UPDATE: Monckton is being deported from Qatar. Such a show of tolerance from the “tolerant left” who do these sorts of stunts all the time (sometimes illegally). Monckton has been ‘de-badged’, meaning he no longer has a visa to stay in Qatar and had 24 hours to leave the country.
UPDATE2: Monckton says “I was very bad” see below. We now have video. There doesn’t seem to be any “booing” after his statement as asserted by the press reports, and his statement was more than a sentence as reported.
UPDATE3: Monckton gives his account here
An excerpt from an E &E Newswire story
…
After the news conference, and as diplomats gathered for the climate conference president’s assessment of how close countries are to agreement, Monckton quietly slipped into the seat reserved for the delegation of Myanmar and clicked the button to speak.
“In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming,” Monckton said as confused murmurs filled the hall and then turned into a chorus of boos.
The stunt infuriated negotiators and activists here who gather every year to address what they believe is one of the world’s top threats, the steady rise of man-made global warming.
As Monckton was escorted from the hall and security officers stripped him of his U.N. credentials, several people noted that just a few hours earlier a group of young activists had been thrown out of the convention center and deported. Their crime: unfurling an unauthorized banner calling for the Qatari hosts to lead the negotiations to a strong conclusion.
By late today, several activists attending the conference had posted calls to “deport Monckton” on their Twitter feeds
…
Full story:
Inhofe, Monckton crash U.N. talks with gusto
Jean Chemnick, E&E reporter
Published: Thursday, December 6, 2012
http://www.eenews.net/Greenwire/print/2012/12/06/2
h/t Marc Morano
=========================================================
Lord Monckton claims victory over climate change scare stories – Telegraph http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthvideo/9728622/Lord-Monckton-claims-victory-over-climate-change-scare-stories.html
Excerpt:
Earlier in the week he appeared in a video promoted by US lobby group the Committee on a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) riding a camel to promote a “different perspective” of the talks.
The two-week meeting, due to end on Friday is deadlocked on modest goals such as aid and an extension of an existing UN-led plan to combat climate change into 2013.
The European Union, Australia, Ukraine, Norway, Switzerland are the main backers of Kyoto who are willing to extend legally binding cuts in emissions beyond 2012 until 2020.
But they account for less than 15 per cent of world emissions.
Russia, Japan and Canada have pulled out, saying it makes no sense to continue when big emerging nations led by China and India have no binding goals.
=======================================================
[Monckton] has been banned for life from UN climate talks.
Speaking afterwards, he said he was acting on the “spur of the moment”.
“I don’t think it was my turn to talk, but the opportunity presented itself and I took it,” he said.
“I was very bad – I pressed the button and made a short statement.”
“I know it was bad of me, but I got some brief points across which the delegates probably didn’t expect.
“They have now taken my badge, but it’s not the end of the world.”
VIDEO:
@Gail Combs:
Indeed carbon taxes are what powerful invested lobbies who do not have their politician in power are pushing while in opposition. Canada is an example with the Thomson Reuters controlled media Liberal bias and CBC, Canadian Press leftists promoting NDP and Liberal platforms of various carbon tax or carbon markets. Watch out indeed as tere are no example in the world of Carbon Taxes voted by the majority of voters: it is always imposed and like in Australia through lying politicians.
markx says:
December 6, 2012 at 5:03 pm
IMHO too much is being made of this 16 year period.
This approach relies heavily on the assumption there is not another spate of warming in the near future.
The real issue is how much mankind might be contributing to recent warming, and what may be the ongoing and future effects of mankind’s future contributions. (IMHO again, respectively, I think very minor, and the system seems to be remarkably self regulating….)
================================================================
After 16 years of no warming, it’s still too early to mention it ?!?!
“The system seems to be remarkably self regulating.” This dirt ball had 4.5 billion years to evolve it. It would be remarkable if it were not self regulating.
Evicted and now deported for uttering the truth. Simply amazing. Can’t make this stuff up.
markx says:
December 6, 2012 at 5:03 pm
“IMHO too much is being made of this 16 year period.”
