jump to navigation

Australian climate scientists feel so threatened by Lord Monckton, they vow to ban free speech June 30, 2011

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Australian climate scientists feel so threatened by Lord Monckton, they vow to ban free speech

More than 50 Australian academics have signed a letter urging the university to cancel the speech on the basis that Lord Monckton ”stands for the kind of ignorance and superstition that universities have a duty to counter”.

Academics want climate sceptic’s lecture cancelled

The West, 30 June 2011

The letter, organised by University of Western Australia postgraduate student Natalie Latter, says the academics – which include UWA Professor Ullrich Ecker, Sydney’s University of Technology Professor Cynthia Mitchell and Dr Iain White, from the University of Manchester – says the academics are “deeply disturbed” that Notre Dame intends to host the lecture.

It accuses Lord Monckton of “propounding widely discredited fictions about climate change and misrepresenting the research of countless scientists”.

“With zero peer-reviewed scientific publications, he has declared that the scientific enterprise is invalid and that climate science is fraudulent,” the letter says.

“He stands for the kind of ignorance and superstition that universities have a duty to counter.”

Curtin University Professor of Sustainability, Peter Newman – a signatory to the letter – said it was a disgrace any university associated itself with “someone who has clearly got no academic credibility”.

Another signatory, Australian Professorial Fellow at UWA’s School of Psychology, Stephan Lewandowsky, said he strongly endorsed Lord Monckton’s right to free speech “for example in a pub or on a soapbox or in a circus arena”.

Read it all here

Do not dare disagree with us!

Monckton on the IPCC February 22, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
1 comment so far

Monckton on the IPCC

by Tom Minchin
Quadrant Online, February 22, 2010

The IPCC Is “Corrupt from top to bottom”

I met Lord Monckton at a luncheon in Melbourne during his recent tour of Australia. I was surprised journalists here had not thought to ask him how his views on climate science had evolved. Why had he become so interested in  climate science fraud and its political implications? The Q and A that follows is the result of an interview conducted with him after his return to Scotland on February 15.

I began by asking him what had started him on the road to his YouTube-covered speech exposing the draft Copenhagen treaty:

Minchin: What first made you suspect the “climate change” research of recent decades was skewed?

Monckton: The CEO of a boutique finance house in the City of London asked me to have a look at “global warming” because his analysts could not decide whether it was real or not. I first realized something was wrong when I wanted to find out how to convert radiative forcings in Watts per square meter to temperature in Kelvin, but not once in 1,000 pages did the IPCC’s 2001 science assessment report reveal the existence of the Stefan-Boltzmann radiative-transfer equation, without which one cannot even begin the calculation. So obscurantist was the IPCC’s methodology for determining climate sensitivity that it took me two years to research the underlying equations, some of which I had to derive for myself. A scientific establishment that was confident of its results would have explained the matter clearly and concisely.

Minchin: What do you predict will be the outcome of the current wave of revelations about the quality of IPCC research?

Monckton: Governments, banks, businesses, environmental groups, academics, scientists, schoolteachers, and journalists have all nailed their colors so firmly to the mast of the IPCC’s sinking ship that they will do their level best to keep it afloat for as long as they can get away with it. The reaction of “Ed” Miliband, the Climate Change Minister in the UK, is typical. As soon as he learned of the IPCC’s defalcations, he announced a war on climate skeptics. Gradually, the opinion polls will continue to move against the IPCC as its absurdly exaggerated predictions continue to fail. Eventually, nations already hard-pressed as the second, deeper and longer trough of the double-dip recession sets in will decide that stopping the massive leakage of taxpayers’ cash represented by the climate nonsense would be a good idea. How long this process will take, I cannot say.

Minchin: How did science go so wrong on this issue? What caused the corruption of the scientific establishment?

Read the rest here

Climate sceptic Lord Monckton gets a rock star reception February 6, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Climate sceptic Lord Monckton gets a rock star reception

The Noosa Journal, 6 February 2010

NOOSA: The man described by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as being “part of a worldwide conspiracy of sceptics’’ received a rock star welcome when he arrived in Noosa on Saturday.

Hundreds of people queued around the building to hear Lord Christopher Monckton speak on global warming at The J in Noosa Junction.

Fears the controversial aristocrat would receive an aggressive reception went unfounded as the crowd cheered and clapped.

Despite extra space being made available at The J, around 100 people were turned away. But so thrilled was Lord Monckton with his welcome that he delivered an impromptu 15 minute speech in the carpark for those who missed out.

Lord Monckton told The Noosa Journal he was in Australia to deliver the truth on global warming and to exercise his right of reply to Mr Rudd’s “imprudent 45-minute rant’’.

Praising Noosa residents Case Smit and John Smeed for organising the visit, Lord Monckton said that “evil only triumphs when good men do nothing and these were two men who were not prepared to do nothing’’.

Lord Monckton told the audience he was here to tell the truth, as he saw it, and prove global warming was a myth invented by governments to control the population and make money.

