Australian Politics Forum - Climate scientist, now sceptic

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Climate scientist, now sceptic
May 17^th, 2011 at 2:35pm

Interesting read.

Former “alarmist” scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogen...

quote
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.

Back to top

IP Logged

Belgarion Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6177 Gender:	Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic Reply #1 - May 17^th, 2011 at 2:52pm Exactly. Cilmate change and/or AGW has spawned a wordwide industry and its vested interests are making untold financial and political capital out of it. Snake oil salesmen posing as scientists!
Back to top	"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire.....(possibly) IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #2 - May 18^th, 2011 at 7:08am

progressiveslol wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 2:35pm:

Interesting read.

Former “alarmist” scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogen...

quote
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.

David Evans is a software engineer. He has been a climate denialist for many years. He was never a climate scientist, but he labels himself as a "Rocket Scientist" He was commissioned by the Greenhouse Gas Office (under Howard) to write a computer program for carbon accounting. The specs were given to him. He didn't invent anything.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/08/19/60-minutes-climate-change-story-just-plain-i...

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 18^th, 2011 at 7:15am by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #3 - May 18^th, 2011 at 7:23am

Belgarion wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

Exactly. Cilmate change and/or AGW has spawned a wordwide industry and its vested interests are making untold financial and political capital out of it.

Snake oil salesmen posing as scientists! Grin

All other sciences undergo a rigorous critical analysis to ensure the theory is sound and the data is valid; 'climate science' however does not; anyone who questions to status quo is immediately labels a 'denier' by the politcal wing and all questions are discounted as heresay.

Bit like the catholic church during the dark ages where doctrine was never to be questioned and deniers were tortured until they recanted.

Just look at the standard reply from the lefty nut bags to anyone who dares question the 'science' which is not so much a theory but a dodgy hypothysis reliant on unquestioning faith.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #4 - May 18^th, 2011 at 8:37am

muso wrote on May 18^th, 2011 at 7:08am:

progressiveslol wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 2:35pm:

Interesting read.

Former “alarmist” scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogen...

quote
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.

David Evans is a software engineer. He has been a climate denialist for many years. He was never a climate scientist, but he labels himself as a "Rocket Scientist" He was commissioned by the Greenhouse Gas Office (under Howard) to write a computer program for carbon accounting. The specs were given to him. He didn't invent anything.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/08/19/60-minutes-climate-change-story-just-plain-i...

Is Richard Lindzen a software scientist as well? I could have sworn he was a climatoligist. As for David, are you trying to tell me he knows nothing of what he had to model or consult on. Didnt have to do any study what so ever. Just read from a script. I doubt that very much. He is probably just a piece of paper away from knowing what the person with the piece of paper knows, but he also has real world experience in the field. Richard Lindzen backs up Davids opinion.

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 18^th, 2011 at 8:44am by progressiveslol »

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #5 - May 18^th, 2011 at 9:37am

progressiveslol wrote on May 18^th, 2011 at 8:37am:

Is Richard Lindzen a software scientist as well? I could have sworn he was a climatoligist. As for David, are you trying to tell me he knows nothing of what he had to model or consult on. Didnt have to do any study what so ever. Just read from a script. I doubt that very much. He is probably just a piece of paper away from knowing what the person with the piece of paper knows, but he also has real world experience in the field. Richard Lindzen backs up Davids opinion.

Check his credentials before swearing on things like that if you like. Actually Richard Lindzen has a different opinion from David Evans. Neither of them have published any scientific papers that refute the current thinking. Lindzen also claims that cigarettes don't cause cancer, and has profitted well from that ruse too.

It doesn't need a climatologist to account for carbon emissions. He designed a database to do that. That's all he did.

Let me explain - If you wanted to produce a software program to monitor tooth decay in patients based on data provided by dentists, you wouldn't have to be a dentist. You'd just need the data and a way of organising it. Dentists are not software engineers, and neither are climatologists.

Another example - A person designs a software system to account for the consumption of different types of bread at a large baking firm. He doesn't require to be a baker, but if he then starts spouting about how much he knows about bread manufacture, then he's a real masterbaker. David Evans fits in that category.

What he compiled was an accounting program. He might claim to be a Rocket Scientist, but he isn't.

http://www.desmogblog.com/who-is-rocket-scientist-david-evans

Quote:

Here's the research database entry on David Evans:

No peer-reviewed articles on climate change

According to his own resume, Evans has not published a single peer-reviewed research paper on the subject of climate change. Evans published only a single paper in 1987 in his career and it is unrelated to climate change.

Evans has published an article for the Alabama-based Ludwig von Mises Instutute, a right-wing free-market think tank.

Evans also published a "background briefing" (pdf) document for the Australian chapter of the Lavoisier Group, a global warming "skeptic" organization with close ties to the mining industry.

"I am not a climate modeler"

From 1999 to 2006 Evans worked for the Australian Greenhouse Office designing a carbon accounting system that is used by the Australian Government to calculate its land-use carbon accounts for the Kyoto Protocol. While Evans says (pdf) that "[he] know[s] a heck of a lot about modeling and computers," he states clearly that he is "not a climate modeler."

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 18^th, 2011 at 9:54am by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

astro_surf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2981

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #6 - May 18^th, 2011 at 11:29pm

My god some people are incredibly STUPID.

