Climate Clown Prince Charles Might Lecture President Trump

Prince Charles, public domain image, source Wikimedia

Prince Charles, public domain image, source Wikimedia

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Trump aides have raised concerns that Prince Charles, the crown prince who thinks Mad King George was “misunderstood”, will use an upcoming state visit to try to humiliate President Trump in front of international media.

Trump’s team fears climate change differences with Prince Charles could flare up in state visit

Ben Riley-Smith, assistant political editor
28 JANUARY 2017 • 10:00PM

Donald Trump’s aides have raised concerns that a likely meeting with Prince Charles during his state visit could backfire because of the pair’s differences on climate change.

The US President’s team is understood to have worries that the American press could jump on any difference in comments on the environment.

There are also concerns that copycat protests based on those in Washington DC on the day of his inauguration could be seen when he comes to Britain later this year.

Mrs May presented an invitation from the Queen for a state visit during her trip to the White House, which Mr Trump accepted – though dates are yet to be announced.

Prince Charles this week called for action on climate change to avoid “potentially devastating consequences” while Mr Trump is a known sceptic.

Sources close Mr Trump and UK Government figures told this newspaper there were concerns that any joint appearance could see the pair questioned about climate change.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/28/trumps-team-fears-climate-change-differences-prince-charles/

Prince Charles bizarre climate antics include taking a five day $80,000 trip on the Royal Train around Britain, to lecture people about climate change – right in the middle of a government austerity programme, which included extensive public sector job losses.

In February 2010, Prince Charles called into the working class city of Manchester to tell everyone that climate skeptics are liars – after arriving on a coal powered replica of a 1948 steam locomotive.

Prince Charles is a strong supporter of organic farming – according to Wikipedia his 900 acre organic royal farm uses lunar crop planting cycles and the application of homeopathic potions to plant leaves, to improve yields.

Prince Charles recently wrote a Ladybird book on Climate Change – the book is aimed at adults, but apparently uses a children’s book format to present its content.

But who knows, perhaps Trump’s aides are wrong, Prince Charles has other priorities. The royal fascination with the Mad King seems to run very deep.

Back in 2005, the Palace issued a denial that Charles planned to change his name to George when he ascends to the British throne.

Perhaps Prince Charles’ real intention, when he meets President Trump, is to discuss an unfortunate misunderstanding with the colonies which occurred during the Mad King’s reign, on July 4th, 1776.

Advertisements

303 thoughts on “Climate Clown Prince Charles Might Lecture President Trump

  1. “his 900 acre organic royal farm uses lunar crop planting cycles and the application of homeopathic potions to plant leaves”

    Oh and even so *we* are the science deniers? Fascinating.

    • Scratch any True Believer in climatic Armageddon, and get a wide array of beliefs in superstition: chiropractic, homeopathic, any number of New Age nonsense, Traditional Chinese Medicine, acupuncture, anti-vaxxers, 9/11 Trufers, etc.

      Science only counts when it proves what they like.

      It is obviously a tool of rapacious misogynistic non-binary racist capitalism when it proves something they don’t.

      BTW, unless the Sweet Asteroid of Death comes soon, this perennial candidate for Upper Class Twit of the Year will become King of Canada.

      At least you ‘muricans get to elect YOUR clowns.

      • Much more likely to be George VII.
        His given names are Charles Philip Arthur George, and the first two Charleses, respectively, were executed; and died without legitimate off-spring.

        Auto

      • Charles I was executed, but had offspring, to include Charles II, who wasn’t executed, and James II.

        Charles II had lots of offspring, but none legitimate. You can’t swing a cat in England without hitting one of the Merry (but traitorous) Monarch’s spawn, to include Mrs. David Cameron.

      • Traitor Charles II should have been executed, and would have been, had his secret treaty with Louis XIV and dealings with the Sun King via his sister, been known.

      • Also among Charles II’s innumerable descendants was Diana, late Princess of Wales, doubly descended from the Merry Monarch via two of his illegitimate sons; Henry Fitzroy, 1st Duke of Grafton, and Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond. Thus her son, Prince William, royal Duke of Cambridge and famous as Kate Middleton’s husband, will become the first descendant of Charles II to occupy the British throne, if he succeeds as expected.

      • Diana’s ineffectual father was also descended from James II (“the Sheit”, as the loser is known in Ireland), so William will practically constitute a restoration of the Stuart dynasty. God help Britain!

      • Just *love* the historical scuttle-butt!
        However, is it relevant to this scientifically-oriented Blog to any significant Objective standard?
        Indirectly, I’d answer ‘Yes’ to the extent that lemming-limited brains are prone to “Halo-Effect” (Papal??) pronouncements.
        The BIG problem is educating the otherwise gormless voters.

  2. This is a fatuous post politically speculative with little substance. Such posts demean a site that has often risen to a high level of debate around the science and politics of climate change.

    [?? .mod]

      • Sir, you are picky little pedant. Many on this (excellent) blog were not brought-up by Nannies to speak Oxford english (nor, for that matter, Queen’s English, received English or BBC English, let alone the best enunciated English thanks to the E. coast Scots).
        I digress … the “Home Language” of this Blog is English. It behoves us, as natural-born English-speakers, to behave as polite hosts to those trying their best to communicate in English as a second-language, and refrain from comments such as yours … partic’ly of the ‘smart-arse’ nature.
        I understood full-well what Bern was trying to say, without help (spelt “Hindrance”) from you. Might I suggest you adopt French nationality and subscribe to the pedantry of the Academie Francaise … you might find a more welcoming audience to your pontifications than here.

      • Nonsense. All that was needed is a comma after “post”.

        Post is the noun you were unable to find.

        Seems you are the one who needs to learn some grammar.

        Not addressing Berniel’s point; but nothing wrong with his grammar.

        G

      • I dunno about you Mr. King, but where I wuz brought up, we speak Brooklyn.
        We fired UpChuck’s Grandaddy much removed and putrefied a long time ago.
        Sorry, but I gottagetroudahere.

        Overall, English is a language with many fathers, none of whom wish to acknowledge it. It
        has been straight downhill since Beowulf.

      • Love yr reply!
        Only pompous Brits worry about which version of the language is ‘de-rigeur’. I just wanted to take a stand about pedantry and partic’ly the twit who first needled Bern
        I enjoy ‘Brooklyn-speak’ and ‘Bahst’n-speak’ when I visit.
        Good luck, Sir!

      • Berniel’s comment is based on a mistaken assumption about what WUWT is all about. It deserves censure for it’s fatuous content and rude tone.

        However…. in defense of all English-as-second-language people (there are many, here, who have truly worthwhile, intelligently informed, things to say):

        Greg’s comment is slightly mistaken. (<— Please note: no noun follows "mistaken")

        The only grammar mistake in that sentence was leaving out two commas (one after "post" and one after "speculative").

      • I think it’s OK to point out stylistic errors in head posts, because they can be corrected and their authors are presumably desirous of getting their stuff correct. (It might be re-posted or published later.) But it’s too picky to correct comments, or anyway to correct them in any belaboring way. IMO.

