Posts Tagged ‘monckton’

More on the Monckton/Abraham debate on global warming

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

Source: CFACT News

Target: Monckton

Lord Monckton is under attack, a sure sign that he’s winning on warming. Monckton fights back and refutes Prof. Abraham

[Videos of Monckton responses to Abraham here]

Have you noticed the kicking around that CFACT Advisor Lord Christopher Monckton’s been getting lately?

Add to the title “Viscount of Brenchley,” “whipping boy du jour.”  Seldom a recent day goes by without some new name calling or conspiracy theory attacking Lord Monckton echoing through the left-wing blogosphere.

Why is Chris Monckton the victim of a global warming attack campaign?  Effectiveness.  Few have been so brilliantly effective at debunking the global warming scare as this compellingly articulate British Lord. (more…)

Global warming alarmists in full retreat as skeptics attack greenhouse theory

Friday, July 23rd, 2010

Source:  Seminole County Environmental News Examiner

by Kirk Myers

Sensing that their sky-is-falling theory is crumbling under scientific scrutiny, the always-insecure global warming True Believers are losing their cool, lashing out at critics with a mounting campaign of scurrilous personal attacks, impugning the motives, integrity and mental state of anyone who refuses to genuflect before the high priesthood of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

The latest target of the Warmists:  Viscount Christopher Monckton begin_of_the_skype_highlighting     end_of_the_skype_highlighting of Brenchley, a mathematician and leading critic of the global warming theory, a.k.a. “climate change.”  Monckton was recently mocked and browbeaten in a 115-slide presentation by John Abraham, a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of St. Thomas in Minnesota.  His “hit and run” slide-show attack was an attempt to discredit a presentation that Monckton had given in St. Paul, Minnesota, in October 2009.

Monckton replied with a powerful rebuttal that, point by point, eviscerated Abraham’s embarrassingly dishonest production.  Monckton called on Abraham and the university to issue a formal apology, remove the libelous presentation from the Internet, and donate $110,000 to a Haitian charity as compensation for the damage done to his reputation. (more…)

Lies, damned lies, and little Littlemore

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The SPPI Blog does not usually concern itself with climate-extremist websites. However, that of Richard Littlemore, the cringing, paid lackey of a convicted internet-gaming fraudster who now additionally faces money-laundering charges and has recently found a new fraud – making dodgy solar panels whose construction emits more carbon dioxide than they will save in their remarkably short life-span – has sunk to a new, panicky, desperate low.

Littlemore, you may remember, unwisely agreed to debate me on live radio [Hear the debate here. Or read it here.] across Canada a couple of years ago. As a full-time hack for a PR company he knows no climate science at all, so instead he resorted to the only trade he knows – an ad-hominem personal attack on me. During that radio broadcast he suggested – with characteristic mendacity – that I was paid by fossil-fuel interests.  (more…)

SPPI Monthly CO2 Report Posted

Friday, July 9th, 2010

Source:  SPPI

by Christopher Monckton

Cancun is coming – and it will pointlessly cost you dear

The authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for June 2010 discusses the failure of the Climategate enquiries to do their job, and the coming Cancun Conference, which will be pointlessly expensive for all. Editorial Comment: Page 3.

Our graphs explained: An account of how we compile our authoritiative SPPI temperature and CO2 graphs. Page 4.

IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but, for nine years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570 ppmv by 2100. This factor alone almost halves all of the IPCC’s temperature projections. Pages 5-7.

Since 1980 global temperature has risen at only 2.7 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not 6 F° (3.4 °C) as IPCC predicts. Pages 8-11. (more…)

World government lite – the Cancun Treaty is coming

Friday, June 11th, 2010

From The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley in Bonn, Germany

Well, here we are again. In Bonn, Germany, that is, for the latest in a long series of two-week negotiating sessions intended to lead to the triumphant signing of a binding climate treaty in Cancun, Mexico, this December.

Why Germany? The UN’s bureaucrats were humiliated by the chaotic failure of its attempt at Copenhagen last December, under the charmingly inept direction of the Danish Prime Minister, who was so far out of his depth that he could not even recall the names of the heads of government he was calling to speak.

The UN did not want the Copenhagen catastrophe to repeat itself in the manana republic of Mexico, so it scheduled three two-week sessions for bureaucrats to prepare the draft of what they hope will be a legally-binding treaty to be signed by all the member states in Cancun. (more…)

Oxford University students lose faith in warming

Tuesday, June 1st, 2010

Source:  Washington Times

EDITORIAL: Climate alarmists on the run

Former Vice President Al Gore was at his peak when the film “An Inconvenient Truth” made its initial Hollywood splash. Faith in man-made global warming had never been more widespread, with liberal academics and media subjecting to ridicule any who dared question the “settled science.” Only a fool could deny that elevated carbon-dioxide levels had melted ice caps and stranded polar bears on rapidly diminishing ice floes.

