Dr. Roy Spencer & Lord Christopher Monckton to Challenge Climate Orthodoxy at Cancun UN Conference

I wonder if the “Climate Science Rapid Response Team” is going?

From PR Newswire Available for Radio and All Media

CANCUN, Mexico, Nov. 24, 2010 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — CFACT, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, will feature two prominent experts on climate science and policy at COP 16, the UN conference on climate change which convenes next week in Cancun.

Lord Christopher Monckton will be in Cancun December 1 – 10.

Dr. Roy Spencer will be in Cancun December 6 – 10.

Both will be available (allowing for travel) before and after Cancun.

Last year COP 15 in Copenhagen ended without serious progress on a successor treaty to the Kyoto protocol. A series of meetings in Germany and China were likewise inconclusive. The UNFCCC is under severe pressure to jump start the treaty process in Mexico, however, public doubts about climate science and policy coupled with an inability of developed and developing nations to find common ground leave the UNFCCC with a daunting task ahead.

With billions at stake for carbon traders (whose markets expire with the Kyoto protocol), warming science and policy campaigners, developing nations and subsidized industries in Cancun, the push for a new treaty will be fierce. The treaty proposals being circulated impose crippling costs and regulations that will choke off economic recovery while doing nothing to alter the climate. CFACT, Dr. Spencer and Lord Monckton will open minds and effectively challenge a scientific “consensus” that never was, detail global warming’s scope, causes and effects, separate smart energy strategies from waste and skewer the global warming lobby’s propaganda and abusive tactics.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer is a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. He was formerly a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA. He is co-developer of the original satellite method for precise monitoring of global temperatures from Earth-orbiting satellites. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming. He recently wrote, The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientist. In 2008 he wrote The New York Times bestseller, Climate Confusion.

Lord Christopher Monckton, Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, has been a leader of CFACT’s delegations to numerous UN summits. He has held positions with the British press and in government, as a press officer at the Conservative Central Office and as Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s policy advisor. Monckton advised Thatcher on technical issues such as warship hydrodynamics, psephological modeling; embryological research, hydrogeology, public-service investment analysis, public welfare modeling, and epidemiological analysis. He is author of a detailed analysis and summary of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes’ Fourth Assessment Report.

SOURCE Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow

h/t to R. de Haan

About these ads

86 thoughts on “Dr. Roy Spencer & Lord Christopher Monckton to Challenge Climate Orthodoxy at Cancun UN Conference

  1. UN Permanent Emergency Session sought for Kyoto

    “George Dvorsky, a director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies summarises his preferred way forward as follows ‘Given the failure of Copenhagen, I’m inclined to believe that semi-annual conferences are not the way to go. Instead, I’d like to see the United Nations assemble an international and permanent emergency session that is parliamentary in nature (i.e. representative and accountable) and dedicated to debating and acting on the problem of anthropogenic climate change (a sub-parliament, if you will).

    The decisions of this governing board would be binding and impact on all the nations of the world.”

    http://spectator.org/blog/2010/11/26/un-permanent-emergency-session

  2. Prediction-if what I am seeing in North Korea/South Korea is any indication Cancun is not going to even be on the Radar. I think things there are about to get very unpleasant.

  3. Douglas DC says: “Prediction-if what I am seeing in North Korea/South Korea is any indication Cancun is not going to even be on the Radar. I think things there are about to get very unpleasant.”

    The Administration and its lapdog MSM will happily accept any and all distractions. Lindsay Lohan, where are you when your President needs you?

  4. Steeptown
    “Remind me. Does the Kyoto Protocol expire in 2012? Can’t wait.”

    AGW may expire before 2012

  5. Douglas, I hope you’re wrong. Not only for the obvious reasons but also because I can see them shoving somegthing through while the world’s attention is elsewhere.

  6. A small request.

    Please write UNO, not UN. It is not a unity of nations, it is an organization. It is probably not your friend.

    Do this everywhere.

  7. hunter says:

    “It would be good if someone Dr. Spencer respects were to advise him not associate himself with Monckton.”

    Why not?

    Maybe Dr Spencer sees through the alarmists’ Saul Alinsky-type of ad hominem attacks against Lord Monckton – who regularly spanks their heroes in public debates. How embarassing, eh?

  8. Spencer is fantastic, and I like Monkton on a personal level, but I kinda wish Dr. Richard Lindzen would be there as well! I really enjoyed his testimony before Congress when he sat on the panel before Congress:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/18/profess-richard-lindzens-congressional-testimony/

    Man, he REALLY makes ‘em squirm! It is a long clip, but I highly recommend watching the entire video of this event. The guy knows his stuff, period.

