Curmudgeon.

"For bushfires you need both rain (so bush will grow) and dry spells....."

Yes.

?

Poirot - didn't understand you post. Your point was too deep for me. Since looked at the full report. Doesn't add anything.I have seen Aus scientists claim that there is a link between a bushfire index and temperature changes to date, but without any specifics. Forecasting any trends, considering that bushfire prevalence depends on both warmth and rainfall patterns, would be nearly impossible.

Climate people have been trying to convince us of the link between drought and higher temperatures, and now they want to add bushfires to the fix. They should make up their minds.

A good article John Coulter but wasted on most people.
I wonder when the anti AGW trolls will give up and stop coming out of the woodwork at the drop of a hat to try and spread their message of BAU.
It really will not work you know because time is against you. Every day there is another AGW effect that proves that you are all either on the payroll of big vested interests or just barking.
It will not stop just because you cannot face the facts.
You would be far better to try and prepare yourselves for the inevitable.

MWPOYNTER'

If we went by you, the only safe way to survive would be to clear fell all forest and bushland. Then maybe there are some that would like to see that happen.
Maybe we should just concrete over everything?
This nonsense about burn offs is a red herring the "hate the greenies" always pull out of the hat.
The fire officer at the scene of the Blue Mountain fires said on the news that "some of the trees being burnt were new growth and that they had fought a fire in the same spot a few years ago". This does not say a lot for "cool burn offs" which has to be an oxymoron.
It has also been the subject of trials in the US and it was found that where there had been burn offs and then there was a fire a few years later, the fires burned hotter due to the moisture being dried out in the previous fire.

Curmudgeon,

What's happened?

Significant rainfall, followed by warm dry weather, low soil moisture, etc.

Warmest September on record in the warmest decade on record.

So we get firestorms in mid October.

The season is extended.

Even John Howard recognises reality when he sees it.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/scorchedearth/pm-expect-extreme-weather/2006/12/13/1165685752372.html

There are two interlocking religions being peddled fervently which can be summarised as the following pieces of urgent advice:

1. Stop climate change.
2. Stop the population explosion.

Stopping climate change is supposed to be achieved by stopping CO2 emission. Even if the hysterical predictions from untested[1] computer models were valid, “action on climate change” won’t change the climate outcome. This has been demonstrated by simple, non-speculative calculation[2].

The interests behind challenges to the call for “action on climate change” are said to be Big Oil and Big Coal. It is just as plausible (indeed a lot more so) that the interests behind the “action on climate change” hysteria are Big Uranium [3].

For a measured, unhysterical approach to Australian bush fires see Don Aitkin [4].

As for population, social measures that will (and demonstrably do) reduce population, without the global mega-cull residing unspoken at the back of the most zealous Malthusians’ minds, are those related to the liberation of human volition – especially that of women.

[1] Science tests models (like AGW) by observations of the effect of independent variables (like CO2 emission) on dependent variables (like climate). Correlations are not effects, nor can either correlations or effects in unknown multivariate systems be observed in the future for validation of models into the future.

[2] http://topher.com.au/50-to-1-video-project/

[3] http://www.dcbureau.org/201204097128/national-security-news-service/united-states-circumvented-laws-to-help-japan-accumulate-tons-of-plutonium.html

[4] http://donaitkin.com/the-bushfire-problem