The situation in Bordeaux right now feels close to apocalyptic. I left yesterday. Two hundred thousand people are evacuated, hundreds of homes destroyed, and the fire about 10 miles from the edge of the city.
I also left yesterday. I thought the mood was still surprisingly calm, considering that there was already enough smoke in the city to make it look like a foggy winter day and smell heavily of campfire.
Now I am wondering if my return flight from Bordeaux in a few days will actually happen. Currently the airport is still operating, although the surrounding area has been evacuated. It really looks apocalyptic there, though:
Just had the same here in Washington state for the Little Giant fire. Great image in the article. We had another fire cloud behind Rainier the other day, and saw it from the Rount Mainier farm - it really looked like the volcano was smoking up and ready to top-off. <clench>
There's a good chance that conflagrations during WWII generated such clouds. There are well established incidents of such in Germany (and Japan) (ref: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/91/9/2010bam... , Hamburg, Dresden, etc) but nothing for certain in France. The British attacks on Royan which destroyed 85% of it with high explosive and napalam would be the most likely site.
Yeah, lets not forget Bush sr switching from advocating action against climate change to enforcing inaction on the political pretence of protecting jobs.
I think part of why the right keeps getting more brazen, more anti-reality, anti-science, anti-education, anti-school, anti-democracy is that so many of their numbers are coming due. Disinformation isn't working, as the problems mount, so animosity/overdrama/anger and anti-information are the routes left to them now, as Titanic walls of flame engulf the world in their wake.
Yes because it was the old people watching Fox news who did this...those led astray; but not corporations polluting and their employees "just doing their job", not politicians enabling them and taking payoffs, not the people who own the propaganda outlets?
I mean ultimately it is everyone who ever bought an electronic product or drove an automobile or ate a burger right?... At some level. But it just seems like this level of anger should be directed at the actually decision makers and their lackeys... or are u claiming that there is some sort of functioning democracy that holds power accountable, because most of the electorate like wars and bombing and usury and these things too? If you must be angry, and not saying you shouldn't be, please focus it on the correct source and not other powerless people, misinformed as they may be.
Well you know that answer deep down don't you. Our ancestors knew it. Its simple.
What isn't simple is how to stop the cycle from repeating over and over. But first things first perhaps.
What I personally do is not give them any money if I can help it, and certainly not any consent, any sort of of aide and succour. But this has made my own life probably a lot more difficult than it would be otherwise.
Real examples, I dont live in the west, I don't vote, I don't give any money to corpos, not firsthand, I am typing on an ancient probably third hand device and other than utilities it's negligible.
I try to be as self sufficient as possible and create as less waste as I can ...this is not futilist...these are small things that make a difference at scale.
But ultimately once the next round of guillotines has run its course, which is unenviable and inevitable at this point. We need to find a way to educate ourselves and balance our desires...which will be very hard yes.
Not fultile.
"Giving money to corpos" is basically living in society where the work is shared so that somebody e.g. good at repairing a water leak can concentrate on that and do the job for others, etc.
Or you mean "big corpos"? Why does the size matter?
Or do you mean that those are unethical corporations?
So let's focus on preventing them from doing unethical things them.
In any case, we are living in society, so it is better to cooperate, and to no add but multiply our competences in order to create the future's solutions.
Living "by ourselves", all 8 billions of us, is the recipe for flash-burning through all of the planet's resources.
All of us just using wood for energy is just stupid and short-lived. Our "ancestors" lived on a much different planet and were much less many.
But let's not fall into the trap of hoping that violence can rescue us. That's the opposite of a solution. All the most devoid of ideas and of creativity, the most bloodthirsty, will win, and those are the least capable of well managing the planet in the future. (We are looking for how to prevent corporations to do unethical things, so we cannot at the same time call for guillotines.)
Communities helping each other and huge sums of capital operating autonomously in the benefit of an extremely few number of majority shareholders (yes the same few thousand people own most of the major equity is the top corporations) are hardly comparable.
co-ops and small businesses trying to navigate the legalese of modernity and "make it" though all are responsible in proportion to the degree that they maximize monetary value rather than maximize happiness and humanity.
I'm not knocking capital and it's use in development I'm knocking usury, the immoral use of capital for things that don't take into account personal responsibility.
And violence is not maybe the best way, I don't practice or preach it, but its way we have chosen for the entirety of our past and it's probably the most "natural" way, thus I would argue inevitable.
And ya no doubt it will suck for most of the planet, but the planet isn't going anywhere after all..just you and me, and I'm fine with that honestly.
But you also need to explain others why they should do that too (only one person doing all of that will not make a difference).
This is where "people watching Fox News" are guilty here, they got the wrong information and thus are really not able to decide to "eat less meat" or "avoid ICE vehicles".
So Fox News is a real culprit. But let's not forget that many different news channels exist, with an infinitely better coverage of AGW.
So I actually think it is perfectly OK to blame people for watching Fox News.
