Highlights of Lord Christopher Monckton’s Melbourne Presentation at the Sofitel Melbourne. Recorded 1st February 2010. There are two parts below.
Part 1
Part2
Slides used in his presentation:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8057274@N05/sets/72157623339675684/
Photos for use in blogs and articles:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8057274@N05/sets/72157623340036206/
To put Monckton’s Australian success in perspective, while it did get some MSM coveraged, not all was favourable and there was lots of ad hominem (about his eyes, his cloths, his scientific credentials, his peerage etc) . Here is a sample:
The ABC 7.30 report story (check out images and music!)
Climate wars- Lord Monckton visits Australia
The next night the ABC give a ‘reply’ from Openheimer (at least some of the questions are less then soft):
IPCC scientists on the defensive as sceptics step up assault
The opposition leader Tony Abbott, who came to leadership as a climate sceptic, has recently been vilified by the press as the ‘Mad Monk’ based on the fact that he is an ex-seminarian Catholic, and so recently his suggestion of the advice he might give his daughters on sex was distorted by Labor and the press and mock as though it were a policy statement. And so when he decided to meet Monckton, the headline was too tempting:
‘Mad Monk’ meets Monckton
Sydney Morning Herald:
Climate sceptic clouds the weather issue
But SMH did also give some discussion of the issues:
Ten debates the greens didn’t want to have
Others:
Climate Change skeptic Lord Monckton debates Rupert Posner from the Climate Group
Monckton’s Melbourne meeting: a gathering of men in Richie Benaud blazers
Climate options get airtime as Lord Monckton strides the stage
Disbelieving fans put faith in the lord
Lord of sceptics in call for inaction
Climate change? Not for Monckton
MJK (12:22:19)
So what exactly was the soviet icebreaker doing, “drifting in open water” within 300Nmls of the North Pole in DECEMBER?
Syedoff was not frozen in until the 18th December & was free again in February 1939.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/12/12/today-in-climate-history-dec-12th-1938-getting-warmer/
It’s all in the NYT, go check!
DaveE.
Vincent (13:52:30) :
MJK,
“If anything, the fact Lord Moncton is viewed as the leader of the sceptic movement only discredits the movement.”
“Viewed as leader of the sceptic movement? Really, by whom? Yourself?
I don’t even know where you get the idea that there is a sceptic movement…
Science is itself the manifestation of scepticism which seeks to challenge and falsify any new hypothesis. Without such challenges it would be no more than a faith based system that is built upon the simplist and most uncomplicated of observations….”
Very well said. I do not think the AGW crowd has ever understood that skeptics are just individuals with a great deal of respect for the scientific method. They do not understand we are not some NGO like Greenpeace or WWF and that is why the acquisition we are “paid by the Oil Companies” is so laughable.
From what I can gather from letters and comments, the Australian public is way ahead of MSM journalists and welcomes Lord Monckton’s ideas and his style of presentation and resents references to his appearance.
MSM is rudderless at the moment, I am sure they scan the comments coming in and do not want to offend their readership but find it difficult to change their CC position. The most important thing at the moment is that the debate is happening at all and that Monckton’s message is slowly etching in peoples consciousness. He is leaving at the end of the week but the debate has been raised to MSM level and the topic is now fashionable to be discussed in public.
A couple of dates:
.Tuesday 9th February at 11am (AEDST) on Big Ideas on ABC 1 is an hour long repeat of Lord Monckton’s Brisbane speech.
.The National Press Club will have “The great Climate Change Debate” on Wednesday 10th February, I imagine this will be broadcast on ABC 1 from 12:30 to 1:30pm (AEDST)
So we go from ‘the science is settled’ to discussion and debate, a healthy sign, and I trust the general public to make up their own mind seeing that the topic has stopped being ‘underground’.
” carrot eater (10:16:25) :
My claim is false? Perhaps I worded it poorly.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-sceptic-clouds-the-weather-issue-20100201-n8y3.html
Whatever sort of medicine he is developing then, and whatever all it might treat, I look forward to seeing it.”
This article is written by the opposition.
