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
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The gloves are off, take your sword…all this acrimony and downright violence for two words spoken by a British citizen voicing his personal opinion to peers…. This sounds more like a personal battle between a man who has a title but no seat and a citizen who his higher on the pyramid this “Lord” cannot climb..People like me have nothing to do with that. But for those here who gave information on climate change thank you for all the websites. I would like to propose a new point of view on ” climate change” which is different than “global warming” given by systems science. Nature (as our body and even humanity for that matter) is a self-regulatory biosystem. This means that the weather degrees wont change much overall but the variations will be more extreme. Eventually, how the system reacts on the long run cannot be foreseen since it depends on its resilience. Longtime gardeners (30+) such as myself have observed this. This implies more catastrophes. I believe some who invest money in commodities are aware of this http://www.thebrowningreport.com/. So whatever we do to curb this variations and augment nature’s resilience is good. The thing is, we have now to find what is the proper prescription. I believe we are all here united on one point : what is good for nature is good for humanity. That we might disagree on details is not important, we are of the same battle.
Haven’t read all comments, so don’t know if anyone has observed that Lord Monckton’s granddad, the 1st Viscount M of B, was the lawyer who advised King Edward VIII during the abdication crisis. Prince Jugears would be well advised to heed the 3rd Viscount’s wise counsel now, as his great uncle did the 1st.
richardscourtney says: @ur momisugly February 8, 2014 at 12:10 pm
Kate Forney…
I clicked on your name and I assume you are one of the two lovely young ladies who appeared. If so, then I urge you to continue to question, to learn, and to think for yourself. This applies to all things including politics. You may harden into one of the American political right like the admirable Gail Combs, or you may turn into some leftie like me, or more likely you will adopt views which are somewhere in between, but you will then be your own person….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Kate, I agree with Richard. Do your own thinking.
Richard- Actually I am somewhat middle of the road.(You can tell by the constant attacks from _Jim.) Though at times I am ready to join the ranks of the Anarchists in sheer disgust with our so called leaders. [search Mark Stoval “The State versus Governance” ]
My thinking is: Leave people as much freedom as possible. Protect their property and wealth and have enough government to ensure that protection. Provide a safety net for the less fortunate. (This does NOT have to be via a corrupt wasteful government BTW) Honest politicians NEVER make it high up in politics so keep the government small and as close to home as possible so citizens have direct control of their politicians.
Pure dog-eat-dog ‘Capitalism’ devolves into the bullies owning the government and just about everything else. Unfortunately in the USA the checks to prevent this have been removed one by one over the years as I have detailed here at WUWT on occasion.
E.M. Smith, an economist, has a couple good threads discussing stuff you will never find without a lot of digging.
“Evil Socialism” vs “Evil Capitalism”
isms, ocracies and ologies
Make sure to listen to all sides. The worst mistake is closing your mind.
Good Hunting Kate.
Richard says:
February 6, 2014 at 9:11 pm
As a kiwi I think “Prince” Charles is a stupid old fool, widely disliked.
I heard this story about him – Every morning he used to go for a walk near Buckingham Palace and was accosted by a prostitute who offered him her services for a 100 pounds. She was persistent so to get rid of her he used to mutter “I’ll give you 10 pounds” and hurry on. One day he was walking with Camilla so he hastily crossed the road to avoid her, but she yelled out from across the road – “See what you get for 10 pounds you cheapskate!”
—————————————————————————————–
Classic!!!
Charlie boy is a deluded, but highly dangerous fool ,he must be removed from the succession before he can inflict real damage!
DICK R says:
February 16, 2014 at 12:03 am
Charlie boy is a deluded, but highly dangerous fool ,he must be removed from the succession before he can inflict real damage!
————————
Rather too late, I’d say. The image of a buffoon-King is burned into the consciousness of many.