Are the Redwoods Superannuated?

I recently heard a piece on the BBC's Newshour which confirms the newsmedias' insidious biases. It was a story on a group of scientists mapping all the trees in a sequoia forest where the trees, some of which are over 3000 years old are dying prematurely.

First of all, I don't understand why they think that if the trees in this forest have started dying during the past 50 years it signals premature death. If the trees are indeed 3000 years old, what makes scientists think that this is premature death. Maybe they are dying of Sequoia old age. OK, so maybe there are some older trees, but as you see in human life, some people die in their late 80's and no one considers that premature even though there are plenty of ambulant, robust people in their high nineties living alone and doing all the things people in their 50's do and maybe not even more slowly. I personally know, and know of, many people like that.

But back to my point on bias. The lead up to the piece, by the announcer, went something like this..... "Scientists are mapping a forest of ancient trees which are dying prematurely due to climate change."

I thought to myself that it seems that scientific research is now directed by political agendas rather than by a desire for truth. That would have been a blog post by itself (and it may become one - a pathologist acqaintance of mine insists that all science today has a definite agenda [religious, not political in his case]).

But upon listening to the article, and I listened very carefully, nowhere was there even a hooded reference to climate change. The scientists were only describing their tribulations in camping out and doing the work and what it will mean when it is finished and that its significance will only be noted 25 to 100 years in the future.

At the risk of becoming like Cicero I must reiterate that environmentalism is the single greatest threat, past or present, to American freedom, liberty, capitalism and democracy.