Lord Monckton invites ‘Chazza’ to spar over ‘unroyal’ global-warming remark
His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales,
Clarence House, London.
Candlemas, 2014
Your Royal Highness’ recent remarks describing those who have scientific and economic reason to question the Establishment opinion on climatic apocalypse in uncomplimentary and unroyal terms as “headless chickens” mark the end of our constitutional monarchy and a return to the direct involvement of the Royal Family, in the Person of our future king, no less, in the cut and thrust of partisan politics.
Now that Your Royal Highness has offered Your Person as fair game in the shootout of politics, I am at last free to offer two options. I need no longer hold back, as so many have held back, as Your Royal Highness’ interventions in politics have become more frequent and less acceptable in their manner as well as in their matter.
Option 1. Your Royal Highness will renounce the Throne forthwith and for aye. Those remarks were rankly party-political and were calculated to offend those who still believe, as Your Royal Highness plainly does not, that the United Kingdom should be and remain a free country, where any subject of Her Majesty may study science and economics, may draw his conclusions from his research and may publish the results, however uncongenial the results may be.
The line has been crossed. No one who has intervened thus intemperately in politics may legitimately occupy the Throne. Your Royal Highness’ arrogant and derogatory dismissiveness towards the near-50 percent of your subjects who no longer follow the New Religion is tantamount to premature abdication. Goodnight, sweet prince. No more “Your Royal Highness.”
Hi, there, Chazza! You are a commoner now, just like most of Her Majesty’s subjects. You will find us a cheerfully undeferential lot. Most of us don’t live in palaces, and none of us goes everywhere with his own personalized set of monogrammed white leather lavatory seat covers.
The United Kingdom Independence Party, which until recently I had the honor to represent in Scotland, considers – on the best scientific and economic evidence – that the profiteers of doom are unjustifiably enriching themselves at our expense.
For instance, even the unspeakable Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has accepted advice from me and my fellow expert reviewers that reliance upon ill-constructed and defective computer models to predict climate was a mistake. Between the pre-final and final drafts of the “Fifth Assessment Report,” published late last year, the Panel ditched the models and substituted its own “expert assessment” that in the next 30 years the rate of warming will be half what the models predict.
In fact, the dithering old fossils in white lab coats with leaky Biros sticking out of the front pocket now think the rate of warming over the next 30 years could be less than in the past 30 years, notwithstanding an undiminished increase in the atmospheric concentration of plant food. Next time you talk to the plants, ask them whether they would like more CO2 in the air they breathe. Their answer will be Yes.
The learned journals of economics are near-unanimous in saying it is 10-100 times costlier to mitigate global warming today than to adapt to its supposedly adverse consequences the day after tomorrow.
Besides, in the realm that might have been yours there has been no change – none at all – in mean surface temperature for 25 full years. So if you are tempted to blame last year’s cold winter (which killed 31,000 before their time) or this year’s floods (partly caused by the Environment Agency’s mad policy of returning dozens of square miles of the Somerset Levels to the sea) on global warming, don’t.
You got your science and economics wrong. And you were rude as well. And you took sides in politics. Constitutionally, that’s a no-no. Thronewise, mate, you’ve blown it.
On the other hand, we Brits are sport-mad. So here is option 2. I am going to give you a sporting second chance, Charlie, baby.
You see, squire, you are no longer above politics. You’ve toppled off your gilded perch and now you’re in it up to your once-regal neck. So, to get you used to the idea of debating on equal terms with your fellow countrymen, I’m going to give you a once-in-a-reign opportunity to win back your Throne in a debate about the climate. The motion: “Global warming is a global crisis.” You say it is. I say it isn’t.
We’ll hold the debate at the Cambridge Union, for Cambridge is your alma mater and mine. You get to pick two supporting speakers and so do I. We can use PowerPoint graphs. The Grand Debate will be televised internationally over two commercial hours. We let the world vote by phone, before and after the debate. If the vote swings your way, you keep your Throne. Otherwise, see you down the pub.
Cheers, mate!
Viscount Monckton of Brenchley
=====================================================
Related: Chicken al la still not a king
Chris Monckton for King..!