      • actually Bern’s perfectly correct and uses a perfectly good adverb to modify a perfectly good adjective.

      • That is because, Mr. Phillips, in insulting the voters’ choice, you are insulting those who love America (for that is who voted for Mr. Trump — it is America-haters who are upset he won).

      • Gareth Phillips January 31, 2017 at 2:47 pm
        ” Trumpist Messiah”

        Many of us are not fond of him, but we are very enthusiastic over what he is doing.

        As they say in industry you don’t have to like the guy just work with him.:-)

        michael

      • So let me see if I have got this right, Gareth. You don’t approve of posts insulting world leaders, and to make your point you insult the President of the US. Just brilliant. I don’t think you understand how much people hate that type of hypocritical crap.

      • Say something intelligent, and you will be treated as someone intelligent.
        Post your usual pablum and you will be treated like the lack-wit that you are.

    • Actually, Berniel, I think I can see where you are coming from. It is a speculative stirring of the pot. It’s rather uncalled-for in my opinion. I sincerely hope that President Trump is properly welcomed and that the Bonnie Prince minds his manners as a host.

    • high level of debate … , yeah, but, at some point, it gets so ridiculous that maintaining that high level is like trying to take a comedian seriously.

      Embracing the ridiculousness of it, then, somewhat boosts dignity by calling a joker a joker and not even worth taking seriously.

  3. The President needs to simply stay calm, polite and listen.
    Then state that there are some serious concerns regarding the integrity of data collection and adjustment. Along with failure of climate models to accurately predict the results of the past 20 years. And that as president he would be remiss not to have these issues examined thoroughly before committing to any actions for the year 2100 when 20 years of real world data has shown the models to be oversensitive.

      • Hivemind
        I think Myron had the new POTUS in diplomatic mode.
        You and I agree “Out and out wrong”, but the Heir apparent – to whom Myron’s piece was ‘addressed’ (I think)- seems not to agree.

        Auto

    • Impossible. Trump could never listen politely to any opinion which does not comply with his own view 100%.
      We rather hope he does not show up, we would be seriously concerned for the wellbeing of our Monarch. If he cannot keep his little hands off our Prime Minister, Lord knows what he will attempt with our Queen.
      Note, 1.8 million people have signed a petition to keep him at arms length.
      Heed the will of the people Trurmpster. Stay on your side of the pond where your pals think you are a valid political leader.

      • Wow, the English have really gone downhill. Mass paranoia, delusions,……Hey, maybe we can send you a bunch of Hillary supporters that are sooooo traumatized. You could console them. Meanwhile, while England is overrun by immigrants and blacked out by saving the planet, we Americans can get on with making America great again after eight years of decline. Maybe even an exchange—our warmists and Hillary supporters for England’s Brexit supporters and global warming doubters. Then we could all live happily ever after.

      • “Impossible. Trump could never listen politely to any opinion which does not comply with his own view 100%.”

        Sounds extreme, Gareth . . better go with 97% ; )

      • I totally disagree with you GP. As an Englishwoman I welcome Trump and I trust that Bonnie Prince Charlie will remember his manners as a host.

        How many of those signatures on the petition were multi repeats?

      • Don’t fret Gareth. I’m sure the POTUS will supply a safe space for Charles , complete with hot chocolate, play dough and a few plants to talk to. Long live the Queen. Cdn

      • “Impossible. GARETH could never listen AT ALL to any FACT which does not comply with his own view 100%.

      • “Wow, the English have really gone downhill.”

        Good to see you have not included Scotland, Wales or Ireland, or is this the usual idiocy that does not understand that the UK and England are not interchangeable terms? If you cannot get basic geography right, how can you expect your comments to be taken seriously?

      • Interesting to see that posters on this site attacked Obama for eight year solid with mainly disinformation and needless attacks which were, to be honest extremely viscous at times. Now our Royal family has been attacked in the same way.
        But one posting against Trump has posters foaming at the mouth. Apparently they love to attack people they hate, but cannot take any criticism of their hero in return. Sums up the hypocrisy of the US hard right in a way I could never express. So don’t whine, you have another 3 years 11 months of this, unless of course Trump is impeached before then which given his dodgy background is highly likely.

      • “we Americans can get on with making America great again”

        I’m sad that you don’t think the US is great now, I have always thought is was a fine country. It’s rather sad to see you have such a low opinion of your mother nation.

      • Only 1.8 million out of tens of millions of adults? It appears that Trump is more popular in Britain than the US. Pro-Brexit voters must love him.

        In England outside London, about 56% voted the Leave the EU. That’s a landslide. Even Wales voted Out. How does it feel to be in such a minority, Gareth? Unless you exist in London, Scotland, NI or Gibraltar.

      • “Wow, the English have really gone downhill. ”

        That’s what happens when the best and brightest have been fleeing a country for fifty years. They don’t call it the ‘brain drain’ for nothing.

      • As usual for a leftist, facts don’t matter.
        All that matters is whether you support or attack the politicians he likes.

      • “Interesting to see that posters on this site attacked Obama for eight year solid with mainly disinformation and needless attacks which were, to be honest extremely viscous at times. Now our Royal family has been attacked in the same way.”

        An attack on Prince Charles is not an attack on the Royal Family, it is an attack on a political position Prince Charles takes.

        President Obama deserved most of the criticism sent his way, imo.

      • Ah, Gareth. Did you not notice the many polite conversations he has had with folks of opposing viewpoints? Trump has shown that he wants to hear all opinions and continues to invite people who disagree with him to meet.

        I think you would benefit by following his example.

      • “Leader of the Free World”, Gareth, please. How do you like him now? It must gall, but them’s the breaks, mate.

      • Donald: “May I address you as Teresa?”

        Teresa: “Yes, you may, thank you for asking. And how may I address you?”

        Donald: “Mister President”.

      • Any questions about climate change directed to Trump should meet with exactly the same rote response Scott Pruitt crafted so carefully for the Senate committee Democrats. Trump can memorize one single sentence (I hope), and (hint) it shouldn’t contain the words “hoax” or “Chinese”. Pruitt chanted the perfect dogged “non-denial denial” and the committee was unable to provoke him into a sound bite for CNN.

        But, alas, Trump won’t be able to refrain himself. He’ll say something spectacularly provocative and make headlines again. We’ll all get a chuckle out of the “meltdown” in the media and among the planet savers.

    • Myron, good comment. I think we should show Prince Charles respect and welcome him as a visitor to our country. Good manners never hurt. And, I think President Trump should meet Prince Charles in private and thank him for all the science and philosophy we got from the UK, etc. and try his best to be a good host. Then leave the public business to a tour of the sights in Washington, or other things the Prince might like to do. And then give him a royal sendoff as a prince should be treated. In other words respect the Royalty in the UK as they are due and hope similar hospitality will be returned when the Presidents visits the UK. Too often we judge the person and forget the great nation he represents.
      The substantive and difficult topics should be limited to the Prime Minister, not royalty.

  4. I would have thought that their respective handlers would contrive to avoid a spat, public or othrwise.
    Having said, I’d just *love* to have them go-at-it.
    I invite readers to prime President Trump with some apposite one-liners for Bat-Ears.
    I’ll re-visit here when I’ve thought of some…..

