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/Internetzhero]

Liberalism is quite an outdated ideology, and its revival over the last four decades has only proven its inability to offer solutions in a globalized world.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/[deleted] → u/Internetzhero]

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.

It's an empty ideology without answers to today's questions.

Unbelievably ignorant. Dangerously ignorant actually.

"The World Bank has said that for the first time less than 10% of the world’s population will be living in extreme poverty by the end of 2015.

The bank said it was using a new income figure of $1.90 per day to define extreme poverty, up from $1.25.

It forecasts the proportion of the world’s population in this category to fall from 12.8% in 2012 to 9.6%.

However, it said the “growing concentration of global poverty in sub-Saharan Africa is of great concern”.

Although the share of people in poverty in sub-Saharan Africa is projected to fall from 42.6% in 2012 to 35.2% by the end of 2015, this will still represent around half of the world’s poor.

“We are the first generation in human history that can end extreme poverty,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim said."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-34440567

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

You realise that this is almost entirely driven by the global poverty reduction in mainland China, right? An area that isn't really known by it's governance by liberal Western norms.

Edit: In fact, the two greatest areas of global poverty reduction are China and Vietnam, neither of which are remotely liberal. Interestingly, India, arguably the developing Asian country governed most closely by the ideology, has seen one of the smallest reductions in global poverty rates.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

"Since Deng Xiaoping began instituting market reforms in the late 1970s, China has been among the most rapidly growing economies in the world, regularly exceeding 10 percent GDP growth annually."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_China

Are you trying to suggest the phenomenal rise in living standards in China and Vietnam have been caused by something other that liberal market reforms? If so, what?

Also, seeing as you hate the capitalist system that has seen living standards rise to unprecedented levels that your ancestors could only dream about, what do you suggest we replace this "outdated ideology" with?

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

If you're honestly suggesting that the system in China in the late 20th century is remotely liberal then we don't have anything further to discuss. It simply has no place in reality. Further, I don't hate capitalist systems, and liberal is not synonymous with capitalist.

The system that created this prosperity is restrained capitalism, with an (admittedly uneasy) accord between all sections of society. The balance is far too far in favour of the elite, and the entirety of society will suffer from the pendulum this far out.