Tom in Florida:
Thankyou for your information for me in your post at February 6, 2014 at 5:02 am.
It “helps” a lot.
I was especially pleased that you told me
Thankyou for that. I was not aware of the change you report. And it resonates with me because it has similarities with the debate about the nature of our House of Lords (HoL) which has been raging for over a century.
Many want our HoL to be an elected Chamber but others fear outcomes similar to that you report from making your Senate an elected Chamber. The HoL is a bit of a ‘botch’ at the moment but it does ensure that a wide variety of expertise and experience is involved in government.
The other strangeness is that you don’t directly elect your President: you elect people to elect your President. This somewhat similar to our electing MPs who represent political Parties, and the Parties elect their Leader. The monarch selects the Prime Minister from among the Party Leaders.
I hope this response demonstrates the usefulness to me of your post. Again, thankyou.
Richard
fobdangerclose….
Before you believe Abbott. look at the long term view: Norway Experiencing Greatest Glacial Activity in the past 1,000 year John Kehr explains a recent peer-reviewed paper in that essay and links to the paper.
Also look at Kehr’s Himalaya Glaciers are Growing and his NH Summer Energy: The Leading Indicator
As William McClenney (geologist) recently said here at WUWT
“…. we had better hope and pray some well-mixed trace gas can delay the next glacial inception. Onset of the Little Ice Age after the Medieval Warm Period, right when the Holocene reached about half a precession cycle old, was harrowing enough. The Modern Warm Period, reportedly less warm then the MWP, marks the second thermal pulse…..”
(Thermal pulses are expected during the descent into glaciation)
Within the circles of geology the hot debate is on whether the Holocene interglacial is about to end or the earth is looking at low solar insolation for the next 4,000 years and a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ . Sunshine now is 9% or ~ 40Wm−2 weaker than during the Holocene Optimum while John Kehr (Chem Eng) calculated the energy from CO2 going from 300 ppm to 390 ppm was just 1.4 Wm−2. (Color me not impressed)
This does not give me the warm fuzzies when a recent paper says:
“Despite a conservative tuning strategy, the LR04 benthic stack exhibits significant coherency with insolation in the obliquity band throughout the entire 5.3 Myr and in the precession band for more than half of the record….
…the 21 June insolation minimum at 65°N during MIS 11 is only 489 W/m2, much less pronounced than the present minimum of 474 W/m2. In addition, current insolation values are not predicted to return to the high values of late MIS 11 for another 65 kyr. We propose that this effectively precludes a ‘‘double precession cycle’’ interglacial [e.g., Raymo, 1997] in the Holocene without human influence ….”
Especially knowing the phrase “without human influence” is needed to get anything through peer-review these days. That paper is A Pliocene-Pleistocene stack of 57 globally distributed benthic D18O records
I dare say rather pithy post, old chap! Bravo!
James Abbott says: @ur momisugly February 5, 2014 at 5:31 pm
…Some of the structures built in the C19th (to which period you refer) have just been smashed to pieces.
You cannot explain this away, its actually happening right now…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What bull!
That topic was done to death here at WUWT. GREENS (ya you) screamed bl00dy murder about dredging and other routine maintenance so there were floods as a direct result. (The New Orlean’s Leeves are another example)
We saw the same thing in the USA and Australia with GREENS screamed bl00dy murder about clearing brush, logging and fire break roads and then grab head lines screaming GLOBAL WARMING when the inevitable fires run out of control. Here in the USA Obama did one better by canceling the government contract for aerial firefighting planes.
I am getting sick to death of politicians and lobbyists setting up people for destruction, loss of property and even death and then turning around and morphing the tragedy to their advantage when they were directly responsible.
Blimey, if it ain’t Balmy Prince Charlie, and the Frostbite Revolution! AND, he took the Low Road!
You ROCK, Christopher Monckton!!