      • Like it! Bat-Ears might have the knowledge of Shakespeare to roll-out some of these .. and I can just imaging a Monty Pythonesque skit of him thus addressing the President!
        As to the President having the literary skills to plumb these put-downs is a matter for (little??) conjecture.

    • He might want to enquire about what terrible hardship, disability or other circumstance led to Charles being one the largest beneficiaries of state welfare during his entire life. Does he feel any sympathy or sense of community for the other beneficiaries – even if they have needed so much less than him, for much shorter periods of their lives? And does he feels angry or depressed about not ever having held a job or been able to earn any money through his own efforts? Has he ever been tempted to prove himself capable of the basic human challenge of providing for himself and his family through his own efforts? His life is a punishment in a way – we should feelk sorry for him. I guess the same could be asked of Trump, inherited wealth of the Fred Trump dynasty. When you look at the Clintons, Bushes and the Kennedys – really there is little or no difference between a state toff and a private toff.

    • It is not the “bat-ears,” it is what is not between those ears.

      (HAD to pipe up, here, for someone very dear to me has the same adorable ears)

      • Oops, I beg your pardon, Mr. King (just now read your nothing between the ears comment — didn’t meant to plagiarize you).

      • Hark my Liege, the wind doeth soundly blow without obstruction from east to west between thine open cranium cavity. If I may be so bold, methinks you should face more toward the north in order to temper the whistle.

  5. The Brits have been suffering a bad run on the Princes of Wales.
    David who became Edward VIII could not keep away from the Nazis. Was too friendly with them as king and then back with them as the Duke of Windsor.
    The government sent him to the Bahamas to get him out of sight.
    Now, Charles has succumbed to today’s versions of authoritarian government. Climate and environmentalism.
    Two authoritarians in a row.
    Not good.

  6. Chuck is still living in the middle ages when royalty meant something other than a second rate reality show.

    When he starts paying income tax like all the rest of the citizens of the UK, he can have a vote , one vote, like all the rest. Never mind his backdoor lobbying with his “spider” memos.

  7. Prince Charles is far far far worse than you portray him. He isn’t the brightest star in the firmament or the sharpest knife in the box. He thinks he’s the President Elect of Great Britain. He also thinks he has the right to involve himself in the day-to-day governing of the UK. Golly, we executed (in 1649) his kingly namesake for that precise reason. If he doesn’t listen & calm down he will be forced to abdicate shortly after he eventually accedes to the throne & he will put the very institution of the monarchy at great risk. If Trump loses his rag with him on his State visit then he (Trump) has my full support. In fact I insist he (Trump) does give him (Charles) a dose of reality. And damn the consequences.

    • How can you give a ‘fruit cake’ a dose of reality. just wrap it back up and put it in the closet until it’s past due date and then toss it.

  8. Myron Mesecke: He might also politely add that the models used to predict the climate some 75 year out seem to have a little difficulty hindcasting as well, as shown by his countryman Mike Jonas, an MSc Oxford Mathematics graduate. Of course that was to be expected, given that the IPCC itself declared that the climate was a coupled, non-linear chaotic system that was not amenable to modelling.

  9. Btw, according to Pew Research: Americans Don’t Believe The ‘97% Consensus of Climate Scientists’ Claim: http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/12/08/pew-research-americans-dont-believe-the-97-consensus-of-climate-scientists-claim/

    Mad Charles and the Brits maybe. Americans, no.

    Just 27% believe it.

    97% is obviously a bogus number inflated through trickery.

    Most important, any “consensus” is a consensus of ideology, not of science.

    It’s a consensus of scientists who are liberal. Poll conservative scientists and the numbers would be reversed. The consensus is bogus. It’s a political consensus.

    And what a joke this “March of (leftist) Scientists” is going to be, showing them and their nutcase followers for the fruitcake ideologues that they are. Remember, scientists are like *totally* apolitical, so we should always just do whatever they want us to do:

    • “The consensus is bogus. It’s a political consensus.”

      Science is NOT a show of hands, it is a show of evidence. A consensus is not science , it is politics.

    • I wouldn’t say that the majority of us Brits adhere to Charlie’s ideas.
      Although his mother has earnt more respect.

      • Ackkk! That which has been seen cannot be unseen.
        This brings me back to my grad school days. I contemplate how such a display of tomfoolery would have been viewed by the inhabitants of the Chem. Dept. We were a decidedly hard-core lot, back in the day.

      • Well, it’s not like they were all really Scientists, either.

        Welcome to America! Where you can be anything you want to be, regardless of qualifications. Just declare what you think you are, and everyone else is required to agree. ~¿~

    • As a woman of science, marching with these dim bulbs is not what I want to do. Women are running on emotion—the complete antithesis of science. We had “feminine snowplowing”, “feminine glaciology”. It’s insanity. Why in the world men allowed this to go on fails me. Men seem cowardly and women emote. Therein lies the problem. Someone has to have courage and a brain for science to exist. We seem lacking in those characteristics—or at least in shutting down the insanity that now passes for science. (That these women have PhD’s makes me nauseous. How horribly demeaning to the PhD’s who actually earned them doing real research and real science. How do I know she didn’t earn her PhD? She’s wearing a “kitty” hat.)

      • This one, as far as I could tell, is a Doctor of Science Communication. I couldn’t be sure . . her self cred blerb was not real clear . .

      • Sarah E. Myhre Ph.D. Home; CV; Research. Postdoctoral Research; Doctoral Research; IGERT Research; Communication, Press, Outreach. Science Communication; Press;

        I saw something about her being a climate scientist . . but got bored

      • “Women are running on emotion”. Indeed, Sheri.

        Remember when in 2005 Harvard President Larry Summers caused an uproar from feminists and the media when he said that the under-representation of female scientists at elite universities may stem in part from “innate” differences between men and women? A feminist interviewed by NPR said when she heard him say that she literally swooned. QED and case closed.

    • OMG!!!, Those people are teaching the next generation? What does a Uterus have to do with science? All these groups just reek of left wing politics. Any real scientist knows there is no missing link in the cycle of life, and that life is a continuum, and only stops when ended. Also, that looks like a bad prom picture, and no one over 16 should feel comfortable appearing in public like that. These liberals simply live on another planet.

      • “What does a Uterus have to do with science? ”
        Quite a lot, You came out of one…..ask me how I know.

      • ““What does a Uterus have to do with science? ”
        Quite a lot, You came out of one…..ask me how I know.”

        For a group of Women Scientists to use a uterus on a poster instead of a brain says a whole lot. The left just simply doesn’t get it. Keep politics out of science. Imagine of a group of men scientists used a similar tactic. Those women scientists would be filing harassment lawsuits.

      • But what comes out without an man’s intervention is simply ghastly!

        You’d think after Judd’s abominable comments they’d connect the dots, but not so.

  10. Not sure if that is John Kerry or Prince Charles….
    Either way, the question is“Why the long face?”

    Back in 1776, we stopped listening to the English royalty. Prince Charles is a prime example of why that was a sound decision, still valid today.