Flat temperatures for 16 years are quite relevant as data falsifying the skills of computer models in their predictions / projections.
In its “State of the Climate in 2008” report, the NOAA said about climate computer models “The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more.Since then, the goal posts have been moved back to 17 years by Ben Santer but 17 years is now rapidly running out without the warming eagerly anticipated by the warmist crowd.
At one time the “consensus” view was that CO2 would dominate natural climate change cycles but with flat temperatures the “consensus” fall back position is that natural climate cycles are hiding the inexorable warming from anthropogenic greenhouse gases. Well, anticipate that the models will be tuned or parametrized to add what modellers think are the natural processes in order to “predict” the flat lining recent temperatures. In their hubris, they will maintain once again their creations have predictive ability.
You have to admire the warmists… sticking to their cause in spite of 16 years of hard observational data blowing their theory out of the water.
But, really, I think these poor souls just need a new cause to grasp hold of.
Perhaps the WUWT readers have some suggestions?
Checking out some AGWarmist sites. Monkton has made some of them very angry. I think not because he said an inconvenient truth. Rather, because he injected an element of farce into the COP proceedings, farce that will make the news, and these people are desperate to be taken seriously.
All those reported murmurs at the conference, and heard from the likes of phil M and the other “flat earther” trolls posting here, that deny their own eyes (for the sake of their own vested ideological beliefs) — sound exactly the same, and these same murmurs were heard hundreds of years ago:
“Burn the witch, burn the witch!”
Somebody should make sure to take away the dogmatic, close minded lunatics matches. (Yes, that mean you too, Phil, you dogmatic, closed minded witch burning lunatic).
James Abbott asks:
“Why does the climate skeptic community hold up Monckton as a hero ?”
What do you call someone who stands up for truth against a tide of lies likely to result in an awful lot of suffering when he could at much less personal risk just went along and made Gore $ to boot?
I call that sort of person a hero.
markx says:
December 6, 2012 at 5:03 pm
IMHO too much is being made of this 16 year period.
I realize NOAA talks about 15 years and not 16, but they seem to attribute much relevance to 15 years without warming.
Here is what was said:
PDF document @NOAA.gov. For anyone else who wants it, the exact quote from pg 23 is:
”The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate.”
http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/cmb/bams-sotc/climate-assessment-2008-lo-rez.pdf
Also, Santer said that if the slope is flat for 17 years, that is very significant, whatever that means. We are rapidly closing in on that.
So by combining NOAA’s statement with Santer’s statement, and the fact that we had no warming for 16 years (at least on RSS), I conclude that we can be 97.5% certain that CAGW is false.
James,
Like I said, I read that 2 years ago when it was posted, and only a few minutes later I found the report that listed Monckton as a lord on the same site, written by the same guy. Repeating the original text here doesn’t change that but thanks for the refresher.
And I’m not old enough to say that I have been researching the subject for 30 years, but I found the contradictory statements quicker than you did, bud.
When did Monckton become British? He has a Hawaiian birth certificate!
James Abbott says:
December 6, 2012 at 5:36 pm
I have been researching the subject for over 30 years.
###
And you still spout idiocy? Must be your Marxist world-view that is interfering with your thinking. If I spend 30 years studying something, I would be an authority on that subject.
Being deported from Qatar is not a great loss. It is in fact a shame a UN conference is held in such an ugly dictatorship at all. Kinda unbelievable.
Just imagine the US constitution were bent the same way, to have a single unelected ruler and a legislative body, whose members are appointed by said ruler, but in spite of that no matter what this advisory council says, the ruler is free to do whatever he wants. Checks & balances, anyone?
Why, Mohammed al-Ajami, a Qatari poet was sentenced to life imprisonment just a week ago for insulting the emir and his son in a poem. That much about unalienable rights like freedom of speech.
A follow up on my previous post. Here is the reference in case there are disbelievers.
