Bushfires shocking but not proof of climate change

The Queensland bushfires have sparked the usual hysterical piffle from the Greens and Labor, liberally laced with terms such as “crisis”, “emergency”, “unprecedented” and “historic”, but as Graham Lloyd’s sober look at history shows (“Debate reignited over the role climate change plays in fires”, 10/9), bushfires in Queensland are not unusual.

The same sober look will show the claims about the dying reef, melting ice sheets, sea level rise, temperatures and hurricanes are also hyped up to serve the climate change agenda.

The idea there is a single cause for “climate change” and that we can “fix” it by returning to the dark ages is dangerous. The country’s electricity system will soon fall apart because of this hysteria and the firefighters who are “calling for more renewables to fight climate change” will be cooking with dried dung and reading by candlelight, and so will the rest of us.

David Bidstrup, Plympton Park, SA

Graham Lloyd implies that since massive fires happened in eastern Australia in 1953 the massive outbreak of destructive fires in 2019 could not be attributed to global warming. The Bureau of Meteorology data on climate change shows that rising temperatures were evident from the beginning of the 20th century and have been gaining momentum with rising CO2 emissions ever since. Time we all lifted our heads out of the sand.

Richard Smith, Claremont, WA

Greens leader Richard Di Natale is the latest in the opposition parties to use cheap shots rather than constructive input into national issues. By accusing Emergency Management Minister David Littleproud of “endangering people’s lives” for not directly linking recent bushfires in Queensland to climate change, he’s implying that if he were emergency minister he would be able to stop the bushfires by making such a link.

As Graham Lloyd points out, bushfires at this time of the year in Queensland are not unprecedented, with the “worst bushfires in the state’s history” reported in October 1951 and then in August 1953.

If we are facing a sustained period of drier, warmer conditions, however caused, it is not cheap shots required but investment in contingency measures including land clearance, tree selection, readily available water resources and better forecasting.

Ron Hobba, Camberwell, Vic

Greens opportunists never miss an opportunity to blame seasonal bushfires on global warming/climate change. It is they who oppose controlled scrub burning, which reduces risk, lest some animal or bird might be harmed. Much of our parched land would be greener if priority for river water was not given to environmental flows. One thing the Greens and the conservative federal government that has been in power for six years seem to have in common is their opposition to building dams, making water along with electricity among the most expensive in the world.

Brian Whybrow, Wanniassa, ACT

Bushfires are normal events in this season in tropical and sub-tropical latitudes of the southern hemisphere — in Australia, Africa and South America. Even Captain Cook noted many fires in eastern Australia in 1770, long before the era of “global warming” hysteria.

What is unusual is the number and ferocity of recent Australian fires. Destructive bushfires need three things — a big load of dry fuel, hot dry winds and a point of ignition.

A big load of dry fuel close to towns and buildings in this season is a sign of gross mismanagement (seen most commonly on public lands). That fuel should have been raked, dozed or burnt in safer weather conditions.

Hot dry winds are not unusual in this season in these latitudes — no use whinging. But how do 100-plus bushfires start suddenly? There have been no lightning storms so who are the arsonists or idiots starting these fires?

Viv Forbes, Washpool, Qld

With the fire season well and truly upon us (and in my case, up the road), I wonder if terminology needs review to stop “fire response fatigue”. The lowest level of fire danger is rated at “Low/medium”, we go next to “High”, “Very high”, “Severe”, “Extreme” and the recently added “Catastrophic” (“Code Red” in Victoria); there seems to be an element of exaggeration that might encourage complacency. Would not a simple index of “low”, “medium” and “high risk” get the message across better?

Graham Pinn, Maroochydore, Qld