Sorry to foist a political viewpoint here but Mr Monckton (a “titled” individual you might have noticed) opened the door. The monarchy and its unelected minions – protectors of privilege, status, power and wealth, the most entrenched enemies of democracy – have never stopped interfering in the running of our “democracy”. Charles has been voicing his opinions openly for decades. Let him and the rest of them keep rabbitting until they finally convince enough of their “subjects” that there can be no place for unelected power (including Lords and viscounts etc, whether legitimate or otherwise) in the process of governance if we are to eventually become a genuine democracy.
jim hogg:
You conclude your rant at February 6, 2014 at 6:31 am saying
Fortunately, that horrific outcome is not possible here in the UK. Mob rule and lynch mobs are not a good idea.
Our present system has evolved over 1,000 years. It has much wrong with it, and it cannot be transported to other cultures, but it always continues to meet present needs because its evolution is formed by present needs and not ideological abstraction.
Richard
Quite cheeky, milord.
I like it!
Gail Combs:
Absolutely bloody spot on! Well said.
William Astley says: @ur momisugly February 5, 2014 at 6:07 pm
” When the Money Runs Out: The End of Western Affluence”
… The Western economies cannot support the programs we currently have….
The US’s and the EU’s long term security/viability are dependent on economic success and fiscal constraints. There is an idiotic idea that we can use deficit spending and/or money printing schemes to spend our way into prosperity. That has been tried before, it ends in riots and bank collapses. We are losing to China and heading towards a currency collapse.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You do not understand. The elite hate and fear the middle class. The whole goal is the collapse of western civilization to usher in a global government.
“It is clear that current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class, involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work place air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong
“Can we balance the need for a sustainable planet with the need to provide billions with decent living standards? Can we do that without questioning radically the Western way of life?” – Pascal Lamy former director of the World Trade Organization (responsible for the destruction of USA and EU jobs)
Now Former European Commission President Jacques Delors is backing Lamy to succeed José Manuel Barroso as the head of the EU executive next year.
They have really made it quite plain they are targeting “the affluent middle class” and the sheeple are just nodding there heads and saying “Yes we want to be poverty stricken serfs forever more”
Your message :
Jon Snow continues to co opt guests into saying “that the world is still warming” this is a direct lie it is not. You can access the raw data yourself. RSS satellite data the most accurate is specific, no temperature change distinguishable from zero for 23 years, flat line for 17 years and 4 months and down since 2001. Earth warmed by 0.72C in past 100 years (HadCRUt4, Dec. 1913 to Nov 2013) Not unprecedented over past 11,000 years. Central England warmed at 4.33c/century 1694-1733 six times rate observed in past 100 years. Divergence from multi model projection now 3.2C. IPCC AR5/SREX says no plausible link between warming and incidence and strength of so called extreme events. 1762 mentioned, it is has happened before say 1940 then warming or AGW is not to blame. America having coldest winter for decades, cold does not equal hot, get a grip. Even if 0.72C was the anti Christ explain what Cameron is supposed to do as God to get the wind to blow in the opposite direction. Snow once said that to excel on TV you only need to be as bright as the lowest member of the audience and he makes this fundamental truth a reality night after night after night.
See here:http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/
Dear Mr Wells,
Thank you for contacting Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries regarding CHANNEL 4 NEWS.
We are sorry to hear that you were unhappy with the content of this report. Please be assured your complaint has been logged and noted for the information of those responsible for our programming.
Channel 4 News is made for Channel 4 by ITN. They are asked not only to report on the day’s significant events but to provide analysis. Channel 4 News is expected to examine fresh perspectives and interrogate facts and opinions. It should critically examine policy and comments presented by the government and the establishment here and abroad and it should give a voice to those who may not otherwise be heard.
Wherever possible it should provide additional information and stories and angles which others have not yet explored. It is not there to provide exactly the same news as that on the BBC or on ITV but to provide a thoughtful alternative.
Thank you again for taking the time to contact us. We appreciate all feedback from our viewers; complimentary or otherwise.
Regards,
Alex Chase
Channel 4 Viewer Enquiries
For information about Channel 4 have a look at our FAQ section at http://www.channel4.com/4viewers/faq
My reply:
Dear Alex
You have the right to your own opinion but you do not have the right to invent your own facts and that is what Ch4 News does every day of the week when reporting issues relating to so called climate change. Climate change is a fact during our planets 4.5 billion year history the climate has changed and will continue to change, so what? What else would you expect when we live on a lump of rock hurtling through time and space?