And at the same time, on the other side of the world, people are celebrating how much more productive they are with AI, never mind the energy taken up by datacenters both directly and indirectly (encouraging more consumerism and more CO2 output). It's exceptionally callous.
People also stupidly watch soccer games such as World Cup, go on meaningless vacations, eat out when they can cook at home, argue nonsense on online forums such as HN. Sure those activities aren't "encouraging more consumerism and more CO2 output"?
Actually- when you take it standalone- e-activities, that lead to little else consumed, are quite ideal. You will never get the budhist monk, meditating on a rock out of normal people, but somebody sittings there, playing a game for hours on a glowing rock, is as close to nilwanna as it gets. So thank you gamedevs out there for creating this.
Yes. But AI is at the apex of that. Your argument is like saying "he already eats hamburgers, deep fried food, soft drinks, chips, and is already overweight, so there's no harm in smoking as well!"
hello from California -- in 2017 three thousand homes burned (Santa Rosa) .. the damage totals are easy to look up.. The skies over San Francisco were so black that the sun was barely an orange dot. I am fully sympathetic to the people in France and elsewhere. This part of the world suffers from wildfire also.
What I was referring to were the elite benefitting from AI the most. Even if their house burns up, they likely have enough money to just buy a new (maybe cheaper) one somewhere else and retire. Obviously, not everyone in California is like that - I was referring to those who are getting huge salaries at tech corporations. But it's a lot different for a poorer person to lose their home than a super rich one.
The situation in Bordeaux right now feels close to apocalyptic. I left yesterday. Two hundred thousand people are evacuated, hundreds of homes destroyed, and the fire about 10 miles from the edge of the city.
I also left yesterday. I thought the mood was still surprisingly calm, considering that there was already enough smoke in the city to make it look like a foggy winter day and smell heavily of campfire.
Now I am wondering if my return flight from Bordeaux in a few days will actually happen. Currently the airport is still operating, although the surrounding area has been evacuated. It really looks apocalyptic there, though:
https://static.actu.fr/uploads/2026/07/aeroport-bordeaux-fum...
Everyone in Southern Europe who hate tourists are about to get their wish!
What resources would you recommend to follow this event as it continues?
NASA FIRMS is good for tracking where the fire is. As well as the site another user recommended, I was following this one: https://feuxgironde.fr/
It’s in French but this crowd sourced website updates quite quickly : https://feuxdeforet.fr/gironde-33/saumos-22-07-2026-4367/
Just had the same here in Washington state for the Little Giant fire. Great image in the article. We had another fire cloud behind Rainier the other day, and saw it from the Rount Mainier farm - it really looked like the volcano was smoking up and ready to top-off. <clench>
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/climate-lab/little...
https://archive.is/20260725052942/https://www.seattletimes.c...
"East" of Seattle is certainly one way to describe it (100 miles east).
That's remember me of https://www.france24.com/en/20190824-macron-france-brazil-bo...
There's a good chance that conflagrations during WWII generated such clouds. There are well established incidents of such in Germany (and Japan) (ref: https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/91/9/2010bam... , Hamburg, Dresden, etc) but nothing for certain in France. The British attacks on Royan which destroyed 85% of it with high explosive and napalam would be the most likely site.
Don't look up
Good job climate change really, definitely, is a global conspiracy and completely untrue.
Because if it weren't, the current trend would be pretty amazing horrifyingly awful.
Everyone needs to remember those who were deniers and followers of them
Never let them live this down
https://rehost.diberie.com/Picture/Get/f/532005
Picture from the french "moderate" right journal Le Figaro, mai 2026.
"investigation into environmental alarmists"
Yeah, lets not forget Bush sr switching from advocating action against climate change to enforcing inaction on the political pretence of protecting jobs.
https://sk.sagepub.com/ency/edvol/globalwarming2ed/chpt/bush...
The president of the United States, and pretty much all his cult-members/followers
I think part of why the right keeps getting more brazen, more anti-reality, anti-science, anti-education, anti-school, anti-democracy is that so many of their numbers are coming due. Disinformation isn't working, as the problems mount, so animosity/overdrama/anger and anti-information are the routes left to them now, as Titanic walls of flame engulf the world in their wake.
Bush II dismantled NASA's mission statement to monitor the world, for example. This is not a new foe, and I have not forgotten. https://www.ucs.org/resources/nasa-earth-removed-mission-sta...
Yes because it was the old people watching Fox news who did this...those led astray; but not corporations polluting and their employees "just doing their job", not politicians enabling them and taking payoffs, not the people who own the propaganda outlets?
I mean ultimately it is everyone who ever bought an electronic product or drove an automobile or ate a burger right?... At some level. But it just seems like this level of anger should be directed at the actually decision makers and their lackeys... or are u claiming that there is some sort of functioning democracy that holds power accountable, because most of the electorate like wars and bombing and usury and these things too? If you must be angry, and not saying you shouldn't be, please focus it on the correct source and not other powerless people, misinformed as they may be.