  9. What we have to do is to tell everyone we can, at every opportunity, that they are being led up the garden path. Current UK snow helps (tho’ weather ain’t climate)
    And to keep abreast of Cancun, lest nasty things are agreed to while MSM interest is elsewhere or they parrot the warmists line, so we can alert people.
    Widespread popular rejection of CAGW does have a (slow) political effect – I hope!

  10. You don’t have to agree with Monckton about everything but he does talk sense on climate issues. He talks rubbish on some other things. Being right about one thing doesn’t make you right about everything so I find all that blurb about him annoying. Also, why do people keep mentioining his viscountness? That is relevant to what exactly?

  11. Actually, I can’t think of a more dynamic duo to unleash on Cancun. Say what you will about Monckton, the man knows his stuff and even more importantly, he is quite skilled at communicating these concepts to lay people (and idiots like politicians). Spencer is fantastic, his credentials and expertise are beyond reproach and he, too, possesses that rare gift of being able to communicate complex ideas to those who are not members of the Climatologists Guild.

  12. For those folks who want to DUMP on “Lord Monckton” I can only say, “Wright Brothers, Edison, and Michael Farady….”

    Let’s see: Developers of the airplane, Electric Light, Phonograph, Motion Picture Camera, Telephone (Yes, I said that…read about it, Edison made the first PRACTICAL microphone and earpiece), Capacitor, Improved Voltaic Pile, and 3000 pages of Notes on Electro-Magnetism (Faraday) which formed the basis for Maxwell’s 1861, “On Faraday’s Lines of Force”…where the Maxwell Equations are found.

    WHAT’S SIGNIFICANT ABOUT THESE FELLOWS:

    Wright Brothers: 8th grade education.

    Edison: Home Schooled

    Faraday: No FORMAL Education (self taught).

    Where would we be without them?

    Therefore, in consideration of the “content of his arguement” rather than the content of his “Cirriculum Vita”, I give Lord M. much respect.

    Oh, last, just remember Louis Pastuer’s overall grade at the “Institute de’ Ploytechnic”, which was MEDIOCRE. Next time you get a chance to be innoculated against some dread disease, you may just want to turn it down as the primary inventor of the concept of bio-innoculation, really didn’t have strong “academic” credentials.

  13. DailyKOS is doing a hit piece on Monckton yesterday: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/11/26/923417/-Climate-scientist-takes-on-AM-radio-host-and-wins!

    “Until a few months ago, nobody ever heard of John Abraham, an engineering professor at St. Thomas University in St. Paul. Maybe you’ve never heard of him. But he’s shaping up to be perhaps the biggest hero of the fight against global warming, evah.”

    Commentators on Fark are eating it up, but they’re a young crowd and I think the global warming issue to them is really a replay of Gore vs Bush and they’re just sticking to their side.

    [Note: Until Abraham comes down out of his Ivory Tower and debates Monckton, he forfeits any credibility.]

  14. Just a view:
    Climate science has moved from purely ‘science discourse’ into the political and lately into fiscal arena. Inevitable it has attained, like it or not, most of the attributes of a classic ‘ideology confrontation’.
    As in any political struggle there are true believers on both sides, honest interlocutors, but there are also ‘refuseniks’ as well as ‘agent provocateurs’ (sometimes difficult to tell apart), short term profiteers, the armchair generals (I am one of these), and finally, as in any revolution, the most dangerous ‘uninformed rabble’, who do not care for fancy phraseology, formulae or feedback sensitivity, they care just for what they see as the phoney excuse for extra taxation burden. Few honourable scientists may find the road to Damascus uninviting and full of potholes , while the ‘uninformed rabble’ is boarding the Boston train.

  15. hunter says:
    November 27, 2010 at 11:23 am
    At least Monckton has the wherewith-all to look them straight in the eye and call bullshit. Then proceed to tell them why it is bullshit. CAGW proponents still seem to have a foothold. IMHO, skeptics have been too nice. Now it is time to not be nice. Post-normal science be damned.

  16. ‘One of the hottest years on record’..?
    I know ‘weather ain’t climate’ – but we’re freezing our b*ll*cks off her in the UK at the moment…

  17. More power to Dr. Spencer and Lord Monckton. Of course, they are attempting to convert a crowd that either has a vested financial, personal, and/or political interest in AGW being true or are too fanatical and/or too committed to the cause to believe anything that contradict their belief.

    I always thought the best way to strike a blow to Big Environment is to buy an advertisement on TV. If I had the money, I would buy an ad during the Super Bowl. But it couldn’t be a year when the GE subsidiary NBC has the Super Bowl because GE has a financial interest in AGW being true. I would buy a Super Bowl ad that would start off with words “You were lied to” and end with the words “Research is the worst nightmare of environmentalists.” An ad so dramatic in an event where people watch the commercials instead of the program itself would send Big Environment crying and on the biggest damage control they could muster.