If they can’t win the argument they play on the man.
I suppose I have too much time on my hands, but I watched both the clips displayed by Anthony and the 1hr 35 min film of Lord Monkton’s address in St Paul, October 2009 pointed to by ” Anon (11:50:17)”. There are no graphics in the latter other than Monkton on stage, but early in the film a link appears to a pdf of the slides (86 of them!!). The two talks are very similar, even with the same initial jokes, although they are, as expected, slanted to the audience, first an American one, then to the Australian one. He uses similar dramatic tricks for effect, lowering his voice towards the end, for example, to draw the audiences’s attention to his message.
In front of the St Paul audience Monkton took about 20 minutes to get to the point, passing via the DDT and HIV examples and a further 10 minutes lampooning “An Inconvenient Truth”. Remember this talk was pre-Copenahgen, when he was spreading alarm about the nature of the draft Treaty. The Oz version is clearly aimed at warning the natives about the dangers of the ETS.
One might well poo-pooh Monkton’s style of rhetoric, but for the 1 hr between his introduction and the end of his St Paul lecture, he systematically dealt with matters scientific. It is a pity that the full Australian presentation is not yet available, which might exhibit different emphasis. We should debate the substance of Monkton’s lecture here, rather than be sidetracked as to whether he was “too arrogant for most Australians”. Keep the focus guys.
Whether a believer or sceptic, be thankful there is an eloquent speaker such as Monkton who is able to draw attention to the Climate Change question before reasonably large audiences and gain necessary publicity in the face of general MSM bias and ennui.
Keith Minto (18:39:08) :
‘MSM is rudderless at the moment, I am sure they scan the comments coming in and do not want to offend their readership but find it difficult to change their CC position. The most important thing at the moment is that the debate is happening at all and that Monckton’s message is slowly etching in people’s consciousness. He is leaving at the end of the week but the debate has been raised to MSM level and the topic is now fashionable to be discussed in public’
Hear! Hear!
The demise of the ‘fourth estate’ (the MSM) as a credible check on the politics and the affairs of the world is a result of business interests being more important than journalism. Journalism is mortally wounded in my view. Journalists are being replaced by ‘mama dolls’. The ‘Fourth Estate’ is now a looking more and more like a deceased estate.
It is a similar ‘disease’ to that which afflicts universities in their dependence upon funding for research. Who pays the piper calls the tune’. Scientists will ‘follow the money’ and maybe not the science honestly.
Fortunately the ‘blogosphere’ is replacing the so called news media for immediate analysis of affairs affecting the people. Thank god for sites such as WUWT that has provided effective discussion and analysis of the issues surrounding the so called climate science.
‘Joe public’ is not stupid. The public instinctively senses corruption – might take a bit of time to ‘sus it out ‘but inevitably it happens. And that is what is going on around the world now. I have noticed in all the MSM whenever members of the public are given the opportunity to comment, the overwhelming thrust of that comment is one of scepticm of these issues. They ask ‘How can this be?” Then they dig. That is why they are responding to Lord Monckton. He is articulating their own innate scepticism and they resonate with this. MSM people take notice or die.
Keith and Bryn,
Both of your comments are really excellent. Lord Monckton drives the opposition crazy because he cites facts, while(st) they are used to emotional arguments [“Save the Planet,” etc.].
The message is getting out. For example, here is a fascinating interview with RJ Pachuri: click
Pachauri is put on the “hot seat” by the interviewer, who admits that Pachauri is his friend. And Pachauri fails.
MJK (12:22:19) :
While he is entertaining, LORD Moncton comes across as far too arrogant for most Australians. He will never be taken seriously while he insists on emphasising his title of “Lord.” Most of the Australian media treat him as a joke. If anything, the fact Lord Moncton is viewed as the leader of the sceptic movement only discredits the movement.
Anthony, how can you honestly support this guy when he runs rough shot over the facts? For example, his discussion surrounding the so called Arctic ice recovery since 2007 in his presentation is a joke and very misleading. Ice never fully recovered following the 2007 record low — it is still way below the long term average and you know it. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
Get your info from another data provider.
