Global Warmest defector says, "No smoking hot spot"

[Devil's Advocate]

Originally Posted by richard schumacher

What fight? An electrical engineer is not an expert in a field relevant to climate change no matter how many programs he wrote; he's a scientist wannabee whose opinions on global warming carry no weight.

For the facts of global warming discussed by atmospheric physicists and climatologists see
RealClimate

Well seeing as he wrote the program that the climatologists are using to make their predictions, it would have to be assumed that he has enough knowledge to know HOW climate systems interact or else he could not write the programs. Unless he's wring and as such the models he created showing AGW (an impossibility models at best can only show GW) are unreliable.

[MegansPrius]

deleted: duplicate post

[MegansPrius]

Actually, David Evans did the programming, not the design.


FullCAM

is the result of collaboration between the two authors. Dr Gary Richards (+612 6274 1926, gary.richards@greenhouse.gov.au) led the conceptual design and selection of models, and Dr David Evans (david.evans@sciencespeak.com) provided the modeling and programming services for implementation.
from: http://www.climatechange.gov.au/ncas/reports/pubs/fullcam-usermanual.pdf (6MB download)

He's an electrical engineer who now works...for the Coal Industry.

His bio: David Evans: Brief Biography (hosted at Lavoisier.com)

Lavoisier's Bio:
Lavoisier Group - SourceWatch
In 2001 Australian economist John Quiggin wrote that the Lavoisier Group is "devoted to the proposition that basic principles of physics...cease to apply when they come into conflict with the interests of the Australian coal industry."

So yet again, we have a shill for the fossil fuel industry writing an opinion column and trying to pass it off as science.

[Zythryn]

With his background I am really curious why he didn't publish an article pointing out the errors in his programing rather than an opinion piece

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

With his background I am really curious why he didn't publish an article pointing out the errors in his programing rather than an opinion piece

Perhaps because he has only published one peer-reviewed article, but that was in 1987.

Evans published only a single paper in 1987 in his career and it is unrelated to climate change.

He's also got a funny definition of rocket scientist:

Who is 'Rocket Scientist' David Evans? | DeSmogBlog

And the article at the OP of this thread gets thoroughly dissected here:
Deltoid: The Australian's War on Science XV

[TimBikes]

Originally Posted by MegansPrius

Perhaps because he has only published one peer-reviewed article, but that was in 1987.

Evans published only a single paper in 1987 in his career and it is unrelated to climate change.

He's also got a funny definition of rocket scientist:

Who is 'Rocket Scientist' David Evans? | DeSmogBlog

And the article at the OP of this thread gets thoroughly dissected here:
Deltoid: The Australian's War on Science XV

Scott - for someone who has "FIGHT THE SMEARS" as their tagline, you sure like to smear a lot.

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by TimBikes

Scott - for someone who has "FIGHT THE SMEARS" as their tagline, you sure like to smear a lot.

It is misinformation that gets my goat, and I tend to think of the "Information Age" as the "Mis-information age."

Climate change and risks from tobacco are both issues which have been obfuscated by misinformation.

Chris Landsea, Roger Pielke--you won't find me posting about their backgrounds, because they're qualified in the subject matter.

But a "rocket scientist" who isn't a "rocket scientist" and -- by his own words -- not even a climate modeller, but simply a software engineer -- and who writes opinion pieces full of misinformation about climate change based on his daunting qualifications as a rocket scientist and climate modellor... well, just look (Quote from OP article by David Evans):

"I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.")

Quote from David Evans at Desmogblog:

"By the way, I know a heck of a lot about modelling and computers but I am not a climate modeller."

"the term "rocket scientist" means someone with a PhD in physics, electrical engineering, or mathematics (or perhaps a couple of other closely related disciplines), from MIT, Stanford, Caltech, and maybe a few other institutions."

When David Evan's bio and the similar articles are also hosted on a site (Lavoisier) beholden to the Australian Coal Industry?

Secretary Ray Evans describes the 90-odd Lavoisier members as a "dad's army" of mostly retired engineers and scientists from the mining, manufacturing and construction industries.

Yeah, I'll call BS on that. That's not smear. That's context. Smears are known for being devoid of context.

[TimBikes]

So Scott - when people raise questions about the church / reverend Obama hung out with for 20 years, is that a smear, or context? I doubt I'll vote for Obama, but I think it's a smear. But by your definition, one could call it context.

Anyway Scott, I honestly think you are much better than this. When you attack the argument, not the person, you are pretty persuasive - even to a "skeptic".

[MegansPrius]

Originally Posted by TimBikes

So Scott - when people raise questions about the church / reverend Obama hung out with for 20 years, is that a smear, or context? I doubt I'll vote for Obama, but I think it's a smear. But by your definition, one could call it context.

Anyway Scott, I honestly think you are much better than this. When you attack the argument, not the person, you are pretty persuasive - even to a "skeptic".

I don't see how -- by my "definition" -- out of context quotes from Rev. Wright constitute context. Obama's response to those smears constituted context.

All of my posts on Evans are thoroughly linked. I'm not asking anyone to take my word on him. If you think I'm misquoting him out of context fire away. I've laid all my sources out in the open. You can check the sources for yourself.

But Evans himself BEGINS his opinion column by implying he has credentials as a climate and rocket scientist:

I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector...

When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.

The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.

How can one not think Evans is a climate scientist after reading the above? Therefore, his purported credentials are fair game for scrutiny.

And, under the mildest scrutiny, they fall apart. He uses a definition of "rocket scientist" that exists as part of specialized Unversity slang for doctoral candidates at few United States universities when writing for an AUSTRALIAN newspaper! He implies that he is a climate scientist when he is an electrial engineer and software programmer. He may have built climate models, but he couldn't design one (as, again, he states elsewhere), another fact one would never guess from the above paragraphs.

I am ready to be shown evidence of Dr. Evans' expertise in climate science at any moment.

Now, if the fossil fuel industry did not have a history of generating misinformation about climate science, then, yeah, you could say my bringing up the Lavoisier group is just a smear.

The Lavoisier Group was established by Hugh Morgan. Hugh Morgan is deeply involved in Australian Mining. He's a former CEO of Western Mining Corporation and Alcoa and has a long history of opposition to environmental regulation of any kind.

The President of Lavoisier is Peter Walsh (Australian politician) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, a former Energy Minister devoted to an unfettered free-market. The vice-president of is Ian Webber, a Director of Western Mining Limited Resources. The secretary of the Lavoisier Group is Ray Evans, another former Western Mining Executive. The Treasurer is Harold Clough, another mining executive.

All of these people stand to lose money if greenhouse gasses undergo stricter regulation.

The Lavoisier Group is the place where David Evans is published repeatedly.

So when Evans crows about his (false) background as a climate scientist and fails to mention his connection to the Austrialian Mining Industry which opposses CO2 regulation, yeah, I call that context.

Call it a smear if you like.

[TimBikes]

Geez Scott - it was kind of a compliment - then you go ranting on and on again.