Let's roll with the futilist attitude for a second; what is it you suggest that we actually do, once we're focusing the anger on the correct source?
Well you know that answer deep down don't you. Our ancestors knew it. Its simple. What isn't simple is how to stop the cycle from repeating over and over. But first things first perhaps. What I personally do is not give them any money if I can help it, and certainly not any consent, any sort of of aide and succour. But this has made my own life probably a lot more difficult than it would be otherwise.
Real examples, I dont live in the west, I don't vote, I don't give any money to corpos, not firsthand, I am typing on an ancient probably third hand device and other than utilities it's negligible. I try to be as self sufficient as possible and create as less waste as I can ...this is not futilist...these are small things that make a difference at scale. But ultimately once the next round of guillotines has run its course, which is unenviable and inevitable at this point. We need to find a way to educate ourselves and balance our desires...which will be very hard yes. Not fultile.
"Giving money to corpos" is basically living in society where the work is shared so that somebody e.g. good at repairing a water leak can concentrate on that and do the job for others, etc.
Or you mean "big corpos"? Why does the size matter?
Or do you mean that those are unethical corporations?
So let's focus on preventing them from doing unethical things them.
In any case, we are living in society, so it is better to cooperate, and to no add but multiply our competences in order to create the future's solutions.
Living "by ourselves", all 8 billions of us, is the recipe for flash-burning through all of the planet's resources.
All of us just using wood for energy is just stupid and short-lived. Our "ancestors" lived on a much different planet and were much less many.
But let's not fall into the trap of hoping that violence can rescue us. That's the opposite of a solution. All the most devoid of ideas and of creativity, the most bloodthirsty, will win, and those are the least capable of well managing the planet in the future. (We are looking for how to prevent corporations to do unethical things, so we cannot at the same time call for guillotines.)
Communities helping each other and huge sums of capital operating autonomously in the benefit of an extremely few number of majority shareholders (yes the same few thousand people own most of the major equity is the top corporations) are hardly comparable. co-ops and small businesses trying to navigate the legalese of modernity and "make it" though all are responsible in proportion to the degree that they maximize monetary value rather than maximize happiness and humanity.
I'm not knocking capital and it's use in development I'm knocking usury, the immoral use of capital for things that don't take into account personal responsibility.
And violence is not maybe the best way, I don't practice or preach it, but its way we have chosen for the entirety of our past and it's probably the most "natural" way, thus I would argue inevitable. And ya no doubt it will suck for most of the planet, but the planet isn't going anywhere after all..just you and me, and I'm fine with that honestly.
Work close to your home, dont travel long distances, dont buy stuff you dont really need, eat less red meat
But you also need to explain others why they should do that too (only one person doing all of that will not make a difference).
This is where "people watching Fox News" are guilty here, they got the wrong information and thus are really not able to decide to "eat less meat" or "avoid ICE vehicles".
So Fox News is a real culprit. But let's not forget that many different news channels exist, with an infinitely better coverage of AGW.
So I actually think it is perfectly OK to blame people for watching Fox News.
And at the same time, on the other side of the world, people are celebrating how much more productive they are with AI, never mind the energy taken up by datacenters both directly and indirectly (encouraging more consumerism and more CO2 output). It's exceptionally callous.
People also stupidly watch soccer games such as World Cup, go on meaningless vacations, eat out when they can cook at home, argue nonsense on online forums such as HN. Sure those activities aren't "encouraging more consumerism and more CO2 output"?
Actually- when you take it standalone- e-activities, that lead to little else consumed, are quite ideal. You will never get the budhist monk, meditating on a rock out of normal people, but somebody sittings there, playing a game for hours on a glowing rock, is as close to nilwanna as it gets. So thank you gamedevs out there for creating this.
Yes. But AI is at the apex of that. Your argument is like saying "he already eats hamburgers, deep fried food, soft drinks, chips, and is already overweight, so there's no harm in smoking as well!"
They denied climate change even before the data center boom. Poor argument, even if the target you want is on the side of the field you’re aiming at.
I feel like this would be much less of an issue if the datacenters were all fully solar+battery powered.
But if the forests burn down, that makes more tree-free land to build more datacenters!
(/s, it's a joke, like this one: https://i.imgur.com/CMsAp8v.png )
hello from California -- in 2017 three thousand homes burned (Santa Rosa) .. the damage totals are easy to look up.. The skies over San Francisco were so black that the sun was barely an orange dot. I am fully sympathetic to the people in France and elsewhere. This part of the world suffers from wildfire also.
What I was referring to were the elite benefitting from AI the most. Even if their house burns up, they likely have enough money to just buy a new (maybe cheaper) one somewhere else and retire. Obviously, not everyone in California is like that - I was referring to those who are getting huge salaries at tech corporations. But it's a lot different for a poorer person to lose their home than a super rich one.
So, if you used climate credits, to build up those forrests. Do they get nil and void, if those forrests burn up?