  18. This upcoming UN Cancun conference is not about saving the world from global warming, it’s about getting our wealth and technology as well as part of our sovereignty.

  19. It’s great Dr. Spencer and Lord Monckton will be in Cancum.
    But I join prior commentor in saying that top of my list for another person of ”gravitas” to represent objective science at this cirucs would be Dr. Lindzen.

  20. ” but we’re freezing our b*ll*cks off her in the UK at the moment”…… The typo makes this a giggler. Like Homer’s postcard to Marge; “Wish You Were Her”.

  21. Dr A Burns says:
    November 27, 2010 at 12:41 pm

    “Surely at AGW scammers won’t allow Monkton and Spencer to speak openly at the conference ?”

    There are only 20 heads of state bothering to show up. So pallbearers for the AGW casket appear to be in short supply.

  22. Great news!

    Monckton brings his very quotable command of facts, as well as his delightfully British knack for skewering the pompous (who remain largely unaware they’ve been skewered)

    Roy Spencer is also a good communicator, but his real value at Cancun is that he brings the one truly novel idea to the table. That is, the climate-alarm boys have mixed up cause and effect (forcing and feedback), specifically regarding clouds. The world warms when clouds are few, NOT clouds are few wien the world warms. “Climate Blunder” is a marvelous, very readable description and discussion of that concept.

    Monckton/Spencer will of course be “outside the tent” at Cancun, so the challenge is to sway a few reporters and at least make the event uncomfortable for the Kool-Aid guzzlers inside.

  23. Just to show nature has a sense of humour it will be snowing heavily across most of Europe this week, the earliest snow we’ve had for five years. Added to that the low, low temperatures makes belief in AGW a bit harder to stomach for most folk. But then the Met Office and the BBC just can’t seem to help themselves. Science will out, maybe not at Cancun but eventually it will have its day…

  24. I like an can respect Lord Monckton, he’s a likable character, honest, even about his mistakes, and he knows to get the math right and the political game but with a nice touch of satire to it.

    Me, I just call ‘em hippies until their ears starts to bleed whereupon they tend to start running around in circles screaming gibberish on top of their lungs, which is about when I point my finger at ‘em at laugh myself silly at the same time exclaiming I frakking knew it! You hippies are just out to get the real doctors to prescribe you cheap psychotropic drugs.

  25. “The decisions of this governing board would be binding and impact on all the nations of the world.”

    This is a good reason to oppose Obama and Putin’s current nuclear weapons reduction effort. We may need them to guard our sovereignty. I kind of realize why the Iranians think they need them, too, after reading this.

  26. Max Hugoson says:
    November 27, 2010 at 1:43 pm

    > [Edison] Telephone (Yes, I said that…read about it, Edison made the first PRACTICAL microphone and earpiece),

    Edison & co. invented the carbon microphone. His attempts at an earpiece didn’t improve on Bell’s earpiece, which is still in use and is basically a small loudspeaker. Bell used the same thing for the microphone. It works, but the carbon microphone had a much stronger output.

    It’s been a bad few decades for Edison. First the CD displaced LP records, then the breakup of Ma Bell spawned innovation that left the carbon mike behind, now politicians are forcing the replacement of incandescent lightbulbs. At least they still use the Edison base in CFL replacement lamps, but its days may be numbered. His Portland cement manufacturing techniques are still in use, CO2 intensive though they are….

    > Edison: Home Schooled

    Nothing wrong with that, a lot of people home school in New Hampshire

  27. Spencer deserves a seat with full privileges. He is a solid scientist with excellent abilities in mathematics and physics.

    Monctkon is a circus act. In a real scientific debate with scientists, where there is plenty of time to explore depth of knowledge and to fully respond to wild claims, I think Monckton would be totally destroyed. His sole role is obfuscation, and he is good at confusing people who understand little about the science involved.

    [Reply: Such ad hominem attacks are discouraged here. Provide specific, substantive refutations of Monckton's science, or take it elsewhere.]

  28. Roy Spencer’s book, the Great Global Warming Blunder, sets forth in plain American English one extended argument which reveals the single greatest weakness in the AGW position, namely, that the AGW people have no hypotheses which explain the behavior of clouds. Such hypotheses are absolutely necessary if the AGW people are to explain the “forcings” that are necessary to yield more than one degree Celsius of warming this century. In response, all the AGW people can do is crank up another model run; that is, they produce yet more epicycles on epicycles. Spencer’s book is especially important because its shows the lay of the land exactly as it is today. The so-called science of AGW is in its infancy and does not have the hypotheses which would make it a genuine science. Someday there will be genuine climate hypotheses but they do not exist today. There is no scientific basis for AGW proponents’ claims of dangerous global warming.

