Dear Armchair Critic,

This is directly from the Royal Commission findings of the causes into the 1939 Fires. It was number 2 on the list after the drought;

"The Condition of the Forests.—When the early settlers came to what is now this State, they found for the greater part a clean forest. Apparently, for many years before their arrival, the forest had not been scourged by fire. They were in their natural state. Their canopies had prevented the growth of scrub and bracken to any wide extent. They were open and traversible by men, beasts and wagons. Compared with their present condition, they were safe. B ut the white men introduced fire to the forests. They burned the floor to promote the growth of grass and to clear it of scrub which had grown where, for whatever reason, the balance of nature had broken down. The fire stimulated grass growth ; but it encouraged scrub growth far more. Thus was begun the cycle of destruction which can not be arrested in our day. The scrub grew and flourished, fire was used to clear it, the scrub grew faster and thicker, bush fires, caused by the careless or designing hand of man, ravaged the forests; the canopy was impaired, more scrub grew and prospered, and again the cleansing agent, fire, was used. And so to-day in places where our forefathers rode, driving their herds and flocks before them, the wombat and the wallaby are hard put to it to find passage through the bush."

Were they idiots?

ALTRAV,
>I have to stand up for common sense and reason.
Ha ha ha ha ha! Oh man, that was a good one. Oh boy (wipes tears from eyes.)

Dude, you condemn the most advanced and sophisticated 'common sense' and 'reason' we have on the planet, science.
You condemn as 'beliefs' one of the most sophisticated enterprises the modern scientific method has EVER tried to study, the chaos that is weather and climate and the interactions between the two.

Rather than standing up for 'common sense' you're standing up for backyard rumours and old wives tales.

This is what the science is saying:-
____________________________________

Fire ecologist Philip Stewart said Queensland's fires of the past few days were historically unusual.

"When one looks at the charcoal records with Aboriginal burning, we haven't seen any indicators that show that there had been mass fires or large intense fires like we are seeing today, or 'mega-fires', as I would call them," Dr Stewart said.

"They're not something one would expect at this time, but then again, fires of this nature can occur anywhere, provided that there's the right climatic conditions and the right fuels and so on."

Dr Stewart said the intensity and the extent of the fires was abnormal, as was the time of year that they were occurring.

He said they were "absolutely" a result of climate change.

"Climate is a driver of wildfire and of fire full stop," Dr Stewart said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-01/why-qld-bushfires-have-been-described-as-abnormal-unprecedented/10571122

Hey SteeleRedux,

"Were they idiots?"
Maybe, I don't know;
- They might've been misinformed by others whom had preconceived notions on the true facts;

Read the article below and take notice of the date.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-14/analysis-bushfire-politics-hazard-reduction-climate-change/11700594

What was done to mitigate the situation?
How many planes did the govt order a rapid convertion for use in water bombing operations?

Or was it all just an inconvenience to their Christmas holiday planning?

The problem in all this is just how stupid, irresponsible, pointless, and pathetic the whole saga is.
Because history just seems to repeat itself and our leaders never learn.
Maybe the system that makes them our leaders should be looked at.
We need to foolproof our government for incompetence

Here's another article.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-18/indigenous-burning-before-and-after-tathra-bushfire/10258140

I don't know the truth, I wasn't there in 1939.
What I do know is that the articles I linked to and what you wrote can't both be true,
- And one of those versions has to be false.

Hang on, actually, on the basis that:
'They might've been misinformed by others whom had preconceived notions on the true facts;'

Then, on the basis that 'I didn't know' is no more of a valid excuse any more than 'I didn't find out';
And on the basis that as our leaders 'It's their duty to find out the true facts for the best interest of their constituents;

Then yes, if they were misinformed by others whom had preconceived notions on the true facts,

- then yes they were idiots -

If for only however, that they themselves were foolish enough to rely on those other idiots.

Max, you're as big a fool as the person who wrote that tripe of a report.
He conveniently forgets about the blacks and their habit of random burn off's.
I don't care what another idiot expert craps on about.
The evidence is clear, FUEL not CLIMATE is the culprit.
Fuel on the ground, due to arrested controlled burning.
Fuel on the ground directly the fault of the greens.
Weather, (NOT CLIMATE) because it is hot and windy, the two things that fires love.
Read your posting again and this time read it all, not just the bits you feel might help your cause.
And as for your equally misguided running mate SR, yes they were idiots, as they reported on a geography and landscape/environment they knew nothing about, using their knowledge and expertise and familiarity of past exploits and locations.
The operative word in SR's submission is "apparently", leading us to believe an uncertainty about the comments which followed.
And so it should be, as their sentiments were speculative and not conclusive or based on experience in the region.

AC,

"Well the logic here might be 'Don't do them poorly then".

Good one!