How the tables have turned in a short time. On May 20, Oxford Union, the prestigious 187-year-old English debating society, formally considered the question of whether it was more important to focus on growing the economy or solving global warming. Climate realism won the day, 135 to 110. It’s no wonder, considering how the purportedly scientific arguments advanced in support of the scaremongering conclusions have fallen apart since the Climategate scandal invited verification of the left’s previously unexamined claims. (more…)

Kerry’s Powerless America Act

Friday, May 14th, 2010

Source:  IBD

View Enlarged Image

Regulations: Call it cap-and-trade or bait-and-switch, but John Kerry and Joe Lieberman continue to tilt at windmills with a bill to restrain energy growth in the name of saving the planet.


IBD Exclusive Series:
American Freedom And Prosperity Under Attack


The bill introduced Wednesday and sponsored by the two senators is called the American Power Act, an Orwellian phrase if ever there was one. Like President Obama’s offshore drilling program, for every “incentive” there is a restriction. It’s as if Hamlet were to be appointed Secretary of Energy.

The legislation has little to do with developing America’s vast domestic energy supply. It’s cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending. It’s about regulations, restrictions and research. It does not deal with exploiting America’s vast energy reserves but with finding ways to mitigate their alleged harmful effect. (more…)

Lord Monckton on Climate Change – Melbourne Highlights clip, Parts I & II

Friday, February 12th, 2010

O’Brien does it again

Friday, February 5th, 2010

Source:  Herald Sun

By Andrew Bolt

Perhaps, I thought, Kerry O’Brien had finally been embarrassed. Perhaps this was his apologetic way to even things up.

After all, yesterday’s interview on his 7.30 Report with climate sceptic Lord Monckton had been a disgrace, as I wrote this morning. Monckton, unlike almost every warming alarmist interviewed by O’Brien, was not given a one-on-one studio interview. Unlike almost every warming alarmist interviewed by O’Brien, Monckton had his motives and funding questioned, and his integrity gratuitously impugned. Unlike almost every warming alarmist interviewed by O’Brien, his appearance was counterbalanced and interrupted by interviews with three warmist critics, including a green lobbyist, who between them actually managed to speak for longer than did Monckton himselt. And unlike almost every warming alarmist interviewed by O’Brien, Monckton was not allowed the time tto actually explain his views, and indeed had them misreported by the reporter. (more…)

Are the Polar Ice Caps Melting?

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2010

Source:  http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/2871-are-the-ice-caps-melting

by Rebecca Terrell

“The entire polar ice cap … could be completely ice free within the next five to seven years.” So claimed global-warming magnate Al Gore at last December’s UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

The scientist he referenced, Dr. Wieslav Maslowski, is a Department of Oceanography professor with the U.S. Naval Post-Graduate School. Maslowski denied making the prediction in an interview with the U.K. Times Online. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.” A shamefaced Gore admitted gleaning the “ballpark figure” from a conversation he had with Maslowski several years ago. Yet only days before Gore’s Copenhagen speech, the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) published a report of Maslowski’s research. It read, “Should the present trend of sea ice melt continue, some models suggest that the Arctic Ocean could become near ice free in the summer time within one decade.”

To further confuse things, DMI records show practically identical total sea ice area measurements in the Arctic for the past five years. However, DMI qualifies its data, noting that the age and thickness of Arctic ice is changing dramatically and citing research from the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Colorado that Arctic sea ice is melting at a rate of 11.2 percent per decade. The NSIDC explains that more ice than usual has been melting in summer months during recent years. New ice cover is relatively thin, weak, and more vulnerable to melting. Remarking on the data, NSIDC Director Mark Serreze said, “We still expect to see ice-free summers sometime in the next few decades.” (more…)

On Monckton’s Nobel Prize Claim

Monday, February 1st, 2010

Source:  Sydney Morning Herald

by Paul Sheehan

Last week the Herald reported that Monckton told a large lie while in Sydney.

On Tuesday it reported: ”He said with a straight face on the Alan Jones radio program that he had been awarded the Nobel, a claim Jones did not question.”

The Herald repeated the accusation on Thursday. It was repeated a third time in a commentary in Saturday’s Herald. (more…)

NASA Climategate Exposed

Friday, January 15th, 2010

[SPPI Note:  The Smith-D’Aleo paper mentioned in this press release was commissioned by SPPI, and the full copyrighted version will be released and posted at SPPI in the next few days.  We consented for a shortened version to be used by John Coleman for his program.  All five segments of the program can be viewed here:  http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/81583352.html ]

*********

Climate researchers have discovered that NASA researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2005 as “the warmest year on record.”

KUSI-TV meteorologist, Weather Channel founder, and iconic weatherman John Coleman will present these findings in a one-hour special airing on KUSI-TV on January 14 at 9 p.m. EST. A related report will be made available on the Internet at 6 p.m. EST on January 14 at www.kusi.com.