NSIDC is a nest of warmists hyping a scare that isn’t.
Lord Monckton in superb form in Adelaide, South Australia, last night (4 February). Courteous as always, witty, factual, dismissive of his own (manifold) abilities, except perhaps his powers of observation, using, as he put it, the Mk. I eyeball.
Two standing ovations in the main auditorium holding several hundred. Overflow crowd accommodated in an annex to which Monckton went to answer further questions after the main meeting closed. Unremarked this morning on website of the local daily. No surprise.
Monckton met with Leader of the Opposition Abbott earlier this week. PM Rudd failed to take up the invitation to meet.
This is where I came across the story, a little while ago: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/climategate-gives-lord-of-the-sceptics-plenty-of-ammunition-20100127-mywc.html That article says:
“As an adviser to Margaret Thatcher, he learnt that when you make policy about an issue that is outside your expertise, you must distill it down to one proposition. In this case, how much will a given increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere cause warming? The answer determines whether or not you spend trillions of taxpayer dollars ‘and wreck the economies of the West’.
Monckton pored over scientific papers on climate sensitivity and concluded the IPCC exaggerated climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide at least sixfold.”
Ah, I see. He admits to commenting on areas beyond his expertise, reads some stuff (he’s a hereditary peer who worked as a journalist then a political advisor) and decides that the mainstream is wrong, and in fact, out by a factor of SIX? Come on, I don’t want this guy to speak for me on anything.
Later on he says: “The last refuge of alarmists is the precautionary principle, in which we “give the planet the benefit of the doubt”. But Monckton says bad policy guided by the precautionary principle has already led to the death of millions of people as the transfer of farmland to grow biofuels meant less food, higher prices, food riots and starvation.”
Death of millions of people? Who? Where? What on Earth is he talking about? How can he call the other side “alarmists”?
And here’s a bit more on this guy: He admitted to lying to the public (http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Aristocrat-admits-tale-of-lost.3340554.jp) and he’s argued for mandatory blood testing for the HIV virus and isolation of all testing positive for life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Viscount_Monckton_of_Brenchley#Views_on_AIDS). [snip]
Climategate: That’s when AGW hell froze over
Nicely done. A good mix of understatement and infectious insinuation. His venture into a Dr. Strangelove accent was very winning.
The man is an endangered species, alas.
I saw a video clip where that topic was brought up and he responded that he no longer advocates that policy, as it’s too late to contain the virus. He suggested quarantine when the infection was in its early stages and might have been nipped in the bud. He defended his suggestion by saying that if it had been adopted then, the result would have been much less net suffering and death now.
Cuba has a quarantine policy that it adopted early, and apparently it’s managed to keep the infection rate down.
He’s got statistics and supporting quotes from UN experts in the field of hunger and/or agriculture on the deleterious effect of biofuel production on world food prices, and the resulting effect on social disorder (many food riots last year) and deaths. He’s got a website where his articles are stored, with supporting links. (I hope a WUWTer who keeps ammo like this at the ready will supply a few of these quotes and links.)
I read and was very impressed by his paper where he makes his case (once again I don’t have the link handy — I hope someone else will provide it), but it’s not necessary to be a boffin to sniff out BS. The bloggers who’ve been poking holes in AR4 in recent months haven’t been initiated into the Piled Higher and Deeper guild that universally missed, or was too chicken to mention publicly, all those glaring absurdities. Credentials can be a negative factor, inhibiting outspoken criticism.
Monckton’s criticism can stand or fall on its merits, regardless of his CV. There are certainly credentialed skeptics (e.g., Lindzen and Cristy) who have also claimed that the climate’s sensitivity to CO2 has been vastly overstated by the IPCC. The idea is not some brainwave of of a “potty peer.” The guy has obviously got a sky-high IQ, one evidence of which (besides his immense vocabulary, which is a good clue) is his fluency in understanding and handling of advanced statistics.