Interrogate facts and opinions, when precisely? What is evident is that Snow and his mates have a clearly defined agenda but since when did the pursuit of an agenda have any specific relationship to asking questions that reveal the truth; this is especially evident when the discussion relates to climate or weather. Not once have I witnessed Snow taking evidence from a guest or Ch4 journalist who gave an unbiased review of AGW, CAGW, Climate Change, Global Warming, Disruptive or Extreme weather, Ch4 has an agenda, fact.
You cannot express an opinion about a scientific fact, observed recorded data is not a moveable feast for Ch4 to exploit exactly as they see fit otherwise you are lying to your audience and if you were Tesco that would be a criminal offence it is called misrepresentation, deception. IPCC accept that warming has stopped, Met Office accept that fact. IPCC AR5/SREX say there is no plausible link between warming since the end of the little Ice Age and the incidence or strength of weather events like hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, flood, drought, cyclones or typhoons, data reveals the are all down, see below.
Straight out of Black Adder, I have a cunning plan. When warming stopped the greens needed a new tag line to continue fomenting their panic laden doom and gloom hence “extreme weather” like it hadn’t happened before ever, just like warming. Unfortunately NASA satellite data put an end to this notion because it reveals that since the start of the satellite era in 1979 water vapour has in fact declined robbing the greens of their latest deceit. See here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/03/06/nasa-satellite-data-shows-a-decline-in-water-vapor/& here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/
Instead of pandering to your green environmentalist cause and deliberately misrepresenting reality why not focus upon reporting what the current situation is and describe how beneficial it would be to stop wasting billions and trillions on wind and solar in the misleading expectation that by doing so we can stop our climate changing and in the process exercise control over our weather, in your dreams.
It is not warming, it has stopped, which part of No does Ch4 not understand?
David Wells
________________________________________
Your message :
Jon Snow continues to co opt guests into saying “that the world is still warming” this is a direct lie it is not. You can access the raw data yourself. RSS satellite data the most accurate is specific, no temperature change distinguishable from zero for 23 years, flat line for 17 years and 4 months and down since 2001. Earth warmed by 0.72C in past 100 years (HadCRUt4, Dec. 1913 to Nov 2013) Not unprecedented over past 11,000 years. Central England warmed at 4.33c/century 1694-1733 six times rate observed in past 100 years. Divergence from multi model projection now 3.2C. IPCC AR5/SREX says no plausible link between warming and incidence and strength of so called extreme events. 1762 mentioned, it is has happened before say 1940 then warming or AGW is not to blame. America having coldest winter for decades, cold does not equal hot, get a grip. Even if 0.72C was the anti Christ explain what Cameron is supposed to do as God to get the wind to blow in the opposite direction. Snow once said that to excel on TV you only need to be as bright as the lowest member of the audience and he makes this fundamental truth a reality night after night after night.
See here:http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/
Dear Channel 4 News
You have a license to report the news what you don’t have is a license to distort and misrepresent fact for ratings. Global warming stopped 23 years ago and the upper, middle and lower atmosphere have not warmed, there is no tropical hot spot confirmed by radio sonde balloons and no increase in atmospheric water vapour in fact everything that was projected to happen because of extra Co2 emissions has not happened so to cite a continuing rise in Co2 as the cause of extreme weather is just stupid. Correlation and coincidence are not evidence of causation, unless there is proven evidence to sustain the belief that just because Co2 exists in the atmosphere at any level it has a substantive and proven effect upon our weather or climate then its presence is benign and what we are experiencing now is just weather, the strongest system wins. We in the UK are getting very wet and in American they are getting very cold what would you have Cameron do get on the hot line to God and ask him to change the direction of the wind because having to accept that we are not in control of our environment is just not acceptable, I also go shopping on Wednesday and the gym on Thursday just what is going on David Cameron should sort this out we are suffering.
