DEAR News Of The Area,
I AM whom Bill Robinson refers to (NOTA 24/10/25) as a denialist, though I prefer climate realist.
He suggests that as a denialist I am too lazy or uncaring to dissect points made in Peter Flinn’s letter (NOTA 17/10/25).
Peter’s letter was about the cause of bushfires in which he said that they were not caused by climate change, a point on which I agree.
The main cause of which is human negligence, arson and lightning strikes.
Everything after the initial ignition is a consequence not a cause.
Climate has nothing to do with cause but may play a part in the intensity of the fire.
However, the intensity of the fire is dependent on the fuel load, its dryness and the humidity or lack thereof.
The main contributor being fuel load which can be reduced with proper forest management.
Paul Davies in his contribution (NOTA 24/10/25) states, “For them to say, quote ‘climate change does not cause bush fires’ is counter to the prevailing view of climate scientists…”.
Are these the same climate scientists that provide multiple climate computer models that cannot replicate the observable climate?
Are these the same climate scientists that provide prediction after prediction that have had a 100 percent failure rate?
If so, these are not the climate scientists that I have any confidence in.
It may be the prevailing view of some scientists but it is not that of all scientists.
To suggest that we should accept a view just because one group of scientists believe it to be so is truly a very weak point of debate.
Such an attitude is contrary to the very nature of science, which thrives and advances on questioning and challenging the status quo.
If it were otherwise we would still be living in the dark ages.
One thing is for certain: science is never settled, it is always evolving.
His letter falls victim to his own complaint that Peter Flinn’s letter presents opinions “in the form of bold authoritative statements”.
He opens his letter with the statement “as a scientist of over 40 years” , without disclosing the field, in an attempt to give authority to his opinion.
As a climate realist, I am neither lazy nor uncaring and do not accept what I am told unquestioningly.
I spend many hours reading on the subject of climate change in order to reach my own informed view, which needless to say, does not align with either Bill Robinson’s or Paul Davies’.
Regards,
Wayne DUESBURY,
Boambee.
You can help your local paper.
Make a small once-off, or (if you can) a regular donation.
We are an independent family owned business and our newspapers are free to collect and our news stories are free online.
Help support us into the future.
