Oh Dear, Paul you have not been reading what I have written.
There is a warming going on it is just that there is an alternative
cause proposed.
It is an alternative because it explains some of the objections to
the conventional AGW theory. Objections such as the small amount of
human caused co2.
The warming cycle can be seen in history and it has arrived on time
as might have been expected.
I am not a scientist and neither are you so we can only take in what
we read about it. Insulting those that do not agree with you shows up
a lack of confidence in your argument.

I am not a scientist and neither are you
Bazz,
Neither are many scientists !

Claims that climate change is responsible for the recent NSW bushfires, demonstrate that those making those claims are ignorant of Australia’s bushfire history.

The “Report of the Royal Commission to inquire into the causes of and measures taken to prevent the bush fires of January 1939 and to protect life and property and the measures to be taken to prevent bush fires in Victoria and to protect life and property in the event of future bush fires” begins:

In the State of Victoria, the month of January of the year 1939 came towards the end of a long drought which had been aggravated by a severe hot, dry summer season. For more than twenty years the State of Victoria had not seen its countryside and forests in such travail. Creeks and springs ceased to run. Water storages were depleted. Provincial towns were facing the probability of cessation of water supply. In Melbourne, more than a million inhabitants were subjected to restrictions upon the use of water.

“Throughout the countryside, the farmers were carting water, if such was available, for their stock and themselves. The rich plains, denied their beneficent rains, lay bare and baking; and the forests, from the foothills to the alpine heights, were tinder. The soft carpet of the forest floor was gone; the bone-dry litter crackled underfoot; dry heat and hot dry winds worked upon a land already dry, to suck from it the last, least drop of moisture. Men who had lived their lives in the bush went their ways in the shadow of dread expectancy. But though they felt the imminence of danger they could not tell that it was to be far greater than they could imagine. They had not lived long enough. The experience of the past could not guide them to an understanding of what might, and did, happen. And so it was that, when millions of acres of the forest were invaded by bushfires which were almost State-wide, there happened, because of great loss of life and property, the most disastrous forest calamity the State of Victoria has known.

(Post cont.)
“These fires were lit by the hand of man.

“Seventy-one lives were lost. Sixty-nine mills were burned. Millions of acres of fine forest, of almost incalculable value, were destroyed or badly damaged. Townships were obliterated in a few minutes Mills, houses, bridges, tramways, machinery, were burned to the ground; men, cattle, horses, sheep, were devoured by the fires or asphyxiated by the scorching debilitated air. Generally, the numerous fires which during December, in many parts of Victoria, had been burning separately, as they do in any summer, either ‘under control’ as it is falsely and dangerously called, or entirely untended, reached the climax of their intensity and joined forces in a devastating confluence of flame on Friday, the 13th of January.

“On that day it appeared that the whole State was alight. At midday, in many places, it was dark as night. Men carrying hurricane lamps, worked to make safe their families and belongings. Travellers on the highways were trapped by fires or blazing fallen trees, and perished. Throughout the land there was daytime darkness.”

Sadly, despite warnings made in the report by the 1939 Royal Commission and by other major inquiries since, that fuel loads must be kept within acceptable limits, as forests are potentially dangerous and explosive places, the findings have not been followed.

Bazz, the group of those denying climate change due to human activity is narrowing. Its not insulting to define that group as mostly crusty old conservative males, because that't who they are.

If you are right and the vast majority are wrong, and we go down the path of action to curtail human emissions of CO2 etc, what is lost? Money, labour, what is it. The planet survives, the human species survives.

Should we take a course of inaction, and continue to pump out vast amounts of CO2 etc. Should that prove to have been the wrong course to take what is lost? the planet, mankind. A rather high price to pay for getting it wrong wouldn't you say. Its a bloody big gamble.

"We also note that you just had to go on holiday outside Australia. I guess that is because you couldn't find anywhere in Australia that wasn't either on fire, or smoke affected."

It could also be that for a fairly well know public figure with his share of detractors, lounging on a beach with his family or doing a bunch of other pretty normal holiday things might not be the ideal way to have the sort of break that most of us could enjoy without risk of being either the subject of polite but intrusive curiosity or outright attack from those taking an opportunity to have their say.

The holiday was outside our normal peak bush fire and weather event season, a family holiday supposedly promised to his children and probably booked some time in advance.

The job does come with responsibilities which are going to go beyond normal job expectations, where family commitments will have to take a back seat when the job really calls for it however I'm left with the sense that most of the talk of Scott Morrison's holiday was and is political point scoring rather than anyone's genuine belief that he needed to be in country.

How much do we really think Scott Morrison could have done in the short term that the deputy PM could not have done in his place?

I've been told the Lib's and Scott himself may have played a similar game against Labor PM's in the past. I don't have the detail but don't reject the assertion. It's entirely plausible.

I would though like to see a move away from that style of politics.
There are issues around government policy which should be addressed in dealing with risk mitigation for bush fires but a politicians family holiday is not really part of that picture.

R0bert