  29. R. de Haan says:
    November 27, 2010 at 10:56 am

    Sorry but the old joke “Can we rise up and slaughter them yet?” starts to take on new meaning.

    DaveE.

  30. JimB says:
    November 27, 2010 at 1:17 pm

    I notice on Weather Underground that Cancun has set new record low temperatures for the last 5 days.

    Pray for snow but they’ll spin it as climate change

    DaveE.

  31. The Lord Monckton is a fraud.! There is an accepted process by which the “facts”of science are presented. The process requires research and a presentation based on rigorous study. The Lord does not do research. He writes volumes of largely nonsensical prose and then pretends that this diatribe refutes the mountains of research performed by scientists from all over the world. Most informed persons are not fooled by this craziness, but there are many who are unaware of scientific protocols who are part of his fan club. This is sad.

    REPLY: You mean he’s like Al Gore? -A

  32. Lord Monctkon . I have been to a monctkon speech on climate change, and I was very impressed with the way he spoke to us, everybody was able to understand what he had to say . If they let him speak at Cancun, I think you will be very surprised.

  33. I hope Monckton does another lord-on-the-street interview with greenpiece activists like he did last year, that was hilarious.

  34. Lord Monctkon . I have been to a monctkon speach on climate change and I was very impressed with the way he spoke to us, everybody was able to understand what he had to say . If thay let him speek at cancum I think you will be very surprised

    I have too, and I was equally impressed.

    As to Anthony’s tongue-in-cheek comparison to Al Gore, whatever your opinion of either one, there is one irrefutable difference between them, namely Lord Monckton is more than happy to take and answer questions from anyone and everyone, whatever their viewpoint. And he always tells people not to take his word for it but do their own research. Oh, and he makes a point of stating that revealing the truth is the ultimate aim of science. When was the last time Al Gore did any of that?

  35. What fun this site is! I’m delighted Monckton is going to Cancun. Yes, he does speak and write well and convincingly, which is more than can be said for a lot of people. The side of him that worries me is his stupid religiosity which, fortunately, hasn’t appeared in his arguments against the global warming mob. And the side of others that worries me is that they seem to care whether he’s a lord or not and all that crap. It’s irrelevant. His name is Christopher Monckton. He’s a good debater against warmists. Bin the rest.

  36. Lots of criticism here of Christopher Monckton.
    Mainly from trolls, of course – The Man They Love to Hate.

    There is a number of things that Monckton says that I don’t agree with (and in particular his continued support for Maggie Thatcher – one of those guilty of setting up the whole cAGW scam in the first place).

    But I think he himself is sound on the climate debate and (as has been pointed out) has effectively spanked the warmists on numerous occasions.

    OK, he may not have qualifications in what passes for “Climate Science”. Just like Al Gore, Joe Romm, Bob Ward, George Monbiot, Lord Stern, Robert Watson, Crispin Tickell, Maurice Strong, John Abraham, Rajendra Pachauri and all the rest of them.

    And when we’re talking about “real” Climate Scientists like Sir John Houghton, Michael Mann, Keith Briffa, Gavin Schmidt, Jim Hansen, Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth and all that dismal cabal of the third rate, the barmy and the dishonest, I doubt if Monckton spens much time sobbing into his pillow because of this gap in his CV.

    The criticisms also miss the obvious point that the whole cAGW scam is only peripherally to do with science, anyway. And if we’re getting down to the dirty business of policy and politics and carbon trading then Chris Monckton (or even I) have as much right to pitch in as anyone else. And I do wish I was good at it as Chris Monckton.

    Go get ‘em, Chris!

  37. I wish them both every success. I hope that they remember the old saying- ‘Convince a man against his will he’s of the same opinion still’.
    The politicians want to believe the climate change problems exist so as to control the profligate population and keep them under the thumb.

  38. John Marshall says:
    November 28, 2010 at 2:31 am

    I wish them both every success. I hope that they remember the old saying- ‘Convince a man against his will he’s of the same opinion still’.
    The politicians want to believe the climate change problems exist so as to control the profligate population and keep them under the thumb.

    Yes, there’s a bit of conspiracy in that but also a lot of truth. It is certainly true of some if not all politicians anyway. But there is another important issue which has to be overcome; sooner or later, all the scientists, environmentalists, journalists and politicians who have fallen for the CO2 AGW hypothesis will have to admit that they have been gullible fools. A good scientist will change his/her opinion in light of new evidence – a la Judith Curry for example. But very few politicians will ever admit that they have got it all wrong, not publicly anyway. The role of the media will be key here, but given their track record on CAGW so far I am not too optimistic. I have previously pointed out to UK journalists (in emails to Channel 4 News, Newsnight etc.) that the opposite of sceptical is gullible, and that scepticism is surely a necessity for good journalism, but to no avail, they have all got the faith and can’t be swayed it seems.

