Right, they seem highly volatile/variable. The thinking is that showing the 99th percentile / range of possibilities would cover that, if it's based on historical data - does that seem right to you or no, and if not why not?
If they told you the 99% percentile odds of the next trigger pull, would it be okay to stay if you thought you liked the odds?
And if you were silly enough to believe him, who would be to blame if he was wrong?
Oh, here are some more [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yarnell_Hill_Fire]. Oh and [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1933_Griffith_Park_fire]. And [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Fire_of_1937]
There is a reason why firefighters are considered to be one of the most heroic professionals.
And some more (not all related to wildfires though) [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_deadliest_firefi...]
https://www.businessinsider.com/california-fire-inmate-firef...
If you mean a more specific analysis: there's no way to do that with a level of detail or accuracy that would be relevant to individual decision-making. There are simply too many variables in the air, in the fuel, and even in the fire itself.