freediver wrote on Jan 6
th, 2020 at 7:41pm:
PM Scott Morrison defends climate policies and asks Australians to be 'patient' over fires
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/02/pm-scott-morrison-defends-climate-policies-and-asks-australians-to-be-patient-over-fires
Morrison also referred to the government’s plans to review “all contributing factors” to the prolonged fire season, which included the inquiry into land clearing, which was set up in early December, to review policies across the states.
“Other issues of how you manage hazard reduction are important because, as you say, the impact, more broadly, of climate change on these issues has a pronounced effect on the length of the fire season,” he said.
“That, equally then has a need to address issues around hazard reduction for national parks, dealing with land-clearing laws, zoning laws and planning walls around people’s properties and where they can be built in countries like Australia, up and down the coast. That being the case with the climatic effects of what we are seeing, there are many restrictions around those effects that have to be reviewed on the basis on the broader climatic effect we are seeing in this country.”
He was referring to the Indian Ocean Dipole climate effect.
I have not heard anyone say that these or all the other fires would not have occurred if the CO2 in the atmosphere had not gone from 375 ppm to 400 ppm in recent decades (that is, from 0.0375% of the atmosphere to 0.04%, an increase of a WHOPPING, catastrophic, world-burning...er... 0.0025%).
I haven't heard it because nobody is daft enough to say such a stupid thing. It's always only ever
insinuated - because saying it out loud would render anyone an instant laughing-stock.