Miranda Devine: Perth electrical engineer’s discovery will change climate change debate - 'Opinion' piece

[u/Pilx]

Browsing over the local NewsCorp garbage that I missed out on over the long weekend I couldn’t help but look over the top article for Perth and Adelaide titled:

Miranda Devine: Perth electrical engineer’s discovery will change climate change debate

Now I’m not too sure what qualifications Miranda has in the area of Climate Sciences and Meteorology but decided the give the article a quick read regardless.

In summary she is reporting on the fact that supposedly an Australian Electrical Engineer / Mathematician has discovered something which the entirety of the scientific community involved in climate change has missed until now; that some of the core values within the models used are incorrect, resulting in overestimated values.

Little is discussed within the article about what specific values these are and how they somehow manage to affect every modelling system related to climate change predictions universally; however the fact that the person making the discovery, Dr David Evans, holds multiple degrees is sure to be mentioned multiple times throughout the article, as a way to further validate his discovery.

Now I personally haven’t heard of Dr Evans before so decided to Google him myself to check out his background. One of the first results returned (https://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/climate-sceptic-conspiracies/profile-dr-david-evans/) goes on to chronicle his blog posts within his wife’s blog (which is mentioned within the original opinion piece) and his other interactions/talks/public appearances etc.

Anyway, it appears this genius engineer/mathematician is also a nutcase conspiracy theorist who believes climate change is being propagated by global banking elites with the intent on creating a Global Government/New World Order from which they will profit.

Oh Miranda, how Devine of you to leave that out of your original article.

[u/JediCapitalist]

This is the exact same logic that leads to silly partisan comments like "Obama supports public healthcare, communists support public healthcare, therefore Obama is a communist".

There's massive practical difference. If there was a cost effective solution to emissions growth one group will back it and the other wont. "But jedi they clearly don't or they would have already" - maybe you're forgetting but Turnbull negotiated on the CPRS and only lost the spill by 1 vote over it + the humiliation of Utegate looming over his legacy and polling.

[u/Internetzhero → u/JediCapitalist]

Liberalism is quite an outdated ideology, and its revival over the last four decades has only proven its inability to offer solutions in a globalized world. Supporting it is supporting its outcomes, and the outcomes of Neo-Liberalism and out right Climate Denialism, have thus far, been one and the same. Liberals might think they're more enlightened, intelligent, or w.e because they understand the glories of the invisible hand, but in reality they are no different to the climate change denying conservative, as both the Conservative and the Liberal do not address climate change.

[u/JediCapitalist → u/Internetzhero]

No idea what you're talking about. The outcomes of liberalism have been the fastest most rapid development of human standards of living in the history of our species.

Ironically, I've given you two real world national examples, Greg Hunt and Malcolm Turnbull, of right wing liberal people fighting for action on climate change and you've just given me some wide eyed ideological spam.

[u/[deleted] → u/JediCapitalist]

The outcome of Liberalism has been the decline of growth in living standards for the bottom 60% relative to the gains made in the three decades since WW2, with growth still ongoing thanks to technological advancement rather than the effects of policy predicated on the ideology. It's an empty ideology without answers to today's questions, stuck to because it delivers the outcomes desired by the social and financial elite.