“‘Monckton’ and ‘debunked’ have been placed side-by-side in almost as many articles, letters, blogs and websites as the words ‘peanut’ and ‘butter.'”
The Capitol Weekly (Sacramento) screams:
If you haven’t found yourself walking out of a presentation and asking, “did that really just happen?,” you haven’t heard Lord Christopher Monckton speak about climate change or how he refers to people who care about stopping it.
It’s almost beyond belief that a California legislator has invited the world’s best-known climate skeptic to give two “talks” today in Sacramento. It is surprising given that his regularly cited factoids and assertions have been refuted by innumerable actual scientists, and that he calls those who disagree with him “Hitler Youth.”
Here’s what we find the most ironic about this. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who invited Monckton to Sacramento to advance her political agenda, co-authored a bill last year establishing California Holocaust Memorial Week. It proclaimed, “We must always remind ourselves of the horrible events of the Holocaust and remain vigilant against hatred, persecution, and tyranny lest these atrocities be repeated.” Why would she of all people give a State Capitol platform to a bully who openly uses hate speech—“Nazis,” “fascists,” and “Hitler youth”—to chew out those disagreeing with him?
It is also difficult to know where to begin putting together a scientific response to a person who has “no expertise in climate science or any science training whatsoever;” someone with a misleading résumé who uses inaccurate facts to make his flawed case that “global warming is bullsh*t.”
On his presentation style, it’s difficult to fault Monckton for responding to critics that find his methods fraudulent, distasteful and offensive. On the science front, it hardly makes sense to respond to his dubious claims by providing facts since the words ‘Monckton’ and ‘debunked’ have been placed side-by-side in almost as many articles, letters, blogs and websites as the words ‘peanut’ and ‘butter’…
When you use Godwin’s Law, you have lost the argument.
I had the pleasure of seeing Christopher Monckton debate the walarmists at Keele University in Staffordshire. He was magnificent. Of course, the aspect of his presentation that they hate the most is that he uses IPCC data to explain why there is no need to panic. Classic.
that’s much like the Goracle’s refusal to do an open debate with just about anyone from the rationalist side of the AGW broughaha. The all know how badly they’ll fare with their tattered ‘science’ arguments that are so demonstrably wrong.
Of the many folks I enjoy hearing/reading two stand out for me – Lord Monckton and Andy Breitbart. They both have that absolutely marvelous talent for causing liberal heads to explode just mentioning their names. Marvelous. [we’ll miss you around the campfires Andy]
The excerpt from Capitol Weekly was both highly amusing and deeply sad in exposing the writer’s unthinking and unquestioning bias. And since when did calling people Nazi’s, fascists and Hitler Youth become hate speech? At this point in time is all disparagement of others hate speech? What ISN’T hate speech under these guidelines? If I say that I hate someone does that mean it’s hate speech or do I only qualify if I say I hate someone because I think they are fascists?
Once again, exposing the bullshit, guesswork, and faulty conclusions of the alarmists. While reading the ad hominem laden response from the writer, it’s probably safe to conclude that Monckton made another climate alarmist cry. Gold star and bonus points, well done Monckton, keep up the good work.
Certainly had an effect on Nancy Skinner:
“Grove said she extended an invitation to debate with Lord Monckton to Berkeley Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, because Skinner is a self-described “climate change expert.” But Grove reported back that Skinner refused the offer to debate. Skinner said Lord Monckton “is not worthy” of talking with her.”
Whoa, inflated ego escape in section 8…
As far as I recall Lord Monckton collates his facts from climate scientists & organizations as he frequently refers to them by name, He then goes on to describe in great detail with legitimate calculations (which he is more than qualified to do) precisely how these scientists reach their conclusions,
So lets not attack somebody with a superior intellect with futile ad-homs without a justifiable reason as its coming across as nothing more than sour grapes on your part,
You might also want to consider refraining from inane & petty comments such as “fraudulent, distasteful & offensive” when there are people such as Peter Gleick for example (amongst others) who would fit that description so much better wouldnt you say?.
The moment I spotted the ad homs I knew the author was a warmist.
Well of course that is your opinion – the easy way to dismiss genuine people like Moncton is to attack them – the fact is that most of your lot just cannot stand the heat in the kitchen – when your house is built of cards it is easy for an intelligent brain such as Moncton’s to collapse it. As I have said many times – give us an irrefutable proven fact that supports your hollow cause – the only one I can think of is ‘socialism’