Except that they weren't:
[A couple of thoughts about the Stanley Park "devastation," after having visited Vancouver's rightly famous downtown park myself at the end of March: Even if SP has had 10,000 trees felled by two major windstorms this past winter, the park contains half a million, or more. So 10,000, while a large number, would be just 2% of the total inventory. And consider that wind has been an important natural part of forest renewal since time immemorial. Typhoon Freda, for instance, hit the park just as badly in 1962, long before the world had heard of SUVs or begun to think climate change was manmade. And Freda caused nearly $5 billion damage (in 2007 dollars), far more than the storms of 2006-07, neither of which was large enough even to warrant being named. And, finally, SP exists only because the federal government leased the land to Vancouver beginning in 1886 because the entire 1,000-acre peninsula had been logged out. Few, if any, of the trees toppled this winter were more than 120 years old. They were certainly not "old growth." Too many tree-huggers and enviro-squishes see nature as existing in a perpetual, never-changing equilibrium -- as if preserved under a dome. All change to "nature," therefore, is unnatural. So any change to SP, for instance, is proof some force beyond nature (i.e. manmade warming) is to blame. But SP is a manmade park to begin with, and wind damage there is nothing new. The level witnessed this winter is not even new in the park's relatively short history.]
The only planet climate and vegetation don't change on is a dead one.
Yet the promoters of the hyperenvironmentalist agenda rely on our short memories to conceal to divert us from this fact.
If it didn't happen before in our current memory (which grows ever more unreliable with time), it's never happened before.
Source: National Post