Dear Luciferase,

From you;

“ The prescribed burning window is becoming more limited by climate-change.”

And

“We have to intensify the PB rate to achieve the same fuel-load reductions as in the past. This means a different funding model but not necessarily increased funding, tho' this will surely result from these fires. “

Wow!

Is this a road to Damascus moment for you? Luciferase finally accepting global warming.

Well done mate. I mean it. It takes a big man to step over entrenched views such as your past beliefs. Welcome to the club.

Steelie,

Cherry-picking what I've said to falsely precis my argument as "climate change did it" is a bit sad. The standard of debate, and evidence, must rise above this to reach a truth, but you appear uninterested in that.

Did I not too suggest that ideological opposition to burns is the exacerbating factor? Regardless of the Greens executive position on burns, with its stymieing caveats (where are RdN and SHY lately?), you assert that its all just a funding issue (in Victoria). Wherein the following is the support for this? http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/papers/govpub/VPARL2006-10No332Vol2Chap7-9.pdf where I read:

"In the past 20 years asset loss and damage and natural resource damage have increased significantly despite substantial augmentation of fire protection resources. The increases have occurred in an era in which, as Mr Williams said, ‘we have never enjoyed higher funding levels for fire suppression, greater technology in dealing with fires, better co-operation between government at state and local and federal levels in dealing with these fires".

You will find too, therein, that a problem may lie in how money is spent, which is a point I made. Everyone in this country knows we are coming to grinding halt in green-tape wound by ideologically imbued government departments. The level of disaster we are seeing is one symptom of this.

You will find nowhere here where I have ever even suggested AGW is non-existent, let alone GW. I challenge you to prove that wrong.

However, I have suggested that intermittent energy sources, together with the unaffordably humongous level of energy storage required to make them despatchable, is one of the Oz left's (and your) most stupid ideas, and unshared by Finnish Greens.

I believe you have evolved here just to rip scabs and watch the ensuing fun. Try restoring your previous good reputation and stop falsely attributing opinions, either outrightly or by cherry-parsing.

Damascus, my arse.

Reflections on Nero:

Australia burns while ScuMo fiddles with himself.

MrO, you've got that all wrong, Australia burns while the GREENS fiddle with themselves and each other.
The PM, has to watch it all happen, just like the rest of us.
He has already begun the process of fixing the problem that caused the SEVERITY of this incident, not the problem itself.
For that you would have to take control of the weather and things like natural events, like lightning strikes, which happen all too often and are the norm in this country.
As to the severity and dynamics of the fire, that we can direct ALL the blame to the GREENS, as the evidence is clear.
The PM must now decide how to rid the country of this vial and self serving vermin, called the GREENS.
It is a false argument to even begin to think that this disaster had ANYTHING to do with climate.
It was a group of unfortunate weather events that coincided and conspired together, to create the 'perfect storm'.
Had one of the factors/contributors not been present, (dry heat, wind, excessive ground covered fuel) we would not have experienced such a catastrophic event, as it is being called.

ALTRAV,

The only thing that's keeping you on OLO and talking to intelligent people is that your doctors have yet to formally declare you as brain dead.