I tend to agree with you anti-green.

It is wrong to claim that that this one extreme and extraordinary event is directly caused by AGW.

However, it is also wrong to claim that the increase in frequency and intensity (world-wide) of extreme weather events is not caused by AGW.

I also think it is wrong to directly blame political activism (or inactivism) in this tragic event, although I can understand why people are wanting something, or someone to blame (or not to blame).

Even a Christian preacher says the bush fires are a punishment from God for the decriminalising abortion in Victoria.

Do you have any opinion in regards to the information contained in Barry Brook's articles?

Fwiw, I tend to put less and less credence in the popular press these days, for obvious reasons.

OK, it's an article full of emotive terms and threats ..

So what are you saying PM Rudd, or the politicians "weaseling out" should do?

There are no solutions there at all that I can see, just blame for climate change .. that's a bit raw, the climate changes, yes, it does.

"Is it serious enough" .. what if it is, what are you saying should be done, what? Give you money, give someone else money? Stop doing this start doing that .. what? What would you do? What are you doing - besides talk and more talk about what everyone else should do?

It's just a typical Green circular rant that has no objective except to make veiled accusations that if "something" isn't done, it will get worse. While clearly stating that Greenpeace and the people's movement are doing something, talking and finger pointing. Obviously you're the good guys in all this - are you worried about something that you need to defend your role?

Go away, work up some solutions come back and present. (try not to use your usual bogey man of the fossil fuel and coal industry so as to focus hatred) Try not to be alarmist.

I'm not buying into the "climate change/AGW" argument .. you can't argue about something that has become unfalsifiable (like religion), most everything now can be attributed to "man made climate change", hot, cold, wet and dry.

And herein lies the crux of the difference of opinion over climate change.

Phil Matimein: 'I do believe that climate change is probably being hastened by human beings due to the pace that it is occurring.'

Clownfish: 'What I do doubt, very strongly, is that humans have had, or can have, any significant influence on the process.'

One believes and one has doubts ... and both behave just like religious believers and doubters. And of course true believers seldom have doubts.

I'm with you Clownfish, I'm very much a doubter of the mania of manmade climate change.

JBowyer, ssssssshhhh don't mention the money... it's banal.

I'll just join Miranda and defend the science:
The models have suggested that human induced climate change will increase the duration and severity of heat waves in south eastern Australia (among many other predictions currently with evidence to support them). So to some extent, yes they did "predict" these sort of events. Being probabilistic predictions however, it is also true to say that one event proves nothing. Q&A's summary is good!

I reckon we'll get to point 9 ("Friggin scientists, they should have been more assertive") on Q&A's list within about 5 years the way things are going. Only recently has the real-world data been scary enough to publish the more likely, but scary predictions.

People were shocked that the US financial system could collapse so quickly. Conservative scientists are now being equally shocked at the ice shelves collapsing years before they ever expected it. Methane levels are also doing surprising and potentially dangerous things. They are not doing this to scare people, they are not exaggerating, they are just doing science.

Alas the media, politicians and lay-men do not know how to talk about uncertain, complex science that takes years of mathematics and modeling to comprehend. Using the usual gambit of public argument: "Pick a side and argue it to the hilt" is *not* compatible with the complexity of real life.

So to the deniers: Get educated...from reliable sources.
To the panic merchants: Chill out and get more educated. also watch your sources, vary them.
To everyone: hone your BS detectors, but lose your tribal allegences. Watch out for the ambit claims and vested interests.
There will come a time very soon when we will need to work together. Those that are still fighting each other will be left behind.

Sticking to the science, as you suggest Ozandy, is the way to go. Extremist claims on either side only hurt the debate. We must move forward with facts at our disposal. Those facts have been gathered with painstaking persistence over decades and have now started to resolve into a frightening picture. Despite what may appear to be the case, in reality there is not much dispute among scientists about the way these facts are tending. Runner, I can't answer your question directly except to say that per capita Australia is a huge emitter and any moves to reduce that would help both in terms of actual volume of carbon in the atmosphere and in terms of perception and leadership. Also, we have the R&D knowledge base here to become world leaders in new energy technology that moves away from carbon based sources. I can't understand why we don't embrace the opportunities now and shore up our future economic as well as environmental health. Whatever you think of anthropogenic climate change, surely shrugging off old and unsustainable ways of doing things and taking on much more efficient and sustainable systems is an overall good for this country.
One more thing - even if you don't believe that the atmosphere is changing because of enormous quantity of carbon that has been forced up there, there is really no doubting that the carbon dissolving in the oceans is making them more acidic. In a sane world, this fact alone would be enough to prompt immediate action.

It is sickening to see this type of article published as bodies are being pulled from the ashes. Yes Mr Hepburn, it is impossible to say whether these events were caused by CC. Did that stop you? No. You then go on to say that “what is clear is that these kinds of extreme weather events will become more frequent.......” How is this “clear”. Scientists can’t even agree on this point, yet to you it is “clear”. We will continue to see monsoonal rains in the north at this time of year and bushfires in the south. Heavens, the coast may experience a Cyclone!
Ever since I can remember there have been those bewailing the perils facing the Great Barrier Reef. As a teenager I travelled and dived the reef. I thought I was so lucky to have seen it. It was going to be dead by the year 2000!
Australians have always suffered as a result of “extreme weather events”. 2009 is no different. “The climate has changed” - What a profound statement! Changed – when? Today is indeed different from yesterday as it is different from last year. I suppose you will somehow manage to link any adverse event on the face of the earth with GW/CC.
What do you mean by “Next time some politician starts to weasel out of their commitment to take action on climate change”. ? Stop handing out money to ratbag organizations? Check the Governmenr website for the monies being thrown at CC. The amounts are mind boggling.
“Until now, the real leadership on climate change has been coming from the grassroots.” I rather think it may be the maggots that are feeding on those grassroots. I suppose most of the members of these 150 “action groups” flew or drove to Canberra. I’ll bet they didn’t walk!
What we have seen in the past week is not some glimpse of Armageddon but rather a repeated picture of what this land has been handing humans for centuries and will continue to do so for many, many more