Climategate: Once Respected Nature Now Staffed By Moaning Ninnies
The once-respected science journal Nature recently published a whining editorial to the effect that climate scientists are not criminals, really; that attacks on them by increasingly-skeptical news media are soooo unfair; and that the fundamental science showing that the planet is doomed unless the economies of the West are shut down at once is unchallengeable.
No doubt most climate scientists are not criminals. However, some are. Many of the two dozen Climategate emailers, who have for years driven the IPCC process, tampered with peer review in the learned journals, and fabricated, altered, concealed, or destroyed scientific data are criminals. Whether they or Nature like it or not, they will eventually stand trial, and deservedly so.
After all, the biofuel scam that is one of many disfiguring spin-offs from the “global warming” scare — driven by the poisonous clique of mad scientists whom Nature so uncritically defends — has taken millions of acres of farmland away from growing food for people who need it and towards growing biofuels for clunkers that don’t. Result: a doubling of world food prices, mass starvation, and death, leading to food riots in a dozen major regions of the globe.
You won’t have seen much about these riots in the Western news media: they are too busy reporting on every putative icicle putatively dribbling in putatively melting Greenland.
Where was Nature when James Hansen — a publicly funded “scientist” and political agitator “working” for NASA — publicly demanded that anyone who disagreed with his climate-extremist views be put on trial for “high crimes against humanity”?
Did Nature write a pompous, pietistic editorial drawing attention to the fact that the penalty for crimes against humanity is death, and asking whether demands that one’s scientific opponents should face potential execution constitute an appropriate contribution to scientific discourse? Did it heck! Nature was sullenly, culpably silent.
Hansen wrote a characteristically overblown op-ed in the British Marxist newspaper the Guardian last year, saying that sea level was about to rise by 246 feet.
Should I face trial and execution for pointing out, mildly, that Hansen knows no more about sea-level rise than a hedgehog, and that even the excitable UN climate panel puts 21st-century sea-level rise at a maximum of 2 feet?
Where was Nature when Al Gore’s mawkish, sci-fi, comedy-horror movie came out? Did it ever disclose even one of the three dozen serious errors or exaggerations in that dismal piece of pseudo-scientific propaganda? Did it heck! Gore’s climate-extremist views chimed with Nature’s own, so its editors were sullenly, culpably silent.
Where was Nature when the UN’s climate panel published, three times and in full color, a graph in its 2007 report purporting to show that the rate of warming over the past 160 years has itself increased, allegedly because of anthropogenic CO2 emissions, when the graph deployed a statistical technique so bogus that any pimply freshman doing Stats 101 would recognize the graph as tendentious, politicized nonsense?
Nowhere, that’s where.
The mindless mantra that moaning ninnies like Nature mumble over and over again is that, notwithstanding one, or several, or hundreds, or thousands of bloopers in the now-discredited climate “assessments” of the UN’s climate panel, the science is settled and the debate is over. Yet the debate rages on and — tell it not in Gath or Ashkelon — the skeptics are winning.
Well, that’s what happens when you shill for Al “ignore those ‘endangered’ polar bears raiding my garbage amid unseasonally heavy snow” Gore in abandonment of intellectual honesty.
Blew the coffee through the nose reading this. Love you Monckton. I get all globally warm and fuzzy when you climb on the pedestal and tell these charlatans where to get off. Thank you for everything you have done. In your way you have saved millions of lives from certain misery.
whats with the zits? It makes you sound like a ranting loony!Truth is you can be wrong or right regardless of age or complexion and your tone is counter-productive.
Bravo, Monckton. Trillions have gone down the drain and thousands, maybe millions, like in the DDT BS, may have died because of misdirection of resources. Especially topsoil and food used for combustion in place of the black goop in the ground meant for it.
As usual, Viscount Lord Monckton – spot-on. (BTW Why don’t you get involved in British politics – in particular, you would make an excellent replacement for the current head of the Conservative Party.) Unfortunately, here in the US we are still stuck in pre-November 2009 days. The MSM has buried the news and the politicians and the EPA are still gung-ho on reducing CO2. (Of course, I think the best to start in that reduction is at the EPA – they need to have exercises in how not to exhale.) The current nonsense with CO2 is much akin to the nonsense about DDT. How many people in Asia and Africa die every year because of Rachel Carson’s unscientific screed, Silent Spring? If they did it with DDT, they sure as heck are going to try and do it with CO2.
I’m thinking Nature’s editors have you just a bit irked.
Knowing a little bit about scientific academia, and having just read the Nature editorial yesterday, yes, those mewling editors deserve a fate worse than death, but let’s also include the optional punishment of sitting in a non-stop faculty meeting, which could be accomplished easily with virtual reality and simulator technology through Al Gore’s invention, the internets.
