Monckton responds to Mann: Global warming has stopped. Get over it.

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
August 25, 2013

The collapsed global warming scare certainly has some odd characters coming to its defense in this paper. Michael Mann (Aug. 25), whom the Attorney General of Virginia investigated under the Fraud Against Taxpayers Act 2000 after some statistical peculiarities in Mann’s failed attempt to abolish the medieval warm period, now bloops another blooper.

He tries to deny the embarrassing near-17-year pause in global warming because “NASA found the warming continues unabated, with the past decade the warmest on record”. As an expert reviewer for the Fifth Assessment Report of the UN’s climate panel, let me correct his latest gaffe.

Moncton RSS

The monthly near-surface temperature record from the RSS satellites (above) shows no warming trend for 16 years 8 months. But go back 20 years and some warming shows up. The temperature climbed from 1993-1996, then stopped.

So the latest decade is a bit warmer than those that went before, but there has still been no warming for almost 17 years. Even the climate-science chairman of the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, admits that. Elementary, my dear Michael. Tut, tut! Statistics 101.

Mann says there is “evidence that humans are warming the planet”. There can’t be. For 200 months there has been no warming at all. Get over it. Get a life.

Mann says his discredited attempt to rewrite medieval temperatures “has not been disproved”. Well, here is what Professor Ross McKitrick, who exposed Mann’s statistical peculiarities in the learned journals, had to say about it:

“… The conclusions are unsupported by the data. At the political level the emerging debate is about whether the enormous international trust that has been placed in the IPCC was betrayed. The hockey stick story reveals that the IPCC allowed a deeply flawed study to dominate the Third Assessment Report, which suggests the possibility of bias in the Report-writing process. In view of the massive global influence of IPCC Reports, there is an urgent need to bias-proof future assessments …”.

And here is the report of three Congressional statisticians in 2006:

“… we judge that the sharing of research materials, data and results was haphazardly and grudgingly done. In this case we judge that there was too much reliance on peer review, which was not necessarily independent.

“Moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that this community can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility.

“Overall, our committee believes that Mann’s assessments that the decade of the 1990s was the hottest decade of the millennium and that 1998 was the hottest year of the millennium cannot be supported by his analysis.”

Mann goes on to say, “Dozens of independent groups of scientists have independently reproduced and confirmed our findings …”. His double use of “independent” was scarcely the mot juste. Here is what the three statisticians told Congress:

“In our further exploration of the social network of authorships in temperature reconstruction, we found that at least 43 authors have direct ties to Dr. Mann by virtue of co-authored papers with him.

“Our findings from this analysis suggest that authors in the area of paleoclimate studies are closely connected and thus ‘independent studies’ may not be as independent as they might appear on the surface.”

Mann then complains at my pointing out that his earlier offensive references to climate “ ‘deniers’ and ‘denialists’ would be illegal in Europe as being anti-Jewish, racialist hate-speech.” He says he is Jewish. Then he should know better than to use such unscientific and (in Europe) illegal terms, calculated to imply Holocaust denial on the part of his opponents.

Mann says the House of Lords says I am not a member when I say I am. Sigh! Mann knows no more of British constitutional practice than he does of elementary statistics. Hansard records that the House has recognized my title to succeed my late beloved father, but does not record the House as saying I am not a member. Facts wrong again, Mike, baby. Try doing science, not invective.

Finally, Mann says I “impersonated a delegate from Myanmar” at a UN conference. Do I look Burmese? Do I sound Burmese? Did the chairman of the conference say he thought I was Burmese? No. He said he knew I was not from Burma. Facts wrong yet again, Mickey.

Meanwhile, the world continues to fail to warm as predicted. Not only Attorneys General but also taxpayers will soon, and rightly, be demanding their money back from the grasping profiteers of doom who so monstrously over-egged this particular pudding.

Lord Monckton is an expert reviewer for the IPCC’s forthcoming Fifth Assessment Report. He has lectured worldwide in climate science and economics and has published several papers in the learned literature. Oh, and his passport says he is The Right Honourable Christopher Walter, Viscount Monckton of Brenchley.

18 thoughts on “Monckton responds to Mann: Global warming has stopped. Get over it.”

  1. This climate scientist you are talking about had the conviction that you should follow authorities without question; that is fascism. Many young environmentalists have no clue that they are the useful idiots (phrase by Lenin) in the march towards a green fascist communist world order. It is only fair to compare them to the Hitler Youth which members had no idea about the real policies Hitler was about to impose on Germany and the tragedy of following Hitler would eventually bring on Germany.

