[Carry_Okie]

A downward revision of 288 acres is news?

A 0.06% change?

Somebody got paid our tax money to run the numbers again, write a press release, contact the reporters, and for what?

[Grampa Dave]

As usual you are right on target. When I saw that refigured acres to drop the total burned by 288 acres, (I didn't even bother to calculate the 0.06% change that you did), I had the same questions that you did.

There has too be some reason for trying to keep this fire below 500,000 acres, so they are recalculating or skewering the data.


I guess that 499,780 acres burnt is Politically and probably diversity correct. If it gets over 500,000 acres, some Americans might pay attention to it for a minute or two.

[sasquatch]

Just imagine how much smaller it'll be if we get hammered with rainfall this winter!
The whole mess may just ooz into the big pond on the left.