And no simulator controls, no Blackberry, no cell phone, no laptop or iPad, but forced to listen and if you say anything, no one can hear what you say.
Let the punishment fit the crime, I say.
A lot of folks believe that the worst case scenario for climate change is that the citizens of the world don’t change their habits, man-made CO2 production continues to increase and unprecedented changes to the world’s climate occur, with drastic consequences for the Earth and human civilization. But even if we believe the most dire predictions will actually come to pass (a conclusion based on a chain of reasoning, many of which are on very shaky ground), that the Dutch and the Bangledeshis will be up to their eyeballs in sea water, etc, even that would not be the worst case scenario. Realistically, the world economies of 2050 or 2100 are likely up to the task of confronting any of the most likely possibilities in regard to catastrophic climate change. The actual worst case scenario is that the scientific establishment of the west may become corrupted by the need to prove the theory of man-made catastrophic climate change independent of the evidence, and that this will further result in a widespread backlash against the scientific establishment and science in general, ultimately resulting in a new dark age within our lifetimes.
This is the fire that the cognoscenti are messing with when they imagine that corrupting the process of science just a teensy weensy little bit in the service of some abstract greater good is worth the trade off. It’s not worth that trade, the foundation of modern, western society if the scientific method, it would do no one any good to weaken that foundation even a little bit, in service to any cause, no matter how seemingly important.
You did not mention their second failed magazine…
Scientific American.
That once great publication is now nothing but a pile of left wing liberal rants with global warming being the top of the BS pile.
I have canceled my subscription and got a refund as I will vote with my pocketbook.
I will not support such left wing tin foil hatted self indulgent buffoonery.
Read the reviews for Scientific American that are posted on Amazon.com:
The comments go on and on….
LINK:
http://www.amazon.com/Scientific-American/product-reviews/B00008DP07/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Here is a sample:
“the magazine abandoned content written by scientists in favour of populist journalism”
“In almost every instance, the writers of Scientific American draw the immediate conclusion that only the government can possibly solve the pressing issues of the day.”
“Unfortunately this magazine has changed over the past year or two. The past six months have been so bad that I’m finally throwing in the towel and cancelling my subscription and looking for a replacement. Every issue now contains a steady dose of environmentalism that often only vaguely resembles science and could be better described as sensationalism. I’ve also noticed a recent trend of religion bashing, with the underlying message being that anyone who believes in God must be an ignorant rube.”
“The opinions are always slanted liberal, which is diappointing since I’d like both sides of issues. Sachs, in particular, has glaring inaccuracies in the last 3 issues. If the magazine is liberal biased, fine, I just wish they would be accurate.”
Well said sir! Now…if only we could get prosecutors to actually look into the fraud that has been perpetrated upon, not just America or the UK, but the world. The money that has been wasted and food that has not been grown in order to provide fuel are the real crimes against humanity. Unfortunately, we will probably never see these evil minded men and women prosecuted for their crimes.
Thank you, Lord Monckton, for expertly dissecting the many ways the AGW frauds and con artists are doubling down in their ideological bunkers even as their writings, organizations and reputations are being discredited and destroyed by their own willful blindness and hubris. They have done science as a whole no favors. One can only hope these frauds come to a proper end but given our mediocre political class (who have been in bed with the climate frauds for years), it seems unlikely.
Best line that describes the true goal of these hoaxers: “…that the fundamental science showing that the planet is doomed unless the economies of the West are shut down at once..” These people in their hearts fear and loathe humanity. They have been exposed as Stalinists, the world is onto their charade, and (as we say here in the U.S.) they have totally jumped the shark. They’re done.
Many of us would just be happy to see Algore broke and in prison…
It’s not hard to fool mother Nature; just ask Henrik Schon.
not just Nature, what about Science (the official voice of the AAAS), Scientific American, the New Scientist?
And it’s not just man-made global warming that the science journals are guilty of misrepresenting, there are other arenas of science (especially medical science) in which the same kind of dishonest censorship reins supreme. The science journals are just about numerous good old boy networks protecting the status quo across the board, real science be damned.
Wow! Why the hell don’t we Americans have anybody that can write like that?
Could Lord Monckton have a quiet word with Tory leader, David Cameron who from a double digit lead in the polls is dropping like a lead balloon.
The Tories were meant to be our saviours from twelve years of socialist hell, especially with Marxist Gordon Brown lying and spinning his new found merry way into our publics hearts.
Unfortunately on many fronts, Cammers resembles nothing more than a slightly warmed over version of the Scottish one eyed, kleptocratic psychopath and is still sticking to the same old, same old tired tale.