  39. Owen says:
    November 27, 2010 at 5:39 pm
    “Monctkon is a circus act. In a real scientific debate with scientists, where there is plenty of time to explore depth of knowledge and to fully respond to wild claims,”

    Aye, but there’s the rub! Sadly those who profess to be climatologists have, over the past year, been proven to lack scientific rigour at best and to be dishonest and incompetent manipulators of the data at worst.
    As far as depth of knowledge is concerned, they crumble into headless chickens when confronted by anyone with a grasp of the scientific principles that they have debauched in order to arrive at their dubious and financially self serving conclusions.
    And as to wild claims, the whole edifice of AGW/ACC /ACDisruption is built on the shifting sands of hyperbole.
    I think you will find that the anachronistic circus act is in Cancun, and that their white elephants are not on tour but remain to despoil our countryside.

  40. Owen says:
    November 27, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    Monckton is a circus act. In a real scientific debate with scientists, where there is plenty of time to explore depth of knowledge and to fully respond to wild claims, I think Monckton would be totally destroyed.

    His video-debate exchange with Abraham took many hours and Monckton emerged a clear winner:

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/08/12/target-monckton/

    For more, such as a fuller, text-based response to Abraham, type Monckton into the search box.

  41. One can only hope that there is time at Cancun for the scientists to attend the field and observe the demise or not of sceloporus on the Yucatan Peninsula.

    Fantastic news, and I am sure we will hear more from L Monckton on potential Nobel Prize winner de Soto and property rights rather than the black market economies

    http://www.blogdelnarco.com/

    thanks to a blogger on WUWT referring to Matt Briggs hammer- this man?:- http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=3220

  42. Scientific skeptics are absolutely essential to the Scientific Method. If scientific skeptics are not permitted to express their points of view, then the UN/IPCC’s view is nothing more than climate alarmist propaganda.

    If the Cancun dog-and-pony show refuses to allow dissenting views, the result will not be science, but advocacy. All indications are that Dr Spencer and Viscount Monckton’s input will be officially banned with prejudice.

    An eminent climatologist such as Dr Spencer must be allowed equal time to present his views on the AGW issue. To deny Dr Spencer a seat at the table exposes the CAGW propagandists for what they truly are: scientific charlatans conniving to pick the pockets of honest taxpayers in order to fund their agenda of a totalitarian world government run by the totally corrupt, self-appointed UN organization.

    If my analysis is wrong, then UN/IPCC apologists are free to try and refute it here.

  43. @Owen says: [snip]

    I learned a great deal of science reading Moncktons papers and often refer people who know little about the subjec to to his website. I was particularly impressed with his carefully constructed paper experiment looking for the heat in the mid-altitudes that was, from my youth, the hallmark claim of CO2-based warming, the signature of true proof of the greenhouse effect. All CO2 models show(ed) that the atmosphere will heat three times faster 8-16 km up than on the surface. His paper showed the theory, the claims and the science (radiosonde ballow measurments) showing that there is absolutely no such warming at all. None.

    The likes of RC had to resort to attaching him personally because they had no answer to his science – that and the fact there is no such warming.

    Later it was quietly announced that the effect of CO2 will be felt at ground level (!) contradicting decades of greenhouse blanket theory. Amazing. When the ground level heat was show to be absent or faked, the next step was to claim it is in the oceans. When that didn’t pan out, it is ‘hidden in the oceans’. Some are still looking for it.

    Dissing Monckton tells us about you, not Monckton.

  44. We should all be thankful for brave souls like Spencer and Monckton.
    One aspect of Cancun not mentioned in the comments above (but well-known to those who live in U.S. states bordering Mexico) is the anarchy caused by drug gang violence now engulfing large sections of Mexico. Can the Mexican police provide adequate security to those ultra-wealthy reps and greenies from around the world traveling to the luxurious resort?

  45. Normally I suspect naivety rather than deception, but I want to call attention to the following article, which appears to be not only deliberate but also malicious deception:
    https://www.llnl.gov/str/March04/Santer.html (“Tropopause Height…”)

    If this is not deception, it suggests incompetence on an unforgivable scale.

    Also noteworthy from the article: There’s a “forcing” graph that corroborates what Bill Illis has shared (about model assumptions) in other threads.

  46. Anthony, I am so glad you post opposing views. The doomsayers can speak here if they want to (we cannot post on pro-AGW sites without edit or censorship), but they better bring their A-game. Huth is spot on. This is a fun site. Best there is. Thanks to Anthony, his wife and family (who support him), and all those who work behind the scenes to make this the top dog blog. The numbers speak for themselves.

