Global warming is one problem.
Overpopulation is another.
It's not hard! (Slaps hand to forehead!)
Max Green,
The latter is contributing to the former, Aren't you constantly on about the Govt should be doing "something" about Climate Change ?
Doh !
If you think the problems facing our Environment from Consumerism can be categorised than you're more insipid than I thought you were !
We could address it all by starting with a National Service to curb the dumbing !

Hi Mr Green, I am so glad that you popped in to see how us deniers are coping. We are coping extremely well, thank you. Only thirty years ago us deniers were written off as cranks akin to holocaust deniers, but now our side is now going from strength to strength with reasoned arguments. Your side, however, can only resort to getting brain washed Komsomol educated school kids to super glue themselves to busy roadways in peak hour in order to get attention. How to win friends and influence people. Not.

You alarmists blew it. 40 years of making hysterical "the end is nigh" predictions, meant to happen in only a decade or so which never eventuated, began the process of the public disbelieving the self interested government funded climate scientists and instead seriously listening with open minds to the other side.

And your penchant for blaming every single extreme weather event on HIGW is another factor in your sides eroding credibility. Such finger pointing may impress adolescents and those who have a compulsive psychological need to believe that they are smarter and more morally pure than everybody else in society, but it does not impress older and wiser people who know that these weather events are cyclical and quite normal.

At least the left is no longer blaming extreme weather events on atmospheric testing of nuclear bombs. US, French, and British bombs, anyway. Soviet bombs were peace loving.

Are the bushfires a result of climate warming?

Given that bushfires have occurred regularly through history the answer can only be an emphatic No!

Is climate change a contributor to the severity? Certainly.
Are there other contributors to the fires' severity? Absolutely (e.g. blocking of back burning and fuel reduction by the greens.)
What is Australia's contribution to climate change? Little to nothing.
If Australia reduced emissions to zero by 2030 what difference would this make? Little to nothing.

Conclusion:
If climate change is happening and we have little to no control over it, the prime focus should be risk mitigate, so while taking a pragmatic approach to reducing emissions the prime focus should on mitigating the effects of climate change i.e.:
1 - reducing fuel load by back burning etc,
2 - allowing homeowners to create a safety break of up to 30m between their properties and the bush.

Shadow Minister,

It's easy to tell that you are an engineer.

This is one of the big problems with people like engineers who are vocationally trained and are dependent on rote learning skills instead of having critical thinking skills. I suggest you stick to doing your chores as a mindless drone and leave figuring out how the world works to the scholars and scientists who are appropriately trained.

Jay Cee Ess,
if you're going to contest the known radiative heat trapping properties of CO2 JUST BECAUSE I linked to a cool youtube that shows it, then you're beyond help. I just don’t CARE if they pumped that tube up to 100% CO2, in fact, they probably did! It was for illustration purposes only! It SHOWS what CO2 does. Look up "illustration" in your dictionary. The science of CO2’s heat trapping capabilities goes back to Eunice Foote 163 years ago. It’s something you can look up in century old physics book. This is known. This is the way.

LEGO, Individual, MHaze,and all Deniers!
(Shakes head.) When did accepting SCIENCE become so optional in this dumbass culture? I'm just amazed how highly you all value each other’s ‘opinions’ rather than spanking them for being so stupid and feeling all entitled about their precious opinions. You're like Gollum, sitting there worshipping the Precious opinions. It's not my fault you think Don is super-sleuth super-hero busting a worldwide conspiracy involving EVERY NATIONAL SCIENCE ACADEMY ON THE PLANET. But hey, if that's your worldview, just make sure you turn your tinfoil hat up to 11 as I’m projecting my brainwaves to lull you all into a false sense of security!
You guys belong in a Flat-Earth convention. You’re denying the KNOWN physics of CO2, the known math of the Radiative Forcing Equation, the years and years of Climate Sensitivity studies converging on 3 degrees per doubling of CO2, the obvious signs from nature like retreating ice caps and glaciers, expanding hotter seasons, hotter nights, and more intense bushfire seasons as predicted EXACTLY by the Garnaut report.
And what are Don’s “many points” that he raises? The same boring old crap. I’m just glad Peter Bowden has the epistemological humility to admit he’s not an expert, but it seems the experts agree. You guys that sit around congratulating each other on ‘opinions’ without actual evidence are just sad little internet trolls telling global conspiracy ghost stories to each other around this virtual campfire. You’re deluded Boy Scouts, and truly need help.

When did accepting SCIENCE become so optional in this dumbass culture?
Max green,
I think it all started when people became aware of the many dumbass pseudo intellectuals started to call themselves scientists & write mindless articles.