  11. Quite right Trump should not risk it and stay well away from out shores. It would help enormously in extracting the Queen form a dreadful promise made without her consultation.

  12. Apparently the Clown Prince has not yet realized that the red Trump ‘Make America Great Britain Again’ baseball caps are satirical. Then again, most of what he does is perhaps best understood in that light.

  13. Well, Charles should tread warily – with Theresa May in charge in Britain he might strike trouble with the House of Commons. Didn’t they chop off some royal head a few hundred years ago for meddling in politics?

  14. Gentleman in Waiting: I’m sorry, lad, but you can’t go in there. President Trump is visiting with great-grandmother.

    Charles, HRH: Brian. It is I. CHARLES. I. Am. Here. To. Hu-MILIATE that climate den!er. Please step aside.

    GIW (peering closer): Oh. I beg your pardon, your highness. It’s just that (cough), well, you’re not dressed as you…. and, well. It must be the glasses.

    C (over shoulder as he enters room): They’re not real. Just to look like scientist, you know. {{slam!}}
    (Re: “slam” — when you are a small child and want the big people to notice you, you have to make a loud noise}}

    • Janice …. that’s not Pretty-Boy Trudeau, is it?
      If it is, nice change from posing in front of his full-length mirror, and obsessively taking ‘selfies’.

    • If you refer to HM The Queen as the official Invitee, methinks she is far from being a ‘clown’, which is more than can be said for some of her offspring. (This is all to do with sucking-up apologetically to President Trump after the ‘slagging’ he got (pre-election) from HM’s Govm’t and from the ever-sensationalist Brit media. Talk about ‘eating Crow big-time!’)
      If, on the other hand, you refer to the Invited, that is Pres. Trump, I would say the answer is obvious: “By being a Clown and WINNING THE ELECTION”.
      The mind boggles at the prospect of a Clowns’ Convention on Global Warming. (I’m dead-certain H.M. — a smart cookie — will stay well-clear!

  15. Charles SACHSEN-COBURG-GOTHA, aka Windsor, one of the last vestiges of the German lineage.

    Katherine Bowes-Lyon ?

    • Charles is a Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, not a Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, like his mom, whose grandad was granted the alias Windsor during WWI. Prince of Whines Chucks’ dad Phil wanted to change the dynastic name to Battenberg (his mom’s family, Anglicized to Mountbatten), but the Palace said ixnay on that, so Windsor it remains.

      Charles’ grandparents are the Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburgs and Battenbergs on his dad’s side and Saxe-Coburg-Gothas and Bowes-Lyons on his mom’s. Queen Mum Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon’s mom was Cecilia Cavendish-Bentinck, hence she was half Scottish and half English, pickled in gin.

  16. One of my great uncles once said to by great grandmother (born in 1867 in Billings, Montana and immigrated to Canada):
    “Grandma, you never listen to me.”
    She said:
    “Nelson, I listen to you. I hear what you say, I consider it – and then I do as I dam well please!”

    I suspect Trump has a bit of that old western feistiness in him.

    • Grandmas should NOT be messed with.

      Here’s one saving the day from green-goo-filled-headed America-haters

      (youtube — “Mars Attacks”)

      And a young man. There are LOTS of dedicated-to-truth young people out there. There IS hope for America!

      Truth wins. In the end. Every time.**

      (Note: That ev1l will, once again, raise its greedy, tyrannical, head does not negate that fact, for it rises only to be defeated in the end; and, one day, The End will come and Truth will win. Forever and ever. :) )

      • Ms. Moore:
        I have a coupla responses from you to my inputs, but am buggahed if I can open them any-which-way.
        I have always enjoyed yr ‘spunky’ and apposite contributions … methinks our thinking is parallel if not pretty consonant.
        And so — out of respect — it bothers me if *you* find fault in what I say, but how to connect? Is there a way via the WUWT Pooh-Bahs to facilitate email contact? Needless to say, I’ve been a Professional all my life, am 74, and straight-as-a-die. You have prob’ly gathered (as I have with you) that we both are committed to The Ultimate Truth, and not tendentious B_S.
        With kind regards, ross

      • Mr. Ross (blush),

        Thank you for so kindly responding to my “Hey! Hey!!!” comments. Here is the comment I was trying to link to: (Me above at 2:54pm today ) It is not the “bat-ears,” it is what is not between those ears.

        (HAD to pipe up, here, for someone very dear to me has the same adorable ears)

        I have no disagreement with your substance, just that particular pejorative. When you love someone very much, it’s easy to get your feelings hurt over such things. I hope you understand.

        Re: connecting…. best not, I think. You sound lovely — for someone whose heart is available. Mine is not. You can’t see the gold band on the 4th finger of my left hand, but, it’s there. You may have just been kidding me, but, just in case, I thought it good to get that said. And no, I would prefer not to “just be friends” as pleasant as I’m sure that would be (I am honoring my heart and my promise — no male friends for me; he deserves to be honored in that way).

        That said, you CAN connect with people if you ask a mod.. Just type out in full “moderato_” and ask for your e mail to be sent to whomever. How about Annie? She sounds very nice from what I’ve read in her comments over the years. :)

        Well, I can tell you this, like it or not!, I’m adding you to my list of people for whom I’m praying this prayer: “Please make ___ into a truly loving couple with someone for whom he/she is perfect and who is perfect for him/her.” One person on that list found “her!!!” I’m taking that as a “Yes” (from God)! :) She is out there, Ross…. don’t give up. She’s looking for you, too, you know.

        With a smile and warm wishes for your Valentine’s Days to be much happier before too long,

        Janice

      • Mr. Ross,

        You did not understand what I wrote? If you ask a more detailed question than, “Eh?”, lol, I might be able to make myself clear.

        Janice

      • Ms. Moore:
        In furtherance of our dialog, my first observation is of massive misunderstandings. I will dwell no more on the subject, except to say that I limit communications to the purely OBJECTIVE — in context of the Blog.
        In that regard, I welcome a continuation of communication thro’ these open channels.

      • Thank you, Mr. Ross, for your explanation. I would not write one more word on this, but, I am so embarrassed at sharing such personal information based on what you now tell me was a gross misunderstanding of your meaning that I’m writing just this bit (when one is embarrassed one feels a strong need to justify oneself!). Your comment above to which I responded at length did, you must admit, end with what bore a strong resemblance to a “Personals” ad. “Straight male, professional, 74….”

        Aaaaa. Gotta go do something else for awhile, like put a brown paper bag over my head. That was so embarrassing…

        And yet… I’m glad I got to say what I did, too…

  17. On the other hand the state visit may well be postponed for a while…1.8 million Brits have signed this petition https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/171928 in the last couple of days, it states –

    “Donald Trump should be allowed to enter the UK in his capacity as head of the US Government, but he should not be invited to make an official State Visit because it would cause embarrassment to Her Majesty the Queen.”