Quote:

Expert credibility in climate change

William R. L. Anderegga,1,
James W. Prallb,
Jacob Haroldc, and
Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1

+ Author Affiliations

aDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305;
bElectrical and Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada M5S 3G4;
cWilliam and Flora Hewlett Foundation, Palo Alto, CA 94025; and
dWoods Institute for the Environment, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305

Contributed by Stephen H. Schneider, April 9, 2010 (sent for review December 22, 2009)

Abstract

Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field surveyed here support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

Back to top

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 11:23am:

So tell me, you'd like to see more and more craphouse coloured people in Australia right?&&Yeah good idea moron.&&

IP Logged

progressiveslol Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 17029	Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic Reply #7 - May 27^th, 2011 at 11:49pm Ill think ill just add to this from time to time, just to annoy you of course. Climatology expert http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/michael_coren/2010/02/12/12859851.h... Listen here http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9005
Back to top	IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 122490
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #8 - May 28^th, 2011 at 12:58am

BigOl64 wrote on May 18^th, 2011 at 7:23am:

Belgarion wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 2:52pm:

Exactly. Cilmate change and/or AGW has spawned a wordwide industry and its vested interests are making untold financial and political capital out of it.

Snake oil salesmen posing as scientists! Grin

All other sciences undergo a rigorous critical analysis to ensure the theory is sound and the data is valid; 'climate science' however does not; anyone who questions to status quo is immediately labels a 'denier' by the politcal wing and all questions are discounted as heresay.

Bit like the catholic church during the dark ages where doctrine was never to be questioned and deniers were tortured until they recanted.

Just look at the standard reply from the lefty nut bags to anyone who dares question the 'science' which is not so much a theory but a dodgy hypothysis reliant on unquestioning faith.

For every cause there is an effect.
You just can't put billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year
without it doing something.
What that something is , is a matter of debate but I believe most scientists
predict dire consequences.
Can we afford to take the risk of inaction if they might be right?

Back to top

IP Logged

Grey

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 5341
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #9 - May 28^th, 2011 at 1:12am

progressiveslol wrote on May 17^th, 2011 at 2:35pm:

Interesting read.

Former “alarmist” scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogen...

quote
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.

Bullshiter gets name in papers shock.

http://www.desmogblog.com/who-is-rocket-scientist-david-evans

Back to top

"It is in the shelter of each other that the people live" - Irish Proverb

IP Logged

astro_surf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2981

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #10 - May 28^th, 2011 at 1:29am

progressiveslol wrote on May 27^th, 2011 at 11:49pm:

Ill think ill just add to this from time to time, just to annoy you of course.

Climatology expert
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/michael_coren/2010/02/12/12859851.h...

Listen here
http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=9005

Thanks for proving my point! Grin

I give you a published work from PNAS on expert credibility and you respond with the paranoid rantings of a retired professor of geography who has published a grand total of FOUR papers even remotely connected with climate change (and they were in as dubious publications as Energy and Environment, certainly not PNAS, lol! Grin

), the sheer ignorance behind your unintentional irony would be hilarious if not so pathetic.

Look, for crying out loud, your side only has a small handful of genuine, working climate science, you can count them on one had.

Richard Lindzen
Roy Spencer
John Christie

If you want to have even the slightest credibility you would be doing yourself a favour and keeping your arguments confined to those actually qualified to make such arguments, not attention seeking idiots like Tim Ball or self professed 'rocket scientists' (seriously, that should have been your first warning, who the hell gives out PhD's in 'rocket science'. I'm pretty sure REAL rocket scientists are actually 'aeronautical engineers' or the like. Not rocket scientists..

Back to top

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Sep 11^th, 2011 at 11:23am:

So tell me, you'd like to see more and more craphouse coloured people in Australia right?&&Yeah good idea moron.&&

IP Logged

Bobby. Moderator Offline Australian Politics Posts: 122490 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic Reply #11 - May 28^th, 2011 at 11:00am I believe most scientists predict dire consequences. Can we afford to take the risk of inaction if they might be right?
Back to top	IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded Gold Member Offline MediocrityNET: because people died for this! Posts: 26966	Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic Reply #12 - May 30^th, 2011 at 4:52am Bobby. wrote on May 28^th, 2011 at 11:00am: I believe most scientists predict dire consequences. Can we afford to take the risk of inaction if they might be right? MARKET FAILURE IS ECONOMICS 101 TAX OR REGULATION IS THE ANSWER: SIMPLE!!!
Back to top	Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) IP Logged

Bobby.

Moderator

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 122490
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #13 - May 30^th, 2011 at 7:10am

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 30^th, 2011 at 4:52am:

Bobby. wrote on May 28^th, 2011 at 11:00am:

I believe most scientists predict dire consequences.
Can we afford to take the risk of inaction if they might be right?

MARKET FAILURE IS ECONOMICS 101

TAX OR REGULATION IS THE ANSWER: SIMPLE!!!

No it's not - we don't need a new tax.
All we have to do is force power companies
to pay high feed in tariffs from
people who have electric solar collectors.
That way people could start solar farms with a proven business model.

Back to top

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Climate scientist, now sceptic
Reply #14 - May 30^th, 2011 at 8:26pm

Bobby. wrote on May 30^th, 2011 at 7:10am:

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 30^th, 2011 at 4:52am:

Bobby. wrote on May 28^th, 2011 at 11:00am:

I believe most scientists predict dire consequences.
Can we afford to take the risk of inaction if they might be right?

MARKET FAILURE IS ECONOMICS 101

TAX OR REGULATION IS THE ANSWER: SIMPLE!!!

No it's not - we don't need a new tax.
All we have to do is force power companies
to pay high feed in tariffs from
people who have electric solar collectors.
That way people could start solar farms with a proven business model.

... so you want regulation instead!??! What for: to fix a market failure perhaps?!??! Shocked

oh, wait, ........... subsidies!!!!!!

geez loise!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged