Look at the recent fires in Australia. Can you directly attribute the cause to climate change? Probably not. Should the government be held morally reprehensible based on their support for coal power? Yes, absolutely. They do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. Politics has a lower threshold of proof than science.
Can you directly attribute the cause to climate change? Probably not.
This is actually a much easier argument to make than the political argument.
Even the Prime Minister "has always made the connection between climate change and extreme weather conditions"[1] Obviously they haven't always made that connection, but it is indicative that the PM's argument is now "yes it's climate change but we shouldn't do anything about it".
The argument is easier because in Australia it's pretty obvious that the last few summers have been hotter and dryer than usual (except in Queensland), and the record is clear that pattern has been happening for some years. Hotter and drier weather leads to bush that is drier and more flammable, and no one has even attempted to argue otherwise.
The politics are harder in Australia because of the combination of the powerful coal lobby and a large part of the press trying to portray climate change as "a leftist conspiracy". This combination has led to the election loss of the Labor party in 2013, and Malcolm Turnbull losing the Prime Ministership in 2018.