The idea that there should be some clear line of descent that revolves around how humanity would prefer to exist when our very existence is no more than a quirk of fate just serves to demonstrate how feeble minded we really are. Every time some demented retard resorts to doom laden rhetoric about the consequences of more or less Co2 in the atmosphere they serve to demonstrate their ignorance of how our climate behaves not their mastery of the subject matter and Channel 4 News is a classic example of this dysfunctional mendacity.
The greens since the inception of the IPCC have tried to promote the idea that if we only cover the planet with wind turbines and solar panels then our lives will be pure and sustainable, everything in the garden will be rosy, now we know that just is not true. What would those people in the Somerset Levels prefer; maybe to live in the Central African Republic or Syria and get butchered or blown up, it is only their chosen life style that is at risk not their life.
Our coupled non linear chaotic climate misbehaves all of the time and instead of Connie Hedegaarde wasting Euros 1 billion every day on wind and solar that money should be diverted into developing our infrastructure so that when it rains, storms, floods or we get drought we can avoid the calamitous consequences of being cast adrift on a lump of rock hurtling through space.
Remember it was the EU who said no to us developing more reservoir capacity in the UK insisting that we should use the toilet less instead believing that if we saved water here it would automatically benefit people who lived in drought regions in Africa, barking mad. As was the suggestion that bad weather always targets the poorer members of society as if weather systems have the capacity to behave like a cruise missile and deliberately target specific countries and regions. It you life in a typhoon or hurricane region then it is most likely you will get driven to despair by a typhoon or a hurricane. Why do people live in areas like Fukushima which are prone to earthquake and tsunami?
Where there is a clear history of earthquake intelligent populations renew their damaged infrastructure with buildings capable of resisting and earthquake, Tokyo and Los Angeles are prime examples but here in the UK where we have a known history of storm, flood and drought we spend billions on wind turbines imagining that this appeal to belief will satisfy the Gods that we really do want to save the planet. Now we know the cost of fighting an imaginary foe instead of recognising the real risk imposed upon us by living on a lump of rock.
Wake up and smell the roses Channel 4, start reporting the reality and investigate the real risk of fighting an imaginary foe for ratings. Every time I witness Jon Snow introducing another flawed climate change disciple I see that lunatic image of the James Bond character in Tomorrow Never Dies who wants to start wars for ratings, unbelievable.
David Wells
Exactly Gail- this is not some esoteric quibble over statistical impurity! “Given one in four households suffer from fuel poverty following large increases in energy bills, this is not really surprising.”
31,000 died from the cold in the UK last year from fuel poverty- mostly pensioners:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/uk-weather-31000-people-died-2852677
Meanwhile jet-setting, palace-dwelling buffoons pontificate about “using less stuff” while jacking up energy costs for poor folks based entirely on concocted (and thoroughly falsified) theories that have survived from the confluence of a conspiratorial commandeering of the peer-review process and compliant left-wing media.
Truly poor folks are starving and freezing to death in huge numbers around the globe as a direct result of these faux scientists. There is nothing scientific about cherry-picking data while hiding that which contradicts your theory, conspiring to thwart FOIA requests, prejudicing the peer-review process, repeatedly readjusting your “data” to align with your theories…to extract (extort) tens of billions of dollars annually from US families.
Steve M. is spot on. In the real world, the withholding of material information is the least of the hockey team offenses. Their behavior seems to epitomize RICO violations:
Racket: “a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not actually exist, will not be affected, or would not otherwise exist.” GL Mark!
It’s time for the gloves to come off!
Thanks Christopher Monckton.
dbstealey says: @ur momisugly February 5, 2014 at 6:41 pm
…Zeke Hausfather says:
“Also, your claim of 25 years of zero trend in the UK seems to run somewhat counter to the data…”
Zeke, your graph shows that the temperature in England has just dropped below year 1750.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
YOU’RE RIGHT! ROTFLMAO – Good eye Smokey.
Prinny is noe too bright.. Let’s see if he is dumb enough to take up Monckton’s challenge. I hope that he is.