Rocks and hard places have never looked so similar within these guy’s convictional stances and even though our very own Phil Jones is now on the rack it seems the Tories breeze along with a ‘move along, nothing to see here’ attitude as if Climategate had never happened.
Climate, to twist an analogy, is the tip of the totalitarian Frankfurt School iceberg. Get that right and the whole politically correct pack of cards falls.
I think I like “‘zit-bespatterd editors” the most. Write-on, Lord Monkton.
Steven
PS…Lord of what, BTW?
The worst of this is the loss of credibility of science which is far worse than any Kansas or Texas school board getting excited about evolution. This is unmooring the whole field of climate science from reality. Some of us had doubts about the scientific merits of a field in which experiment was absent and politics was intensely interested. It will take a generation of honest inquiry before this field will have any credibility again.
I’m as big a critic of the AGW crowd as you’ll find, but you’re completely off target with your biofuel rant. It’s just factually garbage to blame biofuels for the run-up in food prices. In case you hadn’t noticed, all commodities ran up over the past 5 years. Not just corn and soy, but protein, industrial metals, precious metals, oil, gas … it was a commodity bubble, and food prices did not rise out of line with other commodities. Blaming biofuel for food price increases is doing the same thing that you accuse climate scientists of doing, which is attempting to pass off a spurious correlation as causation.
#60: Sharpshooter
I have no helpful data to add on this, but is it not possible that the amount of land (and other related resources, including labor, farm implements, shipping, etc.) diverted to biofuels may have caused scarcities in other,supposedly unrelated, farm products?
You know I think that this pretty much summarizes the current situation of the climate mememonic plauge. And there is absolutely nothing said that does not strike a cord of exteme reality and truth. I look back at “ancient history” 30 years ago and I can remember some of the motavations behind “renewable” energy sources . . . most of them had side benefits of lower impact on the climate . . . energy independence . . . improvement in environmental conditions . . . useful application of waste products . . . disease and pest control . . and perhaps other intrinsic benefits. I watched and respected Al Gore for his stance on “Smokey Mountain, Manila, Philippines” (the huge MSW mountain in which thousands of people lived). I personally became so socially apauled at the conditions that humanity was living under that I actually went to the Philippines and tried to help aliviate the problems through application of MSW-to-energy technology. I met with many, many politicians, up to and including President Fidel Ramos. I realized soon after this life altering experience that the existence of such conditions was not a technological problem . . . it was political . . . and technology and politics do not mix. It also became clear that no matter the economics . . . regardless of how feasible a technology is . . . that unless it can be taxed . . . either through existing tax structure or by creation of new . . . that nothing would ever happen.
Thus in todays world, where politics reins supreme . . . technological feasiblity carries NO significance. If politics makes money . . . technology absolutely is inconsequential. The politician is willing and ready to go to any extreme to make the technology believeable . . . even if it is based on bogus, fraudlent, massaged data.
By the way . . . all scientific problems ultimately morph into engineering challenges. Scientifically proven may not equal engineering feasible.
When you shout and name call, the other side looks like they are winning, even if they otherwise have nothing to say.
Nature and Lancet – I ignore any reports on their articles. I’m sure some of their articles are backed by scientifically sound research, but they’ve shown they are willing to publish garbage as well. Like any person who has proven themselves willing to lie, they can no longer be trusted on any matter.
I’d settle for getting our money back.
Chris, that was hilarious. Bravo.
Moncton is right on that Nature has embraced AGW beyond all rationality. Their recent editorials are borderline insulting to sceptics (‘deniers’) and I am sure will prove to be the beginning of the end of their inordinate influence. They run the real risk of degenerating into another Lancet. What’s next? Blaming global warming on the Israelis?
Ps. Lord Moncton, your arguments are compelling enough without resorting to ad-hom attacks.
DD
Marxism is a religion that considers itself a science. In this age of superstition, then, the high priests call themselves scientists–one of the many essential lies of marxism.
Global warming is the rock upon which our unjustified deference to scientists has been dashed.
Terrific piece, well done. Might be worth looking at human cloning if we can conjure up a few more just like you to join the fight…
davi stanley asks:
“What’s with the zits?”
In the passage, Christopher is comparing warmist scientists and editors with the common person who works for a living. The reference to zits or something like that is necessary to suggest the actual length of the human spectrum that separates these two groups. In addition, the zit reference emphasizes that the so-called scientists are, like Obama, basically kids who have never done anything in their lives other than be enthusiastic graduate students. Beyond that, the zit reference expresses the disgust that we must all feel at having turned over an important part of our culture and economy to wholly immature persons. I could go on indefinitely. What is the proof of Christopher’s claims? Obviously, that all of these kids are so full of themselves, so arrogant, so inexperienced that they, like Obama, cannot permit their own fallibility to register in their consciousness. How’s that for an explanation of a zitful reference?
