1 Mile Visibility
August 19th, 2007 | by Craig |
There are mountains in the background — right around a mile away.
See if you can see them. If not, here is the cheat.
There are a whole bunch more photos in the set, going back over the past two weeks, with various shots from the Meriwether and Little Wolf Creek fires.
I’d sure hate for something like this to go without a political statement, but I just want to mention that I’ve inhaled more poison from the wildfire smoke in the past month than I have in the past 19 years — the previous winner being the summer of the Yellowstone fire.
Just sayin’.
27 Responses to “1 Mile Visibility”
By Erica on Aug 19, 2007 | Reply
I suppose I can just Google this and find out, but, why is your state on fire?
By Craig on Aug 19, 2007 | Reply
/shrug/ It’s August. It’s pretty much this way every year.
Heat + Drought + Lightning (and/or idiots) = Fire, Fire, Fire!
By Courtney on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
Idiots in the case of the Fool Creek fire, I’m fairly certain it was lightning in the case of Brush and Chippy Creek Fires. Either way, I’ve had it with all of them. My system can only take so much smoke and Claritin!
By TMM on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
When we came back through Helena on Sunday afternoon I thought I’d entered some wormhole into an alternate reality. It was smoky when we arrived, around noon, then came the thunderstorms that cleared it all out, then as soon as it had cleared a nasty brownish bile moved in that was thicker than many smog festivals I’ve seen. It was like that all the way up here (Conrad), with the exception of a small clearing around Great Falls. And yes, Erica, the whole state is filled with smoke in the summertime and below freezing temperatures the rest of the year. Most people really wouldn’t like it here; but I hear California is beautiful this time of year. Anyway, with that uninteresting weather report I’ll take my leave.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
As one who has spent the better part of 57 years here, I can tell you that smoky August is a recent phenomenon - it started in 1987 with the fires in the Bulls down by Roundup, then came the 88 fires, and it’s been pretty regular ever since. Earlier springs, longer summers, higher temperatures, and as ExxonMobil reminds us, no known cause.
By Craig on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
I always remember a smoky August, and even though you have 20 years on me, both of our observations statistically the same.
Which is to say, insignificant.
Having said that, though, there was a sudden uptick in the mid-80’s, which hasn’t really been explained. It used to be that fires were attacked early and aggressively, but later on they were allowed to burn. So, is a smoky August a result of recent drought years? Assuredly so. Do fire management philosophies have an effect? Most likely. Are there a slew of other variables? It seems reasonable to think so.
But, Global Warming™ is a nice, tidy package to explain it all away, isn’t it?
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
Forests are tinderboxes with moisture levels in the 5% range - even kiln-dried lumber has more moisture. Spring comes earlier, runoff disappears quicker, prolonged heat of August starts in mid-July. Pine beetles and bud worms are moving north, weakening lumber, increasing fire-susceptibility, and we don’t have the -40 cold snaps in the winters anymore to kill them. Glaciers are melting quickly, and will soon disappear.
Well, it’s certainly not nothing. ‘It’ may not be the only thing, maybe there are other causes to go with these effects, but can we at least talk about ‘it’ a little? Are the words verboten in right wing circles?
By Craig on Aug 20, 2007 | Reply
I don’t see why we can’t talk about “it,” as long as it’s not taken as an article of faith that “it’s” anthropogenic.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
I take it then that you go with the absolutely stunningly remarkable coincidence theory.
By JP on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
Clearly, there are direct correlations that can be drawn. For example, the global mean temperature increase being inversely proportional to the [dwindling number of pirates](http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.gif) on the high seas.
To use your words, Mark - ‘Stunningly remarkable coincidence’, don’t you think?
By Steve on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
There is a greater correlation with Baby Boomer women hitting menopause. (Hot flashes) Another “Stunningly remarkable coincidence.”
But this is not to say that Global Warming isn’t happening. The proof is here in Missoula, why, only 15000 years ago, we were under 800 feet of water and surrounded by glaciers. I am sure that there are some who want to return to the “Good Old Days” but I like having my house above water level.
By Craig on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
Reading comprehension: [Fail!](http://blog.pbwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/fail.jpg)
There’s a key word in my response. For a hint, that particular word rhymes with “anthropogenic.”
By dogette on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
Uhhhhhh . . . your state is like, on fire and stuff.
By Craig on Aug 21, 2007 | Reply
Hmm. Heh. Hmm. Hmmm. Fire!
By carol on Aug 22, 2007 | Reply
Clearly, the liberals are much better at this panic-hysteria-despair thing than we are.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 24, 2007 | Reply
I looked it up. Nice word.
Your thing about pirates and global warming is JPD -
just plain dumb.
By JP on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
Haven’t been called JPD in a while… that’s old school.
Anyways Mark - I just thought it was funny. Figured if anyone would appreciate a good pirate joke, it would be you.
Guess global warming jokes aren’t allowed.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
Thought I was dealing with Craig, whom I love to needle. Had I known it was you, JP, I would not have used JPD. Must learn to read names below posts …
What do you call it when people ignore evidence, make apparent cause and effect out to be merely coincidental … it’s an unassailable fact that higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere trap heat - that’s why Venus is so hot. Humans are putting billions of tons of CO2 in the atmosphere every year. Therefore, the planet has been warming since the dawn of the industrial revolution.
Now they say it’s just a coincidence. It’s not JPD, it’s JPS.
By Craig on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
Zealots have no humor when people poke fun at their religion.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
There is no panic, no hysteria. That’s an overstatement. There is a scientific consensus, which ExxonMobil has sought to undermine by use of standard tried-and-true propaganda techniques. They welcome you aboard.
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
zealotry now? I thought I was just humorless and stupid. I’m going to create a file for your grievances so’s I can keep them in alphabetical order.
By Craig on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
I’ve called you lots of things, Mark, but never stupid.
It is interesting, though, that when you come over her to needle, you don’t recognize when you are being needled.
So, yeah, I’ll definitely stick with humorless, at least until I’m proven wrong.
By Craig on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
>There is no panic, no hysteria. That’s an overstatement.
O RLY?
>There is a scientific consensus
O RLY?
Shorter Tokarski: If you disagree with my conclusions, you’ve swallowed propaganda. If you agree with my conclusions, you’re an independent thinker, and impervious to propaganda.
By Walter Greenspan on Aug 25, 2007 | Reply
Latest scientific analysis suggests that temperature increases PRECEDE CO2 increases!
By Mark Tokarski on Aug 26, 2007 | Reply
Reasonable people disagree on many things, most things, in fact, and arrive at their opinions by use of reasoning, emotions, prejudice - the way we do things. But there are situations where objective reality posits the existence of propaganda - this time financed by ExxonMobil. I’m just calling it like I see it.
By Craig on Aug 27, 2007 | Reply
Oh my. This one is going into the bag o’ quotes to be brought up at a later date.
I haven’t laughed that hard in quite a while. Thank you.
By Jimmy don't play that on Aug 28, 2007 | Reply
Whoa, dude - lose a bundle on ExxonMobile stock or something? You must prefer [ConocoPhillips](http://www.csgv.org/site/c.muLYJ7MMKrH/b.2821461/k.724A/ConocoPhillips_vs_the_NRA.htm) or [Citgo](http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/Default.asp?NewsCode=29287&New) or possibly … oh never mind. Your prejudice is clearly derived from questionable research. *Scientific consensus* indeed. Stern was/is an *economist*.
*(Prettied up the links. –Ed.)*