My argument was narrow: to counter "seems to be a new thing". The argument of "the scale of these fires is unusual, but if there is an unusual cause, it's an unusual amount of arson, not unusual climate conditions".
If a single act of Arson was the only fire started then it still wouldn't make sense to attribute the fires to arson alone, because arson can start a fire but for it to grow it needs dry fuel. Which is created by drought. Which is linked to climate change.
And of course arson trails behind legal and illegal burning off and lightning as starter of fires anyway [1].
I mean like sure if we were able to somehow eliminate arson and burning off we would probably have less bushfires.
That doesn't change that the scale of these fires is straightforwardly linked to climate change. Fixating on these miscellaneous factors distracts from the broader, more critical issue.
If a single act of Arson was the only fire started then it still wouldn't make sense to attribute the fires to arson alone, because arson can start a fire but for it to grow it needs dry fuel. Which is created by drought. Which is linked to climate change.
And of course arson trails behind legal and illegal burning off and lightning as starter of fires anyway [1].
I mean like sure if we were able to somehow eliminate arson and burning off we would probably have less bushfires.
That doesn't change that the scale of these fires is straightforwardly linked to climate change. Fixating on these miscellaneous factors distracts from the broader, more critical issue.
[1] https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ENuS0AHUwAERccK?format=png&name=... (from https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/lcdocs/other/12533/Answers...)