  47. It is certainly good news that Spencer and Monckton will be at Cancun is any capacity.

    Good luck guys.

    John

  48. Everyone will know that AGW proponents have decided to give up their scam and return to science when they start talking about hypotheses instead of computer models. When that moment arrives, every scientist will be a sceptic of AGW claims. Roy Spencer has shown the way for all of us. Al Gore will become more shrill.

  49. My advice to anyone planning on attending anything in Cancun this year is “DON’T”. I keep getting these bad vibrations. In fact, until the latest Mexican Civil War is over, I wouldn’t recommend that anyone who’s not a Mexican go back to Mexico.

  50. Owen says:
    November 27, 2010 at 5:39 pm

    Spencer deserves a seat with full privileges. He is a solid scientist with excellent abilities in mathematics and physics.

    Monctkon is a circus act. In a real scientific debate with scientists, where there is plenty of time to explore depth of knowledge and to fully respond to wild claims, I think Monckton would be totally destroyed. His sole role is obfuscation, and he is good at confusing people who understand little about the science involved.

    I have absolutely no trouble understanding what Monckton says about climate–and I agree with him. But then, I have an MS in science and an ME in engineering. Maybe that’s your problem–you’re completely out of your depth.

  51. Posters from both sides of the argument have concerns about Monckton. I often think of that quote (attributed to both Lenin and Stalin) that the way to control the opposition is to lead it. Al Gore is Occidental Oil; Monckton is a Thatcherite. Could this be the game? Both sides (the leaders of) working towards the same wink,wink goal while the (honest) sheep bleat cheers for one side or the other. What a “leader” puts out as his public goals and opinions should always be taken with many grains of salt.
    I believe the whole show (about nothing) might be the ruse, not just the pro- AGW half. This technique is used over and over in many different types of situations.

  52. The sad thing here is that it’s apparent that political forces have managed to cause damage to Monckton’s reputation to the point that it’s obvious that people who haven’t even heard him speak or have an awareness of his views have a negative opinion of him.

    Sound bites can be easily taken out of context and drive propaganda. Take the time to give the guy a chance. Read a few of his essays, listen to some of his debates with an open mind – how does this jive with YOUR view of the issues. You may find that your opinion changes when you establish it for yourself.

    This goes for the other confirmation bias – not all players on the hockey team are worthy of instant dismissal either…

  53. Well said Martin Brumby!
    Owen, Pepper et al should realise that anyone is entitled to an opinion, just as they are on this site. The point that I wish to make is that Spencer and Monckton are far better qualified so to do, with the former having the academic credentials and the latter a comprehensive approach to explanation, both qualities that are required by simple folk, like me.

  54. @ Martin Brumby

    “There is a number of things that Monckton says that I don’t agree with (and in particular his continued support for Maggie Thatcher – one of those guilty of setting up the whole cAGW scam in the first place).”

    I’m not one of Margaret Thatcher’s greatest fans but I do think you are being unfair to her. She has a science degree and worked briefly as a research scientist. It was perfectly sensible for her to be interested in what scientists had to say about global warming and it still is perfectly sensible to investigate the possible problems that may result from climate change (whatever its causes).

    It is now 20 years since Margaret Thatcher lost power and a lot has happened in that time. If she were 20 years younger I imagine that she would ask more searching questions of scientists who champion the idea that mankind is the main cause of climate change. Obviously I cannot tell what her views would be, but she was never a person who suffered fools gladly and would not be satisfied with evasive answers. She certainly would have wanted some good answers before committing the country to spend countless billions on combating climate change.

  55. Lord Christopher Monckton will be in Cancun December 1 – 10.

    Dr. Roy Spencer will be in Cancun December 6 – 10.

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    I hope there’ll be plenty of video.

  56. Hugh Pepper says:
    November 27, 2010 at 8:44 pm

    The Lord Monckton is a fraud.! There is an accepted process by which the “facts”of science are presented. The process requires research and a presentation based on rigorous study. The Lord does not do research. He writes volumes of largely nonsensical prose and then pretends that this diatribe refutes the mountains of research performed by scientists from all over the world. Most informed persons are not fooled by this craziness, but there are many who are unaware of scientific protocols who are part of his fan club. This is sad.

    REPLY: You mean he’s like Al Gore? -A

    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Hugh,

    you’ll need to supply evidence that Lord Monckton doesn’t do research.

  57. David A. Evans says:
    November 27, 2010 at 7:35 pm
    R. de Haan says:
    November 27, 2010 at 10:56 am

    Sorry but the old joke “Can we rise up and slaughter them yet?” starts to take on new meaning.

    DaveE.

    While I’m absolutely NOT anticipating matters here, you understand, but as Claire Wolf once said: “It’s too late to work within the the system, and too early to shoot the bastards!”