    Old mother May was stupid to suggest it at this time, apparently the diplomats are now running around like headless chickens in a damage limitation exercise.
    There will be huge protests over his lock-down & they would join with the CAGW mob (also quite large, but slowly diminishing) so a state visit now would not be good for anyone. let the dust settle for 12mths
    But Trump & Dumbo slugging it out (I’d pay to see that).

    • *Love* yr analysis!
      I’ll pay big-$ for a public denouement between Bat-Ears & Trump.
      Having said, P.M. May has some serious ‘damage-control’ on her hands. I think she was right to extend the invitation … and let the paid-diplomatic-grunts sort-out the details. Good “Top-Down” thinking in this instance.
      For those followers here who might be anxious that *we* are losing objective focus on Climate Science, I wd urge them to consider that Climate Science has become so politicized that one can’t compartment Science from Politics any more.
      Sad the day …

    • Donald Trump should make a State Visit to the United Kingdom.

      Donald Trump should be invited to make an official State Visit because he is the leader of a free world and U.K. is a country that supports free speech and does not believe that people that appose our point of view should be gagged.

      http://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=178844

      This was setup a couple of days ago and has already 186,856 signatures (>100k should be debated)
      a rate of ~62,000/day
      The anti-Trump was setup 65 days ago and has 1,771,200 signatures
      a rate of ~27,000/day
      I haven’t looked at the JSON data (links are on each page) and I don’t have any graphing tools handy but maybe someone can plot a graph (there are some good graphers on here) so we can see what is going on.

      From the interactive maps (links are on each page) it is clear that the anti-trump signatures are coming mainly from London, and university towns. All those right-on snowflakes that need safe spaces and trigger warnings.
      It is clear that the pro-trump signatures are spread fairly evenly across the rest of the UK excluding London and university towns.
      It is clear who is going to win this debate. My vote is on the adults and not the students and chatterati in their bubbles.

      • He has already BEEN invited.
        By the time he comes the students will be in the middle of exam season. Simple choice, pass or protest :)

  18. If I were Trump I would come prepared. Are Lindzen, Christie, Spencer, Happer, etc doing anything that day? Why not see HRH, with any of his chosen advisors present, and then discuss it.

    Evidence passed on, verbally, from plants will not be allowed. (HRH talks to his plants!)

  19. “Prince Charles bizarre climate antics include taking a five day $80,000 trip on the Royal Train around Britain, to lecture people about climate change – right in the middle of a government austerity programme, which included extensive public sector job losses.

    In February 2010, Prince Charles called into the working class city of Manchester to tell everyone that climate skeptics are liars – after arriving on a coal powered replica of a 1948 steam locomotive.”

    What a hypocrite! And for us mere mortals we sit at home with a special light bulb and one shopping bag for life.

  20. I am surprised that you didn’t mention how corrupt the old fool is. Under the Duchys land in Cornwall lies £50BILLION of Lithium, required for electric car batteries. So perhaps he can help out his mum with her large bill for renovating Buck Palace. But most of that £50B will come indirectly from subsidies paid to buyers of Telsa and Leaf electric cars. And he thinks fossil fuel producers are corrupt.

  21. Charles I was rightfully executed as a traitor. His son Charles II also would have been, had his secret pact with Britain’s enemy French King Louis XIV been known at the time. His brother James II was deposed in the Glorious Revolution, which gave Britain its now practically dead letter Bill of Rights.

    The jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles would be well advised to take the regnal name of George, in keeping with his mainly German ancestry. ERII at least is half Scottish, unlike her almost totally German and Danish father and other paternal forbears and 3/4 Continental spawn.

  22. Hilarious … Hopefully someone will capture one of Trump’s classic facial expressions.
    Images of Prince Chucky always remind me of what some of my neighbours would say when he got off the train at Builth Road Station:
    “You’re not Prince of Wales – pi$$ off back to England.”
    Not said VERY loud of course, as the usual compliment of spooks were present.

    • I would have thought that anyone associated with the British Monarchy would be a little bit silent on WW11.
      They did have some dubious relationships with Adolf et al before the fun started.

  23. “The jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles”
    Hang on, he’s our jug-eared, dim-witted, pompous Teutonic twit Charles.

    BUT…. we are willing to trade him for Homer Simpson or Bart or…
    Tell you what, just take him & don’t brig him back.

    • just tell him the manbearpig is lurking in the cellars at Sandringham and leave him to get on with the search.

    • You have my sympathy.

      How about ridding yourselves of that dysfunctional family and letting the House of Lords chose someone of real accomplishment as head of state, calling him or her king or queen if you want, whether for life or a fixed term?

  24. A man who commits adultery is a cad (worse, but, that word will do for now).

    A man who commits adultery against a woman like Princess Diana
    and (that alone would be enough, but, this clinches the verdict)
    with a woman like MRS. Camilla B.

    is insane.

    Who takes him seriously?

    • With respect Janice, you know not whereof you speak.

      A man who commits adultery against a woman like Princess Diana, deserves sympathy and respect.

      (Hint: Public image is not the reality, as any climate change denier will tell you).

      Why did Diana die in a Mercedes?

      She wouldn’t be seen dead in a Porsche…

    • Camilla’s husband didn’t care about her affair with Charles.

      Diana promptly started having her own affairs. Charles might not be Harry’s dad.

  25. Whenever this Clown Prince makes an utterance, I am reminded of Christopher Hitchens insightful description of this Royal buffoon:

    “This is what you get when you found a political system on the family values of Henry VIII. At a point in the not-too-remote future, the stout heart of Queen Elizabeth II will cease to beat. At that precise moment, her firstborn son will become head of state, head of the armed forces, and head of the Church of England. In strict constitutional terms, this ought not to matter much. The English monarchy, as has been said, reigns but does not rule. From the aesthetic point of view it will matter a bit, because the prospect of a morose bat-eared and chinless man, prematurely aged, and with the most abysmal taste in royal consorts, is a distinctly lowering one.”

  26. Of course Trump could just subtly remind him of what happened the last time England tried to push the issue with the USA?

    • On July 4, 1776, King George III made this diary entry: “Nothing of importance happened today”

      Never was a diary entry more incorrect.

      • This is the monarch whose reputation Cheesy Chuck wants to revive. The only good thing you can say about the misrule of George III is that it hastened the advent of monarchs who reign but don’t rule, ie the modern constitutional monarchy. Any ruler so incompetent as to have lost the most valuable colonial possession any nation ever possessed is beyond redemption. And this display of world class incompetence came before he went nuts from porphyria or what ever inherited malady afflicted the loser.

        India might have been more valuable to Britain in 1776, but I doubt it. However, the 13 English-speaking American colonies were at that time poised to break out in a burst of economic development almost without parallel in history. Already valuable for rum, tobacco, rice, timber and fish, the new US was set to become a cotton and corn farming, canal and RR building, forestry, fisheries, fur, factories, iron and coal colossus. This was largely thanks to breaking out of the constraints on expansion and trade set up by HM’s regimes. The Revolution unleashed the energy and inventiveness of her previously subject peoples and new arrivals.

        His bad. No wonder the Clown Prince so admires his incompetent ancestor (his mom’s playboy great granddad’s deranged great grandad).