Read the rest here

Climate sceptic warmly received during debate January 29, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,

Climate sceptic warmly received during debate

By Bruce McMahon
Courier Mail, January 30, 2010

LORD Christopher Monckton, imperious and articulate, won yesterday’s climate change debate in straight sets.

Forget facts and fictions, numbers and statistics, this British high priest of climate change sceptics is a polished performer, even against the most committed of scientists.

Aided by Adelaide’s Professor Ian Plimer, Lord Monckton cruised to victory before a partisan crowd of suits and ties, movers and shakers.

Read the rest and watch the debate here

Welcome Down Under Lord Monckton January 26, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,

Welcome Down Under Lord Monckton

Channel Ten interview, click for video

We at An Honest Climate Debate would like to welcome the knowledgeable and articulate Lord Monckton to Australia.

Lord Christopher Monckton has arrived in Australia to discuss the man made global warming theory. Professor Ian Plimer, authour of the bestselling book Heaven and Earth, will be accompanying Lord Monckton on his whirlwind Australian tour. For details on Lord Monckton and Ian Plimer’s tour dates and venues please see Jo Nova’s website here

He has already been on Australian tv and radio interviews this week. I especially enjoyed the interview on Channel 10. Here are a couple of snippets from the interview

…the point is let’s have a discussion on this. I will not be saying believe me. I will simply say here are the facts, study them for yourselves. Any fact you want to call me out on and say where did you get that from, I will tell you and you can go look it up for yourself..

…so you can make up your own mind, do not believe either side until you’ve thought it out for yourselves..

How refreshing it is to hear the above from Lord Monckton. How different it is from the likes of Al Gore, who refuse to debate and who are so quick with their ad hom attacks. No wonder the public are losing faith in the man made global warming scare.

“CO2 Warming will be worse than Feared” (Oh, No It Won’t.) January 4, 2010

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

“CO2 Warming will be worse than Feared” (Oh, No It Won’t.)

By the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
SPPI, December 29, 2009

And still the scare stories keep coming. A paper in Nature Geoscience, published “coincidentally” just before the collapsed Copenhagen climate change conference, suggests that long-term temperature feedbacks in response to warming induced by anthropogenic CO2 emissions will be 30-50% higher than the already enormous estimates of the UN’s climate panel.

The British authors said the “more-than-expected” warming would unfold over a matter of hundreds of years, rather than this century. The findings do not mean that the predictions for temperature rise by 2100, established notably by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), should be rewritten, they said.

Read the rest here

Monckton Testimony Before US House Committee April 17, 2009

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , ,
add a comment

Monckton Testimony Before US House Committee


By Bob Ferguson, SPPI

On March 25th, Christopher Monckton gave testimony before the US House Committee on Energy and Commerce.  That testimony gave rise to a letter to both Democrat Ed Markey and Republican Joe Barton, members of the committee.  The letter has been formatted and posted at SPPI here.

As context, the Committee held a hearing on the desirability of, and opportunities for, adapting to anthropogenic “global warming”. Congressman Joe Barton introduced Monckton to the Committee as “the world’s most knowledgeable climate skeptic.” His opening statement concentrated on three scientific graphs and an economic graph. The scientific graphs (each featured in SPPI’s Monthly CO2 Report, showed that global temperature had been falling for seven years; that CO2 concentration had been rising at about half the UN’s central estimate, requiring its warming projections to be halved and rendering them harmless; and that 20 years of satellite observations of changes in outgoing long-wave radiation had demonstrated conclusively that the UN had exaggerated the effect of CO2 on temperature by a factor of 7-10. The economic graph showed the cost of adapting to “global warming” (if and when it resumed) as being many times cheaper than the cost of attempting to mitigate it.

These graphs aroused considerable interest. Provoked by Congressman Markey’s alarm at hearing real science, Mr. Tom Karl, the Director of the US National Climatic Data Center, a Democrat witness, disputed the temperature graph on the insubstantial ground that Monckton had compiled it by inappropriately combining two satellite and two surface temperature datasets; disputed the CO2 graph on the ground that carbon emissions were rising far faster than the UN had predicted; and disputed the satellite data on outgoing long-wave radiation on the ground that all satellites are prone to orbital degradation.

Monckton replied that each of the four temperature datasets individually demonstrated that global temperatures had been falling for fully seven years; that it is not CO2 emissions but CO2 concentrations remaining in the atmosphere that matter, and the concentrations, while rising, were doing so far more slowly than even the lowest of the UN’s projections; and that the analysis of the satellite data that he had displayed had been confirmed – precisely because the results were so surprising to those who believed the UN’s exaggerated estimates of climate sensitivity – by at least four further scientific papers.

Congressman Barton said it was essential that the Committee should know who was telling the truth, and he invited Mr. Karl and Lord Monckton to write to the committee, giving further and better particulars in support of what they each had said.