    I’ve a feeling that more people than ever before have now become aware of the grand shafting scheme being played out before them. They are in realization of the scam being shoved their way —with a vengeance— by the cadre of insiders who wish to enslave all of humanity in the pretentious name of saving us, when no such ‘saving’ is true. More it is decimation of the masses.

    Cancun is just another stage play where everyone will be TOLD in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS that if we don’t play along, bad things will happen to the non-participants, and those who refuse to go along.

    I think I don’t need to say what the ‘bad things’ will be: False flag ops to scare the commoners into submission, mandatory energy reductions in order to ‘save us from ourselves,’ along with sequential electrical blackouts and fuel shortages that will make 1973 look like child’s play.

    Consider THAT happening in the dead of a cold freezing winter, when no food shipments will be made in order to FORCE you to surrender.

    The unprepared starving, freezing people, are easily won over.

    Our way out of this nightmare is to laugh AT the idiots every chance we get, and put them on the spot: CALL THEM OUT. And then? VOTE THEM OUT!

    Demand that EVERY governmental agency which has pushed the lie, to be DEFUNDED and disestablished, i.e., OUTLAWED.

    When they can’t show/produce/reveal the ACTUAL science they profess to possess, then =EVERYONE= will see just how flaccid their ‘no longer open to question’ science really is: LIMP beyond hilarity!

    The Emperor not only has no clothes, but his ‘science’ is beyond the pale impotent.

    The very best way to ‘slaughter’ them is to laugh them into shame, and into hiding. Let their names be forever remembered as traitors to the very science of which they professed to be knowledgeable, but instead perverted, in the name of personal gain and fame.

  58. ************** http://www.carbon-sense.com/ ***************
    NOT this site, lurking and using a similar logic:- http://www.carbonsense.com/

    Posted from Australia today …………………………………………………… carbon-sense site posts are informative.
    ____________________________________________
    ‘Please Spread Around
    For Immediate Release
    30th November 2010Boycott the Cancun Climate Circus

    Statement by Viv Forbes, Chairman, the Carbon Sense Coalition

    The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on all Australian governments to boycott the Cancun Climate Change Circus.

    The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said “we do not want a repeat of the Copenhagen obscenity when 45,000 people gathered to discuss how to reduce things like air travel and conspicuous consumption”.

    Forbes said there is no reason for Australia to attend.

    “This conference is no longer about climate – it is about international redistribution of wealth and industry from the west to the rest of the world. Australia is part of the spoils they hope to redistribute.

    “There is zero chance of global agreement on emissions trading schemes or more carbon taxes. The political landscape and public opinion in the USA has turned dramatically sceptical of the increasingly shrill predictions from the desperate alarmists. Moreover, trading in carbon credits in Chicago has collapsed and even Al Gore is recanting on ethanol. Without US participation, nothing will be agreed globally.

    “In addition, for over a decade, the whimsical world climate has mocked the feverish forecasts of the IPCC. Global Warming looks like becoming Global Cooling (still caused by burning coal of course). Prudently they chose tropical Mexico for this conference or the world media would be treated again to the amusing spectacle of warmists shivering in another bitter northern winter of “unseasonal” snow and blizzards.

    “So they are plotting a new scheme – enforced global rationing of carbon emissions on a per capita basis. This means transfer of Australian wealth, industry and jobs to India, China and Africa for decades to come. And to bypass parliaments and the suspicious electorate, this will be attempted via “International Agreements”.

    “Australia should send no more than one observer to Cancun, and that person should have no power to agree to anything. In particular there should be no promises to extend the failed but costly Kyoto Accord, and no transfer of authority to any new international body.

    “A boycott makes more sense than sending jumbo jets of people to beach resorts in Mexico to talk about reducing that sort of activity.”

    Authorised by:
    Viv Forbes
    Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition
    Rosevale, Qld, Australia
    http://www.carbon-sense.com
    Phone 07 5464 0533
    Email: Info@carbon-sense.com

    For those interested in more info see:
    IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer clarifies matters:
    “The climate summit in Cancun at the end of the month is not a climate conference, but one of the largest economic conferences since the Second World War … one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.”

    http://thegwpf.org/ipcc-news/1877-ipcc-official-climate-policy-is-redistributing-the-worlds-wealth.html

    http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/its_all_about_money/

  59. Cancun will fail miserably and sadly, science will have little to do with it.

    Democracies are still reeling from the near collapse of banking systems world wide and the recovery is fragile as can be. Politicians from these countries think based on the only time horizon that is meaningful for them, the next election. They know that the number one reason for getting thrown out of office is a weak economy. They don’t give sh*t about the grandchildren, or the children, they just want votes in 4 years or less. If the economy was roaring along like a runaway freight train, maybe some token or even real gestures.