      • German British monarchs reviewed:

        EII: Raised a generation of dissolute playboys and girls plus a defective, jug-eared pompous twit-goon.
        GVI: Chain-smoking stutterer.
        GV: Stuffed shirt who let the Commies kill his cousins, then tried to blame the PM for his own cruelty.
        EVII: Dissolute playboy.
        V: Reclusive hemophilia carrier.
        WIII: Dissolute playboy.
        GIV: Fat dissolute playboy.
        GIII: Mad incompetent.
        GII: Given to mistresses, short temper and boorishness, at odds with both his father and son.
        GI: Dissolute playboy who spoke no English, married to despised first cousin.

  27. I thought Charles was on the “No-fly” list? No matter… The President is 884 days older than HRH, but years ahead of him in getting things done AND understanding the REAL world. I seriously doubt HRH could bring up anything that would be a sticky wicket for the President. Oh, and DJT was born on a Friday, while HRH was born on a Sunday…
    Friday’s child is loving and giving,
    But the child who is born on the Sabbath day
    Is bonnie and blithe and good and gay.
    Kind of says it all, doesn’t it?

  28. Charles may not be the sharpest monarch…. but he knows a whole lot more than Trump about climate change. If you disagree, tell me one sensible thing Trump has ever said on the topic that shows he has even a basic understanding.

    • Huh?

      I think the courtiers have scooped up al those inconvenient film clips of Charles stand in a dustbin on a stage at university pretending to be a Goon.

    • No, he doesn’t. Chucky is an ignoramus.

      You want just one comment from Trump? How about, “When I hear Obama saying that climate change is the No. 1 problem, it is just madness.”

      • Have you ever served in the armed forces?

        If you’re a general officer, you say what you’re ordered to say or resign. And no flag officer has resigned in decades.

        No one in the military actually believes that climate change is our No. 1 problem. They’re just following orders to repeat the party line.

      • “They’re just following orders to repeat the party line.”

        when ‘climate scientists’ do that… WE jump all over them.
        When guards in extermination camps say “just following orders” we prosecute them,
        wheres the moral difference ?

      • The three and four stars now parroting the party line will retire and be replaced by Trump/Mattis appointees who recognize real rather than imaginary problems.

    • Perhaps, Simon, HRH Charles knows a whole lot more than Trump about climate change. Nevertheless, because Charles does not know, among other significant facts, that the IPCC’s climate models have been falsified and the conjecture about human CO2 emissions is “not-proven” (at best — no mid-troposphere hot spot did it in long ago), it is clear that he does not know enough.

      • Janice

        “IPCC’s climate models have been falsified” Really? Show me the research that says it has been falsified?

      • Grow up, Simon.

        If you don’t have the brains to compare reality with climate model predictions, you shouldn’t be acting like a twit.

        Oh, wait–you ARE acting like a twit.

        An uneducated, falsifiable twit.

        Now, take your nasty behavior and go join Soros’ dull-tool horde.

        Thanks and have a good day!

      • RockyRoad January 31, 2017 at 11:54 pm
        “Grow up, Simon.

        If you don’t have the brains to compare reality with climate model predictions, you shouldn’t be acting like a twit.

        Oh, wait–you ARE acting like a twit.

        An uneducated, falsifiable twit.

        Now, take your nasty behavior and go join Soros’ dull-tool horde.

        Thanks and have a good day!”

        Actually I thought my comments to Janice were rather polite given we obviously disagree (as were hers). Yours on the other hand were those of a play ground bully…. Perhaps you need to take your own advice offered in the first line of your comment…..

    • One good thing that may come out of the book. It repeated something in an UNIPCC presentation to summarize the UNIPCC AR5 summary of the Synthesis report (which is a summary of the 3 WG reports). Only the Ladybird Book has a nice egg-timer picture.

      Slide 33 of 35 was this:-

      It makes policy fairly simple. Assuming that a doubling of CO2 leads to 3C of warming, and 17 GtCO2 raises CO2 levels by 1ppm, then 1000 GtCO2 emissions after 2011 does indeed give 2C of warming.
      But (1) there are other GHGs, so we should have 2C of warming without any more emissions (2) By the same measure, increase of CO2 from 280 to 400ppm alone should generate >1.5C of warming, so talk of constraining warming to 1.5C only makes sense if climate sensitivity is much lower.

      More details
      https://manicbeancounter.com/2017/01/31/ipcc-ar5-synthesis-report-presentation-miscalculated-the-emissions-for-2c-of-warming/

      • Common man. There is no CAGW problem. Observations and analysis do not even support AGW.

        1) The 20th century warming is not statistically significant (i.e. there has been other periods of warming and cooling in the recent human history post 1850 that is similar to the 20th century. There has been 19 years of no significant warming.

        2) The latitudinal pattern of warming does not match that predicted by the AGW theory. (There is too much observed warming in the Northern Hemisphere ex-tropics. There is hardly any warming in the tropics.) See paper link to below to back up that claim.) That fact indicates a significant portion of the 20th century warming has caused by something else than CO2. Hint solar modulation of clouds. No one is even discussing this observation.

        3) Even if 100% of the warming was caused by CO2, the amount of observed warming is significantly less than what is predicted by the IPCC used general circulation models (See link below). The most recent warmist response is the heat is hiding in the deep ocean. (No one has noticed that if there is mixing of surface water with deep water that will significant reduce/cap the rate of rise of atmospheric CO2. Is there no end to the problems for the warmists?)

        4) There is no tropical tropospheric warming. The IPCC general circulation models predict that the most warming on the planet should be at around 8km above the surface of the planet in the tropics. This predicted warming amplifies the CO2 forcing and is due to additional water vapor in the atmosphere. The 20 years of measurement by satellites and over a 100,000 weather balloons supports the assertion that there is no tropical tropospheric warming. Lindzen and Choi’s analysis (2009 and 2011 papers) shows that planetary clouds in the tropics increase or decrease to resist forcing changes by reflecting more or less sunlight off into space. That result explains why there is no tropical tropospheric warming and explains why there is almost no long term warming of the tropics.

        5) A 1000 years ago it was as warm or warmer than current temperatures. Atmospheric CO2 did not cause that warming. There are cycles of warming and cooling in the paleo record. The cycles of warming and cooling are not caused by changes in atmospheric CO2. There is no explanation for past cyclic warming and cooling that matches the pattern of the 20th century warming.


        http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.0581.pdf

  29. Poor Charles was raised in a slightly disfuncional household. His father once said:

    “If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

    His mum is a good woman though. If only she’d pass the crown directly to William, leaving Charles to his eco-madness

    • ‘Aye’ to that suggestion hands-down …. but constitutionally this likely wd be impossible (comments pls?!) The Succession is just that.
      One might hope that Bat-Ears will forego in favour of Wills, but don’t forget that he has a vast army of Courtly sycophants who want *their* Day in the Sun … headed by Camilla? Forget the fact that the new Emperor will have vestigial clothing (at best) … he will be surrounded and protected as a figure-head anyway.

      • Parliament can do whatever it wants. They beheaded Charles I, gave the crown back to his older son Charles II, overthrew his other son James II in favor of his daughters, then skipped over a bunch of Catholics with a better claim on the throne to chose George I, who didn’t speak English.