In a new report, computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D’Aleo discovered extensive manipulation of the temperature data by the U.S. government’s two primary climate centers: the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) in Asheville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. Smith and D’Aleo accuse these centers of manipulating temperature data to give the appearance of warmer temperatures than actually occurred by trimming the number and location of weather observation stations. The report is available online at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf. (more…)

Lord Monckton rips Scientific American’s climate lies

Tuesday, January 12th, 2010

Source: Courtney of http://www.climategate.com/lord-monkton-rips-scientific-american-climate-lies

December 27, 2009

Does Lord Christopher Monckton ever sleep? Thank goodness he must not–he’s out today with another brilliant hit piece on the global warming hoaxers. This time its Scientific American, who viciously attacked US Senator James Inhofe because he had proclaimed 2009 to be the Year of the Skeptic. (Remember when scientists were skeptics?)

Venomously, Science Fiction American’s editorial comment continued: “Within the community of scientists and others concerned about anthropogenic climate change, those whom Inhofe calls skeptics are more commonly termed contrarians, naysayers and denialists.” Yah-Boo! This name-calling marks the depth of unscientific desperation to which the proponents of the “global warming” nonsense have now sunk.

Unscientific American pompously continued: “Not everyone who questions climate change science fits that description, of course—some people are genuinely unaware of the facts or honestly disagree about their interpretation. What distinguishes the true naysayers is an unwavering dedication to denying the need for action on the problem, often with weak and long-disproved arguments about supposed weaknesses in the science behind global warming.”

Politicized American, following a host of similarly left-leaning bodies such as the Royal Society and the unspeakable BBC, proceeded to parody and then condemn the now-overwhelming scientific case against the notion that CO2 is the principal driver of the past half-century’s “global warming” by setting up and then knocking down seven feeble straw men – childish, dishonest simulacra of the true scientific arguments against “global warming” hysteria. It described its straw men as “only a partial list of the contrarians’ bad arguments”. Yah-Boo!

After ripping Unscientific American to shreds, Monckton goes on to reproduce each of Scientific American’s seven straw men, state the true skeptical argument, and discuss the scientific truth.

A must read: Scientific American’s Climate Lies | The SPPI Blog.

Now Showing: The New Eco-Scary Movie

Sunday, January 10th, 2010

Source: courtesy of http://www.uncoverage.net/2010/01/now-showing-the-new-eco-scary-movie/

During December’s obsession with “Climate-gate,” the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) began revving up publicity for its  video on the NEW eco-disaster-in-the-making, “Acid Test: The Global Challenge of Ocean Acidification.”

It is a lushly-produced, lightly-sourced 21-minute presentation, with alto-gushy voice-over by actress Sigourney Weaver, the star of the movies, “Alien” and “Ghostbusters.”  It does not say in the credits anywhere that Ms. Weaver has also has a science degree.  At one point in the video, Ms. Weaver intones, in twenty years the oceans will be a “sea of weeds.”  Someone from Stanford University tells us coral reefs and seashells will be dissolving, in “20 or 30 years.”  Someone else turned to the camera and said, (very seriously) she has never seen terapods with such thin shells, EVER. (more…)

Monckton on Andrew Dessler’s Post

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

by Robert Ferguson

Andrew Dessler requested a guest posting on the blog of Roger Pielke Sr.

Here follows Christopher Monckton’s short comments:

I’m looking forward to Roger Pielke’s reply.

If the water vapor feedback were anything like as strongly positive as he pretends, then the climate would be far more unstable than it is. Though his post doesn’t explain it, the water vapor feedback is almost 50% offset by the negative lapse-rate feedback: the greater the water vapor feedback, the greater the compensating lapse-rate feedback, which leaves the net feedback at around 1 W/m2/K. Also, though he mentions clouds very briefly, he does not follow through, and I’m sure Roger will do so. As the atmosphere warms, the space it occupies can carry near-exponentially more water vapor, and evaporation from the surface increases. There is, therefore, a negative evaporation feedback that is not mentioned or quantified in the IPCC’s documents, and – more importantly – the more water vapor plus evaporation the more clouds at low level, which are optically dense and reflect more sunlight harmlessly back to space.

We can measure this not only by visual imaging (ISCCP) but also by contrasting the short-wave and long-wave radiation channels as measured on the ERBE and CERES satellites, or even by monitoring changes in Earthshine. Result of all this real-world measurement: in 1983-2001, the only two decades during which we could in theory have caused “global warming”, the CO2 radiative forcing using the UN’s method was 0.8 W/m2 but the positive forcing from an unconnected and natural diminution in cloud cover over the period was 4.5 W/m2, more than five and a half times bigger.

And that’s just the direct forcing. The water vapor feedback, if it had been anything like as big as the UN and Dr. Dessler would have us believe, should have caused a massive increase in global temperature. It didn’t. – Christopher