Saw Lord Monckton in Adelaide Last night… Very though provoking.
he had a number of great interviews on Adelaide Radio too
http://www.fiveaa.com.au/Audio_Lord-Christopher-Monckton-discussing-the-environment-with-Amanda-Blair-Pt-1_95963
http://www.fiveaa.com.au/Audio_Lord-Christopher-Monckton-discussing-the-environment-with-Amanda-Blair-Pt-2_95964
http://www.fiveaa.com.au/Audio_Lord-Christopher-Monckton-Climate-Change-Skeptic_95931?s=29
>>The Norwegian BBC, called NRK would’nt mention it
>>with a single word, of course.
It still beggers belief that EVERYONE is on the same scam. I mean why is there not one regime, company or nation that is virulently anti AGW? Why are they all like sheep?
The power of group-think, eh?
.
>>t would appear that, as his tour is a sell-out, that he
>>has hit upon a winning formula. Humour, fact and
>>comment are presented in an easily digested mix.
Indeed. But who would have predicted, ten years ago, that middle-class hoards would be turning up for a weather/climate conference as though it were a sell-out rock-gig??
It demonstrates how out of touch ALL governments are with their people, and so the people have to get their fix of truth and rationality from elsewhere. Again, it beggers belief that this should simultaneously happen all over the world — but it has.
.
>>The Iceman (16:39:42) :
>> you will see that the 2010 sea ice seems to be much
>>thicker than it was in 1979,
>> http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=02&fd=03&fy=1979&sm=02&sd=03&sy=2010
Nice comparator.
And look at the difference in N.H. snow cover. All that extra albedo, forsix weeks, must have an affect on temperature. (Not all those latitudes are in perma-darkness).
An animation of this would be nice.
2008/2009 vs 2009/2010
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=12&fd=26&fy=2008&sm=12&sd=26&sy=2009
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=01&fd=02&fy=2009&sm=01&sd=02&sy=2010
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=01&fd=15&fy=2009&sm=01&sd=15&sy=2010
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=01&fd=24&fy=2009&sm=01&sd=24&sy=2010
The people should get out and vote! Pointless.
Who the hell can you vote for when all the politicos, thinking this is what the people want, side with the AGW argument.
I keep being told that I should have done something to stop the US/UK invasion of Iraq. But millions marched in protest, paying for the privilege out of their own pockets and it still happened.
It seems only the very right wing opposes this and their cost may ultimately be worse than an AGW supporting party.
Somehow and frankly I don’t know how, the politicos have got to get off the AGW bandwagon.
Stephen Brown (15:11:31) :
What appears to be forgotten by some writing here is that Lord Monckton is not on a speaking tour to affirm to the ‘converted’ what AGW is all about; he is speaking to audiences who have doubts about the route that their Government is taking them.
He HAS to appeal to a much wider audience and, quite rightly, he adopts a much more popularist manner. He has tailored his presentation to his audience without diluting the basic facts which give the lie to AGW. It would appear that, as his tour is a sell-out, that he has hit upon a winning formula. Humour, fact and comment are presented in an easily digested mix.
He is much more easily accepted than the ManBearPig
I would say, nail on head! Well put.
Lord Monkton writes some very good stuff. What I think irks many scientists, paricularly those of a viewpoint on AGW, is that of Professional Pride (PP). Monkton, not being a scientist, but someone who possess great clarity of thought, has the ablility to grasp the principle points of a subject. We all suffer from it at times I would suggest, even me! It would be embarrassing & feelings of resentment are inevitable when PP rears its ugly head as we are all human (well, most of us)!
@dean Boulding:
Lord Monckton is a mathematician. He is perfectly capably of assessing the stat-based claims of the various hockey-stick papers and seeing them for the BS that they are.
I dunno, mebee I need some enlightenment from our Loyalist cousins. To my Missouri mind, this fellow Monckton can be pretty subtle. He gives us a hilarious extended definition of a “spade.” He closes by saying “And that, by the way, is what they were talking about.” And he shows us a picture of–a _scoop shovel_! (Not a spade.) Could that be his point? That even after giving the most ridiculously explicit definition possible, we discover that we’re still not talking about the same thing?
Too bad he’s not the king. Heads would roll!