      • I sand corrected …. thanx for the historical perspective (thanx to lousy teacher, I *HATED* History!)
        This raises the very interesting q. as to *how* Parliament wd contrive to by-pass Charles and move to King William? Moral suasion is one thing, but …..!
        Wd love to hear further comments.

      • “Parliament can do whatever it wants. They beheaded Charles I, gave the crown back to his older son Charles II, overthrew his other son James II in favor of his daughters, then skipped over a bunch of Catholics with a better claim on the throne to chose George I, who didn’t speak English.”

        British history is a bit like a Whitehall farce

      • Ross,

        Beheading Charles I of course came after many years of civil war between Parliament and royalists. And the Glorious Revolution of 1688 required an invasion by William of Orange AND an Act of Parliament, then James’ defeat at the Battle of the Boyne by William (married to his cousin, James’ giant Protestant daughter Mary). However Parliament all by itself selected George I as king.

        It’s unlikely that Parliament would pass an act disinheriting Charles, despite his unpopularity. But nothing could stop them, except maybe the new Supreme Court, which recently replaced the House of Lords as Britain’s top legal authority.

  30. The world dodged a bullet with Brexit. And another won with Donald J. Trump. The third bullet dodges was recently when teh queen overcame an illness with the potential to be fatal. If this deluded old fool chuck ever ascends to the throne, that will be the end of the monarchy.

    • Elizabeth has done really well in difficult circs.
      The future looks like Holly-scripted scenarios (get on it!) Charles ascends w/Camilla. Unrest; pressure; historical precedents galore; Charles abdicates/doesn’t; Camilla as force-behind-the-throne along with Charles’ court & courtesans; Wills’ Court & Kate ‘in-play’ … a script-writer’s paradise!
      Anyway, I stand accused of my own call to culling UK Succession issues from a sober, Science-only Blog.
      P.S. Side-bar is that we ignore the supposedly non-objective stuff at our peril. Does Bat-Ears have an influential “Halo-Effect” along with twits like Bono, diCaprio, Fonda, and the rest of the H’wood glitterati (glitterfarti?) joining the band-wagon to hubristically maximize their future box-office takes in the evenings of their productive years?

  31. You aren’t understanding what Royalty means, Charles doesn’t have to care what you think. He lives a life of incredible privilege, he owns most of Cornwall so he’s worth more than Trump, he doesn’t face re-election in 4 years time and he gets to hand it all on to his kids :)

    • In my opinion that is the craziest of all…..the royals, based purely on the blood their veins, live on the dole with free food, free transportation, free lodging, free walking around money….what a charmed life.

      They have the greatest government pension in the world.

  32. Too bad Chuck doesn’t smoke. His grandad Bertie, aka George VI, died aged 56 from the evil weed, putting his mom on the throne before she was ready.

  33. If “Chuck” doesn’t get it then neither does Prince William. Not going to happen. Kate will be Queen.

      • Okay, I got the name wrong, it is called getting old. My point was that Charles may be unpopular but his offspring are not. The monarchy is secure.

    • Robin Hewitt, Have you never read/seen Shakespeare’s “Richard III?” He killed those little boys for a reason… .

      • Janice,

        first thought was ‘what reason’

        – then ‘uh, same reason with’

        Charles, Prince William.

        According to known dynastic thinking.

        v’

      • Richard III killed not only his two young nephews, but previously, along with his older brother King Edward IV, their middle brother. He might also well have murdered Edward too. And he accused his mom of being a slut.

        The so-called Windsors aren’t quite as bad as the Yorks, but probably only because the stakes aren’t as high.

  34. ATTENTION!!!! We’ve wandered-off into non-Scientific speculation about Brit. Succession.
    To the marginal extent that Charles’ accession *might* impact UK’s future GW policy, that’s fine .. but it is speculation.
    Enough… enough?

  35. He’s the result of generations of inbreeding. I find it funny that Ladybird books are now *EXPERT* books! Really?

  36. Charles will have far more to contend with than bees and homeopathy onced once Mummy is gone. His mother has been a brilliant queen holding together a monarchy in many countries by sheer will and example despite the British press and her oddball son’s shenanigans. She, and everyone else, knows that Charles isn’t up to the task. Countries such as Canada will finally leave the ‘constitutional monarchy’ behind and transition to a monarchy-free structure.

    It really isn’t his fault he’s a dimwit but it can’t be fixed. I sometimes wonder if Her Majesty is hanging on ’til the end in the off chance that Charles goes first.

  37. I believe that it is not a good idea for Mankind to be burning up the Earth’s very finite supply of fossil fuels just as quickly as possible. I would like to add AGW as another reason to conserve. The AGW conjecture sounds plausable at first and should be easy to sell to children but there are some very serious problems that everyone should be aware of including Prince Charles. The IPCC, in part to provide evidence to support the AGW conjecture, sponsored the generation of a plethora of climate models. The fact that there are so many different models is evidence that a lot of guess work has been involved. If they really know how the climate system worked then there would be just one model. The Plethora of models has generated a Plethora of predictions as what the global average temperature should now be. They do have one thing in common however. They have all been wrong. So if the models provide evidence of any kind it is that there is something seriously wrong with the AGW conjecture. On the other hand, others have produced models that do not include any CO2 warming that better track climate for the past 200 years and do adequately predict today’s global temperature. Based on the modeling results and the paleoclimate record it seems best to assume that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. We cannot force Mother Nature to supply the ideal climate for everyone but we must adapt to what ever Mother Nature dishes out. After more than two decades of effort, the IPCC has been unable to measure the climate sensivity of CO2 and has not been able to narrow the range of there gesses as to the climate sensivity one iota. All of what the IPCC has is accomplished is consistant with the idea that the climate sensivity of CO2 is really zero. I would like to see Prince Charles include these IPCC based results in a Ladybird book.

    From first principlas one can derive the Lapse rate that has been observed in the tropoaphere and the insulation effect of the atmosphere due to the heat content of the atmosphere, the pressure gradient as providef for by gravity and the depth of the troposphere. Such a derivation is of a convective greenhouse effect which keeps the surface of the Earth 33 degrees C warmer than it would be without an atmosphere. 33 degrees is the derived amount and 33 degrees C is what has been observed. A radiant greenhouse effect upon which the AGW conjecture is based has not been observed in a real greenhouse, in the Earth’s atmosphere or on any planet in the solar system with a thick atmosphere. Without a radiant greenhouse effect the AGW conjecture is nothing but science fiction. Charles needs to include this information in one of his Ladybird books,

    • ” So if the models provide evidence of any kind it is that there is something seriously wrong with the AGW conjecture. On the other hand, others have produced models that do not include any CO2 warming that better track climate for the past 200 years and do adequately predict today’s global temperature. Based on the modeling results and the paleoclimate record it seems best to assume that the climate change we are experiencing today is caused by the sun and the oceans over which Mankind has no control. We cannot force Mother Nature to supply the ideal climate for everyone but we must adapt to what ever Mother Nature dishes out.”