    As for totalitarian states, they are only there with their hands out. The only reason the believe in global warming is because they think they get money for it. If the solution had nothing in it for Mugabe, he wouldn’t even show up. As long as his personal life style doesn’t change, he really doesn’t give a cr*p what happens to everyone else.

    Russia, China, India are going to do what they are already doing, industrialize. OPEC will keep selling just as much oil as anyone wants to buy. And if the UN cannot stop rinky dink nations like North Korea and Iran from building nuclear bombs, exactly how are they going to stop Canadians from buying SUV’s?

    Varying governments will pay lip service and sign something meaningless. The exception perhaps might be ideologues like Obama who, frankly believe in some pretty strange things despite the real world saying NOT! Obama was very certain that if he could only be nice enough to Iran, they would stop spitting in his face, that a single speech to the Arab world would spark a new era of trust and reconciliation, that he could hit the “reset” button with Russia, and that if he just apologized enought to Europe he’s get at least one extra soldier out of them to help out in Afghanistan and that he is black.

    On this last matter I allow that he may be half right. But no one is throwing away their seat in office or doing squat for their peasants grandchildren with the world economy still teatering. Cancun will fail, and science fact will have little to do with it.

  60. Anthony – how come you don’t step in when ad hom attacks like this are made (as you do when somebopdy called Monckton a circus act)?

    “Sir John Houghton, Michael Mann, Keith Briffa, Gavin Schmidt, Jim Hansen, Phil Jones, Kevin Trenberth and all that dismal cabal of the third rate, the barmy and the dishonest, ”

    Yes Al Gore and Monckton are very similar – both mouthpieces who distort if not actually misrepresent the science. Gore is bad and so is Monckton. Having a nutter on ones ‘side’ does nobody any credit.

  61. David Ball – this site is not quite as open as you seem to believe. I have had a number of postings never appear. These are never ad homs or abusive but do question some of the skeptic beliefs frequently posted here

    I would hope that this post is allowed forward to prove me wrong (but I won’t be suprised if it doesn’t appear).

    [Reply: WUWT moderators approve all posts that do not violate site Policy. ~dbs, mod.]

  62. Well I just had a ‘no show’ on the hypocrisy thread. Possibly because it pointed out that this blog is not immune from charges of hypocrisy.

    [NOTE: Or possibly because it had some trigger words and fell into the SPAM filter. Now recovered. Unfortunately, all your diversions don't address the real issue of publishing things selectively at NYT, they are simply things you don't like. ~mod]

  63. “”””” Huth says:
    November 27, 2010 at 12:39 pm
    You don’t have to agree with Monckton about everything but he does talk sense on climate issues. He talks rubbish on some other things. Being right about one thing doesn’t make you right about everything so I find all that blurb about him annoying. Also, why do people keep mentioining his viscountness? That is relevant to what exactly? “””””

    Well it has a similar degree of relevence to that of all the folks here who call themselves Dr. or PhD, or ordinary public servants who want people to call them Senator. It helps sort out who is whom. Dr Laura has a PhD; so are you going to take her as an authority on climate. My name is George E. Smith; but I am forced to add to that, that I AM NOT the 2009 Nobel Physics Prize winner; he is somebody else. I don’t know much about climate; and it’s an even bet that my Nobellist namesake doesn’t either. It’s for sure that Dr Steven Chu; who is both a PhD, and a Nobel Physics Prize winner, also doesn’t know much about climate; but he is the current Energy Secretary of the USA; so people take notice of what he says.

    If it is your habit to simply address others as “hey you”, then I can see why it irks you if people mention Lord Monckton’s formal title; but there’s no need to choke on it.

  64. {emmaliza says: November 28, 2010 at 7:17 am
    We should all be thankful for brave souls like Spencer and Monckton.]

    I whole heartedly agree, when many have fallen (David Kelly among many others) due to their divulging of information, these and Alex Jones (with his flamboyant nature!) David Icke etc. too are a testament to convictions which are not based on hearsay.

    This Cancun meeting is as big as the Copenhagen one in which many bad decisions were made. Yet it will possibly be overshadowed in the media by the growing tensions in the Korea region.

    Go Lord Monckton and give them a hiding! And a big (very big) thankyou, for your contribution to our freedom.

  65. I am waiting for the Dynamic Duo to be dis-invited, bumped, detained, or suddenly subject to scheduling conflicts. Didn’t they play that with CM last time, dis-inviting him when he was already on the plane on the way there?

    It is funny that they picked Cancun. I can hear the siting committee meeting now.. ” And no sites north of 30ºN! NO SNOW this time!”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/02/shiver-global-warming-protest-frozen-massive-snowfall/

Comments are closed.