  2. Meanwhile, climate ethicist Peter Gleick remains eerily silent about Mann’s shameful unscientific conduct.

  3. Ms. Rimmington should know that using offensive words such as “denier” or “denialist” is illegal in Scotland, where causing gratuitous offence is a crime. I did not call any climate scientist a Fascist, though I once said a climate economist had expressed a Fascist opinion and apologized when a hard-Left journalist humiliated him by pushing the story all around the world. As for the Hitler Youth, that was a remark made by an 80+-year-old Copenhagen resident when he saw thugs from SustainUS break up a private meeting with shouted slogans and bullying. He burst into tears and said the last time he had seen a meeting broken up like that in Copenhagen was when the Hitler Youth had done it. I repeated the story. The goons in question put up a self-justifying clip on YouTube and were horrified when the comments ran more than 11:1 in my favour. So Ms. Rimmington may perhaps prefer to debate science rather than to accuse me, impertinently, of lying. I note that she is utterly unable to argue with any of the scientific points I made.

  4. When this fallacy is finally exposed to all, the last 10 years of misguided truths ,biased agendas and greed will give the world of science a huge black eye, the activities of Gore, Mann and Hanson will diminish the credibility of sound science. It is disgusting.

  5. Smart would be using the most efficient form of energy storage for any given project regardless of sociopolitical fads. Trying to shoehorn solar power into a project even if the numbers don’t add up to it being faster, better, or cheaper is the opposite of smart. The same would be true of putting a diesel powered generator on a calculator. Solar, and most other forms of energy storage or conversion, has a very specific set of uses to wich it is particularly well suited. Transportation and large scale residential power just aren’t in that set.

  6. It is simply the difference between right and wrong.
    The warmists are allowed to drag every vestige of both emotion and sensationalism in a weak attempt to push their agenda and when that is being threatened by ‘Facts’ then lets shoot the messenger – Why Elizabeth, if you wanted to challenge Moncton did you not come up with some proven warmist fact (not opinion) to counter Moncton’s dissertation – I suggest that you would find it extremely difficult since this man truly researches his subject before opening his mouth or putting pen to paper – something that you obviously have not in respect of the reality of the Holocaust and the laws subsequently pertaining to it!

  7. Howdy Elizabeth
    That’s a bit “you too”-ish but it has some validity. I’d prefer to see the climate debate kept on civil terms and in the bounds of science.
    Alas, people like Gore and Mann and Hansen have politicized the debate and demonized people like — well, people like Lord Monckton and me. At the same time, the demonization seems to require that “our” side respond dramatically and aggressively in order to be heard at all.
    “Tu qoque” is a weak defense. Yet the methods of the alarmists seem to require response in kind, a lesson that Republican politicians have trouble with.

  8. Howdy, friend Biggles
    Photovoltaic energy has been just around the corner since the first PV batteries a hundred years ago or so. Around the corner and running like heck, as the saying goes about prosperity under Roosevelt or Obama, but I digress.
    PV works, but the materials are far more costly than conventional generation and conventional energy so they have a higher ecological burden over their life cycle. PV is also intermittent. Storage of PV energy is expensive and that makes PV hard to integrate into electrical distribution systems.
    “If we’re smart enough…” to overcome the engineering obstacles, PV may have an increased role. Generally speaking, though, Milloynistas are more worried about the demands of the foolish to run an industrial economy on technology that is too weak to carry it at this point and will be too weak for the foreseeable future. We don’t have a religious commitment to burning stuff but many of us have a religious commitment to easing poverty and alternative energy — solar, wind, biomass — increase poverty rather than relieve it. Ask UK pensioners about that.

  9. As you may know, it is a direct untruth of Lord Monckton to state the using the word “denier” in Europe is illegal. It is not and to claim otherwise is dishonest. The fact that Monckton has chosen to describe environmentalists as Hitler Youth and to use a swastika in presentations where he has described a climate scientist as a fascist shows that Moncktonn takes offence on a preferential basis. That this site gives him credence on such matters suggest gullibility on your part.

  10. We are already using the sun for energy – without the sun there would be no plants because they need the power of the sun for photosynthesis to produce over 75% of their food requirement! Without photosythesis we would have no supply of oxygen (all comes from plant matter) and without that we are all gone so don’t worry about eventually – the sun is what gives us all life – the ultimate energy source bar none!

  11. Well, does that not just show that to be a true scientist you need to ‘Prove’ the hypothesis before continually banging on about your opinion and then ending up with egg on your face – this guy Mann has had thousands of words published that presumably have emanated from him, all of which it appears are only his opinion – very little scientific fact to back his assertions. In other words one great time waster and now an annoyance – Thank goodness for Monckton who at least researches his dissertations before delivering them.

  12. No one finds it easy to lose face once they’ve taken a position. Even harder when you’re a ‘scientist’ and have to admit you got suckered into buying the Brooklyn Bridge.

  13. Why Mann and his supporters continue to bang the same old drum when demonstrably he and his ilk are so wrong beggars belief – why does any journal/news outlet continue to play this same old cracked record?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.