1. I didn't even mention climate change or weather?

b. Your own source is making a different point that the one you're making..

> What they're saying: Climate scientist Zeke Hausfather summarized the volcano's contribution to 2023's record high temperatures this way: "So, not nothing, but only a small part of the story in the exceptional warmth the world is experiencing," he told Axios via email.

> Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University, also thinks the significance of the volcano's warming role pales in comparison to human-driven climate change and other influences.

> Dessler likens climate change to a "rising tide" that is elevating the baseline temperatures from which heat waves begin. "This means that our heatwaves become hotter, essentially 'floating' on the 'rising tide' of our warming world," he said via email.

The Maui wildfire was driven by a hurricane, a weather event. Did you not mention that? The Axios article providing context and discussion around a topic -- some of which does argue in the affirmative for climate change -- is not contradictory to my post because I was not arguing against climate change. I'm arguing with your attitude towards the commentators on news stories, who you seem to view as ignorant, when they are parroting exactly the messaging that the climate activists trained them to parrot.

The commenters on news stories blaming HAARP and Directed Energy Weapons in concert with Oprah and the Biden Administration's clean-energy initiatives are in fact ignorant. And there are tens of thousands of them.

You're really convinced I made some sort of argument blaming the fire on Climate Change when I did nothing of the sort..