TONY KEVIN SAYS....

The Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission seems to be ignoring the relevance of climate change as a factor in Black Saturday.

Well Tony.. you might understand it if you saw my comments in another thread.. and how CORRUPT (and/or gullible)the whole Green Cult is.. and how CLIMATE CHANGE has been hyped up for one reason and one reason alone...

to me ME and my mate Maurice Strong and our network of left wing corporate capitalists EXTREMELY RICH...and worse.. POW-ER-FUL.

When you speak as you did.. using the term as if it was a given.. a fact... you show just how sucked in 'you' are... to the whole SCAM and capitalist trick that Climate change so called is.

Tony..do you have SHARES in Envex?

I think that it's very likely that the Black Saturday fires will come to be seen retrospectively in the context of AGW, but that there isn't enough evidence yet to establish a causal link.

Regardless of other historical bushfires, the fact remains that Black Saturday was the hottest day ever recorded in Melbourne. But that's weather, rather than climate.

While I'm in general agreement with the thrust of Tony Kevin's article, I think he's left himself wide open to justifiable criticism from the denialist pack.

The existence of sub-climax forest types such as tall wet eucalypts which burn at intervals of up to 400 years is patently the result of an extended period of evolution.

This indicates that wet forests will periodically dry out to the point of flammability, not often, and when they do, a lot of fuel causes intense behaviour. It's not new, and the occurrence of the highest (recorded) temperature (by 0.2 degrees C) in the 100 odd years proper measurements have been taken is no evidence of an increase.

The connection you make between the bushfires and AGW is spurious and ideological.

What everyone here seems to have missed is that it does not matter
whether global warming has any part in the bushfires or not.
The brigades have to fight the fires as they are and not because
someone says its all to do with global warming.

Out in the bush with a pumper, it matters not a fig about AGW !

If climate change had any influence on how dry or how hot it was then it influenced how severe the fires were and deserves consideration; it looks highly probable that it did, with BoM data showing a trend of more record hot weather and less record cold weather. And, just as important as the changes in high temperatures is the impact of climate change on minimum temperatures across all seasons - which impact the amount of drying as well as on opportunities to safely conduct fuel reduction burning. Without AGW those record heat waves - and the fires - would almost certainly have been less severe. Without those record high minimum temps - and the lost opportunities for reduction of fuel loads - the fires would have been less severe.

I don't want the other factors ignored but nor should this factor be ignored.

That so many of the climate science denialists here are so pleased that it fails to get consideration is just a measure of how desperately they are wishing for this issue to go away. It won't.

Just why the Commission has failed to look at the impacts of climate change on recent fires and potential impacts on future ones needs asking and I thank the author for doing so. If it's because of reluctance to complicate their inquiries with something 'controversial' then that would indicate denialist leanings within the commission - AGW isn't controversial except for the fake, puffed up, ideological think-tank generated 'controversy' that relies completely on dismissing the abundant legitimate science out of hand in favour of dubious counter-'science'.

Oh Ken "how desperately they are wishing for this issue to go away. It won't"

Then next says "Just why the Commission has failed to look at the impacts of climate change on recent fires and potential impacts on future ones needs asking and I thank the author for doing so"

That's called answering your own question ..

You say it won't go away .. but it did ! LOL!