Cardinal George Pell on indulgences:
“The rewards for proper environmental behaviour are uncertain, unlike the grim scenarios for the future as a result of human irresponsibility which have a dash of the apocalyptic about them, even of the horsemen of the Apocalypse. The immense financial costs true-believers would impose on economies can be compared with the sacrifices offered traditionally in religion, and the sale of carbon credits with the pre-Reformation practice of selling indulgences. Some of those campaigning to save the planet are not merely zealous but zealots. To the religionless and spiritually rootless, mythology – whether comforting or discomforting – can be magnetically, even pathologically, attractive.”
http://www.sydneycatholic.org/people/archbishop/addresses/2011/20111026_1463.shtml
Brilliant! Perfect timing! Perfect thing to say. This stunt of Monckton just might work.
Just look what rushing at Ann Coulter and throwing shoes at George W Bush did.
Subsequently, in Nov. 2011, this happened:
tolo4zero says:
December 6, 2012 at 1:17 pm
“In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming,”
No warming in 16 years, of course that is good news, the catatstrophists of course treat it as bad news, what an odd bunch.
===================
confused murmurs filled the hall and then turned into a chorus of boos.
Of course there were boo’s. No warming in 16 years is not good news if you are livelihood is tied to global warming.
James Abbott says:
December 6, 2012 at 5:36 pm
“I have been researching the subject for over 30 years.”
Translation; “I am not a good researcher”
Monckton’s comment is what will get press. Brilliant!
Wonderful!
It’s always those spur of the moment opportunities, when captured at exactly the right moment, that allow the truth to ring those clarion bells of knowledge so loud. Well snagged Lord Monckton!
Now, how will the BBC manage to infer Lord Monckton suffered Doha eviction for sitting down and speaking without quoting him?
I do wonder if Lord Monckton was glad that his moment of truth at Doha got him out of that place early. That event must be a seriously depressing place for mature adults or honest scientists. Phil M must just be depressed that he couldn’t go and be there with the other silly eco-absurd money wasting fops.
Brilliant Monckton!
Those UN fascists really showed their colours, yet again.
““IMHO too much is being made of this 16 year period.””
And way, way too much is made of the coincidence of rising CO2 with mannipulated urban land temperatures over the period from 1980-1998. Many, many $billions too much.
So your point is ???
Berényi Péter says:
December 6, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Being deported from Qatar is not a great loss. It is in fact a shame a UN conference is held in such an ugly dictatorship at all. Kinda unbelievable.
——————
Ah, but it in fact its a very fitting location for a UN event and very believable. If Hitler or Stalin were alive today, the UN would elect one of them the head of their human rights committee and the other the head of the UN.
Christopher Monckton,
Please forgive me if I do not refer to your rightful title of “Lord”; however, I am but a Yank, and us Yanks are a bit peevish on such titles.
Please accept my congratulations on your communication of a message many in Daha needed to hear. Your ability to drive a point home, succinctly, and without any threat to health, welfare or human life, is to be admired.
While many stunt protests are elaborate, and can jeopardize the possessions people have worked hard for, or can endanger lives of both strangers and the protester alike, you devised an ingenious way to use but a few seconds of time, without jeopardy to life or limb, to drive home a point. We Yanks refer to that as First Amendment Rights. However, your hosts at Doha apparently take a different view – as do the delegates at the conference.
I don’t always agree with your methods, but here I would like to say that I hold your current actions in the highest regards. You, sir (a title I am willing to give), have my respect.
Email (required) (Address never made public)
Gamecock says: December 6, 2012 at 5:50 pm
“…..After 16 years of no warming, it’s still too early to mention it ?!?!…..”
Nope. It is simply far from the main point of the argument.
The earth has always warmed and cooled over various time spans and has been fairly steadily warming since the end of the LIA.
It would be nice and convenient if that warming had reached its peak, but it may not have, and another couple of years of a fraction of a degree of warming will leave you fairly speechless if this is the main thrust of your argument.