      Really long for ongoing bordom – i.e. long live without hearing about ‘climate change’.

    • “Government officials believe that the Prince’s passion to protect the environment is hugely respected abroad and that he can play an increasing important role as he inevitably moves closer to becoming king.”

  38. The Bonnie Prince is a burden our Brit friends bear. I will respectfully refrain.

    On this side feel free to slang the hell out of our little tin gods. We do it day and night with great gusto. No offense taken.

  39. Stay home Chuck if you are going to do a mini me Al gore speech . Climate changes , always has , and thankfully it’s warming . Humans influence everything and if it’s a bit of warming good . Obviously conserve energy but the scary global warming con game undermines science and other environmental priorities .
    100 months to “save ” the world . Really ? Zero credibility . Stay home and look after your amazing wonderful Mom .

  40. How great would it be if trump invited Charles to come and visit him for a round of golf at his Scottish estate?

  41. Prince Charles is a bullheaded guy
    With the science IQ of Bill Nye
    Which means he’s a jerk
    Who has never done work
    And whatever he says is a lie

  42. As migrants to Oz in the early fifties my father learned quickly the advantages of being a royalist.

    One day a health inspector came by and my father duly invited him to have a cuppa tea (coffee or wine just did not resonate with the Ozzie palate in those days).

    As he sat down he observed a cheap, single page calendar prominently displayed on the wall with the picture of QEII saying “Oh, you have a picture of the queen!” My father responded enthusiastically to the inspector’s beaming expectations and approval.

    When leaving my father queried that he had not yet gone to inspect the chooks’ pen. No need as the inspector was sure they were perfectly fine and trotted off with little ado.

    To his death my father’s annual order with local traders was for a calendar displaying the queen; he was a fast learner in a new country.

    Oz is a constitutional monarchy with QEII as head of state. There is much affection for her but there is little doubt we will dispense with royalty and become a republic if Charles ascends to the throne. Few want a head of state who talks to trees, wants to be a tampon or jail skeptics to highlight just a few of his daft proclivities. My father would not be impressed!

    • With a different method of selecting the president, the 1999 republic vote might have been closer than 45-55%.

      If Canada and Australia go republican, can Britain be far behind? Popularities of Charles and William are down a bit, but still positive and up from Chuck’s low of 39% approval.

  43. I can easily see Trump smiling condescendingly at Charles and saying, “Well, Your Highness—I guess that’s what they still call you, despite your manifest smallness—you seem to me to be another example of centuries-long inbreeding among European royals, propped up by tradition and sentimentalism, and otherwise full of more shit than a Christmas Goose.”

  44. “I believe that it is not a good idea for Mankind to be burning up the Earth’s very finite supply of fossil fuels just as quickly as possible.”

    But we’re not. Start with nuclear power, which the warmistas irrationally hate.

  45. King Charlie

    Rue Brittania here comes your king
    The leaden will replace the gold
    He’s something of a feckless thing
    And something of a nasty scold

    The scepter of too great a weight
    His head to small to fit the crown
    And swaddled in the robes of state —
    The monarchy is sizing down

    Eugene Wr Gallun

  46. The Queen is highly respected because she never talks politics in public (she do have a backstage role, no more). Cimate-change is politics.
    Prince Charles talks too much, he is ill-prepared to the silence that fits his future role as king. That’s why so many people hope him to skip his turn in favor of Harry

  47. As my wife said when Charlie came on tv to flog his book and views on climate change: ‘Don’t just yell at the tv – write to him…’
    So I did.
    I’m expecting the convoy of black Range Rovers containing men in grey suits wearing earpieces,to rock up in front of my house any time soon…..

  48. A dynasty is always established by someone who is energetic, intelligent and capable. With primogeniture, and regression to the mean, the royal heirs gradually get to be of ordinary energy, intelligence, and capability, and wind up in over their heads when dealing with rulers of other nations..

    The death of Queen Elizabeth II might be a good time for the UK to abolish the royal title.

    • Abolish the hereditary rule but keep the title and sacred coronation. Plus the palaces and guard changings, etc, for the sake of tourism.

      Or find a more deserving family, if it must be hereditary. A majority of Britons descend from royalty, so open it up to all of them.

    • Except for the Hanoverian dynasty, from which the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas (“Windsors”) descend. Its lethargic, dumb and incompetent German founder was placed on the throne by Parliament by virtue of being a Protestant, even if Lutheran and not Anglican.

    • Aw geez, someone already said it in the exact same words. I should have searched before I posted. I just knee-jerked because of the ridiculousness that this ass wipe might one day be the Monarch.

  49. I just hope that Trump reminds Charlie boy that he called climate change disbelievers headless chickens for not believing the hundred months to uncontrollable global warming tipping point and that the hundred months has virtually expired with no change except for the adjustments made to the data by the climate scientists.
    By normal pre climate science rules of science that make the theory a fraud. Our would be monarch might do well to remember what happens to odd monarchs called Charles.

  50. As an Englishman I cannot understand why his very intelligent parents haven’t pointed out the facts!
    He obviously doesn’t talk to his sister, Princess Anne, who has more savvy in her small fingernail!

  51. This is a useless, politically inspired post that doesn’t contribute anything to scientific debate. It’s only contribution is to help people afflicted with insomnia. Anthony, time to get rid of Eric before I get rid of WUWT.

  52. Still, with comments about Camilla, and Roger’s mention of Princess Anne, there lingers the question: “Which one’s the horse?”

  53. I’m fascinated — and bothered — to the extent that Brit Royal Succession has ***SOOOOOO**** dominated these columns.
    I return to my Mantra: “What properly and acceptably accredited qualifactions do *[you]* (as a self-proclaimed authority) have to pontificate on matters “Climate-Scientific” beyond the opinions of a lay-person? Qualifications that command the respect by the open-minded, pragmatic, qualified, practitioners of Paleo-Historic Climate Science?
    Back to Bat-Ears HRH Clown (oooops! Crown) Prince, and back to Donald Trump. I would suggest that the former trying to lecture the latter is an exercise of the ‘Enviro-functionally but perhaps well-meaning blind’ trying to convert the ‘Inconvertibly pragmatic, common-sense’ revolutionary’ that Trump brings (at last!) in the context of affordable power for all, and the never-ending benefits to mankind of harnessing it.
    Bat-ears will, without question, have his stand-by generators and water-supply (courtesy of the State??) and is — and will be — insulated from the effects of the Creed that He preaches. He is *not* qualified to represent the day-to-day survival issues affecting the serfs in his future(?) realm. If He starts to lecture Trump, I suggest Bat-Ears be asked to prove the acceptance of His ideology by his future underlings…. down to sky-rocketing electricity bills.
    P.S. For anyone who has an axe to grind, include me as a lay-person with hopefully intelligent questions, but no answers in the scientific context … I limit my opinions to non-scientific issues, and challenging the self-serving propagandists, B_S artists, sinecure-retaining Scientists, pork-troughing opportunists of all sorts who are riding this Scam for all they’re worth, and who are trying to propagandize us proles in following-along.

Comments are closed.