Gail,
Well I know the danger of the Earth First , Greenpeace kooks. Back in the 1970’s when I was a “keep the nuke info from spreading” was some inside Greepeace. They came clear to me as pure commie thugs and I stood up and said so to them direct. They made it plain that I was not welcome and in fact they made it plain they would take “direct action” on me.
I try to pull the Abbott types more out in the open and make them easy to trip up.
Here in the U.S. we have a “two party evil money cult” in Washington D.C. who will use any means to gather up more tax money to pass the pork to one another with.
The whole of it a great danger to all mankind. They are a danger to themselves and us all.
ps
Mr Goode from the land down under. I am not understanding you one bit mate.
I was at the “Euata Ma Pup” out in no where land once on a time in 1969 on R & R, met some roudy cow hands, we were dancing with their ladies and bore the brount of that, all ok.
Do not know if you have a “beef” with me or not, but thanks any way.
Cheeky Chucky
Feeling lucky
Runs amucky
Yucky yucky
Brilliant!
I believe I read Charles has a substantial chunk of the royal treasure invested in wind ventures, at what point do statements of individuals that could influence markets constitute tampering in England?
Harry Passfield says:
February 6, 2014 at 4:58 am
Mr Green Genes: Ah, William McGonagall… Back in my youth no session in the folk club was complete without an hilarious rendition of ‘The Tay Bridge Disaster’. (I guess you had to be there). Thanks for the memory.
============================================================
I’m glad I prompted a look back to your youth. I can only imagine how it was presented at a folk club, especially towards the end of the evening. I am only sorry that I never experienced such a thing (but Fred Wedlock was amazing anyway).
For those who have never experienced William McGonagall, I now present The Tay Bridge Disaster:-
Beautiful Railway Bridge of the Silv’ry Tay!
Alas! I am very sorry to say
That ninety lives have been taken away
On the last Sabbath day of 1879,
Which will be remember’d for a very long time.
’Twas about seven o’clock at night,
And the wind it blew with all its might,
And the rain came pouring down,
And the dark clouds seem’d to frown,
And the Demon of the air seem’d to say-
“I’ll blow down the Bridge of Tay.”
When the train left Edinburgh
The passengers’ hearts were light and felt no sorrow,
But Boreas blew a terrific gale,
Which made their hearts for to quail,
And many of the passengers with fear did say-
“I hope God will send us safe across the Bridge of Tay.”
But when the train came near to Wormit Bay,
Boreas he did loud and angry bray,
And shook the central girders of the Bridge of Tay
On the last Sabbath day of 1879,
Which will be remember’d for a very long time.
So the train sped on with all its might,
And Bonnie Dundee soon hove in sight,
And the passengers’ hearts felt light,
Thinking they would enjoy themselves on the New Year,
With their friends at home they lov’d most dear,
And wish them all a happy New Year.
So the train mov’d slowly along the Bridge of Tay,
Until it was about midway,
Then the central girders with a crash gave way,
And down went the train and passengers into the Tay!
The Storm Fiend did loudly bray,
Because ninety lives had been taken away,
On the last Sabbath day of 1879,
Which will be remember’d for a very long time.
As soon as the catastrophe came to be known
The alarm from mouth to mouth was blown,
And the cry rang out all o’er the town,
Good Heavens! the Tay Bridge is blown down,
And a passenger train from Edinburgh,
Which fill’d all the peoples hearts with sorrow,
And made them for to turn pale,
Because none of the passengers were sav’d to tell the tale
How the disaster happen’d on the last Sabbath day of 1879,
Which will be remember’d for a very long time.
It must have been an awful sight,
To witness in the dusky moonlight,
While the Storm Fiend did laugh, and angry did bray,
Along the Railway Bridge of the Silv’ry Tay,
Oh! ill-fated Bridge of the Silv’ry Tay,
I must now conclude my lay
By telling the world fearlessly without the least dismay,
That your central girders would not have given way,
At least many sensible men do say,
Had they been supported on each side with buttresses,
At least many sensible men confesses,
For the stronger we our houses do build,
The less chance we have of being killed.
