Restoration and adaptation of fire-prone forest landscapes provide ecological, cultural, and social benefits: Facts, myths, and fallacies

View article.

Drawing on recent syntheses of the scientific evidence, this paper examines “myths” commonly used to
oppose climate- and wildfire-adaptation of fire-prone forests. We use an established framework
designed to counter science denial by recognizing the fallacy for each myth. Fallacies are false
arguments; there are several kinds of fallacies, including cherry picking (selecting only a portion of
facts to support a conclusion), false dichotomies or oversimplification (claiming only two possible
outcomes), circular arguments, or straw man (misdirection) arguments. Learning to recognize
logical fallacies and other characteristics of science denial is an essential component of any
assessment of arguments for and against proposed actions