Icecap Note: This letter is Monckton’s reply. It is a remarkable work and you should take the time to read it. Hopefully it will influence some of the fence sitters in congress on this issue and help derail congressional action on cap-and-trade (tax-and-trade) and other similar efforts to drive up the cost of energy to benefit the government, NGOs, traders and corporations who care less about the environment but see profit in green efforts.

How to deal with a Global Warming skeptic in a cooling world December 16, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in humour.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

How to deal with a Global Warming skeptic in a cooling world

By the blogowner, honestclimate, December 16, 2008

The world is no warmer today than it was in 1998, we can’t have people thinking that global warming has stopped. Below is an easy to understand flow diagram on how to deal with global warming skeptics in a cooling world…

(click image for larger view)

Also don’t forget the below flow diagram on:
How to become a climate scientist

(click image for larger view)

This year Poznan, last year Bali December 14, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in humour.
Tags: , , , , , ,
add a comment

This year Poznan, last year Bali

By the blogowner, honestclimate, December 14, 2008

From NZ Climate Science, December 17, 2007

This is an oldie, but a goodie, from Bali last year…

Bali diary

Fortnight Of The Undead

Lord Monckton

Lord Monckton

By Christopher Monckton in Nusa Dua, Bali

Down the Poxy, our local fleapit late on a Saturday night, voodoo flicks like Night Of The Undead were always popular when I was a lad. To shrieks of scornful merriment from the teenage audience, mindless zombies would totter aimless across the clumsily-constructed sets with lugubrious expressions frozen on their messily-made-up death-masks until the hero, with the lurv interest wrenched screeching from the clutches of the late Baron Samedi and draped admiringly on her rescuer’s extravagantly-muscled arm, triumphantly saved the day.

Thus it was in Bali during the Fortnight Of The Undead. There was surreality in the air. The overwhelming majority of the governmental delegates, journalists, quango stallholders, fortune-hunters and environmental lobbyists who attended the UN climate conference in the soulless Nusa Dua conference centre tottered aimlessly among the clumsily-constructed sets with lugubrious expressions frozen on their messily-made-up death-masks. Monckton’s Rule: the further Left, the tackier the make-up. The only laughter came from our gallant band of doubters, the heroes of this otherwise gloomy production.

I nearly didn’t go to Bali. The UN, which had not wanted any dissent at this carefully-staged event, rejected my journalistic credentials out of hand, and without explanation. However, a non-government organization came to the rescue and the high priests didn’t dare to say No a second time. That would have looked too obvious. I proved my journo-cred by writing a major article in the Jakarta Post on day 1 of the conference, cheekily claiming my share of the Nobel Prize because the IPCC had made a correction to its latest Holy Book at my suggestion, and concluding that, since our influence on the climate is a non-problem, and the correct approach to a non-problem is to do nothing, my fellow-participants should have the courage to do nothing and push off home.

The Post circulated the article to all delegates and syndicated it worldwide, provoking weeping and gnashing of dentures among the zombies at my challenge to the scientific accuracy of the Holy Books of the IPCC. I don’t think the UN will dare to question my journalistic credentials again.

The UN’s sinister bureaucrats were furious that their attempt to stop me writing in the newspapers from the conference had failed. So they interrupted a presentation by me to delegates, threatened to have me thrown out by Security if I addressed any meeting open to the Press in the conference venues, and cancelled without reason a room they had previously booked for our team’s daily conferences. The room wasn’t even needed for someone else: it stood empty. So we mounted a demo outside the conference: half a dozen scientists (and me) in white lab-coats and (for some reason) wrap-around shades, holding a banner saying, “New science drives out old fears: Kyoto 2 is not needed”.

The UN, whose pot-bellied goons had taken over the entire Nusa Dua conference zone from the leaner and more competent Indonesian and Balinese security forces, moved us on within minutes, while allowing anti-nuclear protesters, Greens and even Hilary Benn, described as a UK Minister, to mount demonstrations for hours on end.


Obama on the ‘urgency’ of combating ‘global warming’ November 30, 2008

Posted by honestclimate in Discussions.
Tags: , , , ,
1 comment so far

Obama on the ‘urgency’ of combating ‘global warming’

Lord Monckton

Lord Monckton

By Lord Monckton

From American Thinker, November 26, 208

Obama’s World View on Energy and Climate

In a video shown at a costly, two-day “global warming” jamboree at the Beverly Hills Hotel, hosted by Governor Schwarzenegger of California in November 2008, Barack Obama said:

“Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear. Sea levels are rising. Coastlines are shrinking. We’ve seen record drought, spreading famine, and storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season. Climate change and our dependence on foreign oil, if left unaddressed, will continue to weaken our economy and threaten our national security.”

Obama said he would introduce “a federal cap and trade system to reduce America’s emissions of carbon dioxide to their 1990 levels by 2020 and reduce them an additional 80 percent by 2050.” He said his administration would “invest” $15 billion a year in solar power, wind power, biofuels, nuclear power and clean coal to “save the planet” by creating 5 million new “green jobs”.

Read the rest, click below link