[0] - https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/dangerous-...
From what I can see there are those who claim that climate change has to do with it and there are those who claim it's mainly arsonist. Then there are those who claim that focusing on the arsonists is actively used to deflect from the climate change problem, and there are those who claim that such claim actively used to pursue the agenda of climate change activism.
Is there a way to objectively figure out what's going on?
But you can always attempt to more fully understand a given problem space and the political forces at work to shape the debate. You then need to apply a filter of rational analysis onto all 'news' you consume, attempt to work out any inherent bias in the source, hypothesise a reason for a bias to exist even if it is not apparent, then determine that if a bias exists, who profits from it.
Then make up your own opinion. Just like with everything else on the internet.
In this case, the Murdoch press has been actively supressing the climate debate in Australia for years, for which you can find more sources than I can reasonably link here I'm sure.
Don't get me wrong, I do have my own opinion about what's going on that I built using more or less the logic you described. But if I step back I see it has to be driven by by own biases, otherwise how would other reasonable people come to other conclusions. I wish there was more we can do to make it easier to discuss such topics between people who come from different starting points.