What more needs to be said? Janice, beat that 😀
Joe Public says:
February 5, 2014 at 4:42 pm
Perhaps Charlie Boy can talk with his plants, and ask their opinion?
No, no,no. Charles talks TO his plants. If he ever listened to them, everything would be a different story.
I suspect Charlie was only tempted to make his ill-advised ‘denier’ comments to satisfy the ravenous BBC vultures tailgating him around the Somerset Levels. Quite why he feels the need to make his pro-CAGW interventions is a mystery; but he’s been doing it for a long time now and I suppose as long he’s assured of a completely free pass from the BBC (and the rest of the common purpose media) for his non-scientific, non-academic, non-sourced and entirely unproven utterances he’ll just keep right on doing it.
As a British ‘subject’ (of The Crown – we’re not ‘citizens’ here in Blighty as we have no written Constitution) I pay Prince Charles no attention whatsoever. He’s been a complete irrelevance for decades now and is seen mostly as a pretty pathetic, sad little man (I’m not in favour of abolishing the monarchy, though – I just don’t feel, based on his behaviour up to now, that he’s at all suited the job of ‘being King’), but he can always be relied upon to say something inappropriate about ‘climate change’ and for this his chums in the BBC love him. Perhaps he just likes getting himself on the telly, or something.
richardscourtney says:
February 6, 2014 at 5:37 am
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/05/monckton-challenge-to-prince-charles/#comment-1560045
====================================================================
First, thanks again for your explanation(s) of the Monarchy.
I’d like to add this to what Tom in Florida said here.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/02/05/monckton-challenge-to-prince-charles/#comment-1560035
I said this some time ago.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/21/mcintyre-takes-down-lewandowskys-fabricated-statistical-claims/#comment-1085175
The “Balance of Powers” are supposed to, The Legislative Branch – Congress (composed of The House of Representatives and The Senate) which makes the laws, The Executive Branch – The President etc which implements and enforces the laws, The Supreme Court which rules on whether the laws ‘break the rules”. What is often not considered a “Balance” (or lumped in with The Constitution itself) is The Bill of Rights.
A couple of examples.
The Supreme Court ruled that the USEPA , a bureaucracy that is part of The Executive Branch, can regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act (a law passed by Congress). It did not NOT rule that CO2 is a pollutant but only that if it is that the USEPA can regulate it.
“Executive Orders” are an issue when they are issued, not to implement or enforce a law but to have the effect of a law that Congress won’t pass.
Religious freedom. “Separation of church and state” is not a phrase in The Bill of Rights. It was in a Supreme Court ruling. (I think the case had to do with forcing, say an atheist, to pray in a public school. It’s been stretched to prevent kids from praying in a public school. One school system even banned the colors red and green at Christmas!)
The Bill of Rights was to prevent denominational control of Government and Government control of denominations. (Europe had a history of that happening.) It was never to separate “God and County” or “The People from their God” (or lack thereof).
richardscourtney says:
February 6, 2014 at 6:41 am
Richard, just a short addition to the great primer by Tom in Florida:
You may have heard the argument that the United States is a republic, not a democracy. Tom hinted at it with his remark about the ill-advised changes to our political system to make it “more democratic”. I know from personal experience that such a distinction is typically incomprehensible to Europeans but I came to realize that your appreciation of the limits on the power of popularly elected politicians in the British constitutional monarchy may give you a good basis to understand the difference.
The idea of a constitutional republic restricting a “democratic majority” is a bedrock principle of our political system. Our success or failure will ultimately be decided by Americans’ will and ability to uphold and restore the founding principles of limited government.
The “horrific outcome” you mention weighed heavily on the minds of the founders of our republic. I wish you were right about the impossibility of it happening in the United Kingdom but I’m afraid you are wrong just as those who argued it could never happen in the United States.
The hard truth is that you as a foreigner may come to understand and appreciate our founding system better than many of my fellow Americans who will ultimately decide the fate of our country.
P.S. Thank you for improving my understanding of the functioning of your political system—and your current predicament—by commenting here and on the previous “Prince Charles” thread.
Mylord, you made my day.