This is quite an indictment. The last thing we need is this fraud to call into question the integrity of science in general. I think the scientific process should be friendly to skeptics. If it isn’t and if the editors are fixated on a particular outcome, they should be replaced.
I met with many, many politicians, up to and including President Fidel Ramos. I realized soon after this life altering experience that the existence of such conditions was not a technological problem . . . it was political . . . and technology and politics do not mix.
I have noted over the past decade that many publications like SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN as well as my professional journals like LANCET,and on occasion the NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE have ventured more and more into the political realm whether it is regarding climate and environmental issues or national medical reform (read that our current health “reform” legislation) or even the Iraq/Afghanistan conflict.
Sci Am spent a considerable amount of space to attacking Bjorn Lundborg.
Publications such as NATURE seem to support those who accuse dissenters of hidden motives,paid off by BIG BUSINESS Oil Companies etc. or being ignorant easily manipulated fools. It only proves to me that it is easier to slander opponents than to refute with evidence. Open public debate is shunned.
How different is this ideology to past religious zealotry which condemned all who did not accept the “TRUE FAITH” as agents of Satan, or apostates? The similarity of these self proclaimed impartial “scientists” smacks of a zealot secular religious movement. Perhaps it’s like Marx’s “Scientific Socialism” or previous groups who misused Darwin in their political “Social Darwinism” to justify racist theories.
Pathetic.
Why was the IPCC created? To me it’s an obvious question with an obvious answer. It wasn’t to identify and solve a potential problem but to give legitimacy to an agenda. Science has gone along quite nicely without the UN’s help. Hopefully after billions of dollars wasted on this debacle… It will again.
Nice work Lord Monckton BTW!
Nature, as well as Science and numerous popular periodicals (like Scientific American) fell off the left edge of the earth many years ago and have jumped on every leftwing bandwagon that comes along. Although the popular publications like SA never claimed to be refereed journals, Nature and Science do and as such have an obligation to be objective which they clearly are not. They have made themselves a waste of time and money.
A lot of these periodicals are run by leftists. Here is the editor of Lancet at a peace rally: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csxvUzpIQ18
The best strategy for conservatives and moderates is to cancel all our subscriptions to lefty rags.
National Geographic has fallen into the same pattern. More non-scientists pretending they know of what they speak. I haven’t subscribed in years, and now, as with Nature, I don’t even thumb through it at the dentist’s office.
5 – Jack in Silver Spring.
Christoper is the Climate Adviser to the UK Independence Party who are not surprisingly
Anti AGW and Anti EU. They are the only Right Wing party in the UK (BNP carries too much racial baggage).
27. Theo Goodwin.
You beat me to it ! Well done.
The swing to UKIP could be surprising at the elections in May – Comments in Daily Telegraph
and Times would seem to back this up – LAB/LIB/CON are all lefties now.
This is representative of postmodern science; truth does not exist, everything can be explained in social context. Hard physical science has always been a thorn chafing the side of these people because reality tells them what they don’t want to hear. Professor Sokal and his hoax made a folly of this. Postmodernists can thrive in climate science because much of the climate is driven by chaos which can’t be explained by simple models or equations. Thus, they can revert back to saying that truth and reality do not exist. They are free to make up their own alternate reality using computer models and distorted data.
It is known as the human die off. That is the goal. Anthropogenic warming is just one of the tactics to achieve that goal.
Don’t get too hung up on global warming. They can switch to something else whenever it is convenient. Like an attack against biofuels.
Unfortunately, Monckton is playing into the dieoff.org enviro-left greenies’ hands with his overly general attack against biofuels. Better to stick to central issue — scientific integrity.
As long as you show where the lefty green dieoff promoters are perverting science, the media, and government, you are doing your job. Everything else threatens to be a distraction, making your efforts less effective.
Your Lordship has hit one out of the park — AGAIN
Hearty admiration as well for your masterful use of hyperbole, which entertains as it skewers. My favorite: “[T]he UN’s XBox 360s have gotten the models wrong”.
16. Steven, his Lordship is the 3rd Viscount of Brenchley (near Maidstone, England), a position within the British nobility. He is one of few peers of the realm who makes effective use of his position to help his countrymen and the world at large see reason in general, and the insanity of AGW specifically. (In my opinion.)
All the Reds are now Green and Gobal warming was/is the big lie that all collectavist need to push there agenda. We are having a bad wave of collectavist activity. Our Schools are producing Green/Red morons at a fantasic rate.
Thanks again to Lord Monckton for keeping the spotlight on the shifty and ever-shifting pronouncements of the global warmists. The oft-repeated demand from enviromentalists that those who criticize global warming science “should be sent to prison” reveals the deep, black totalitarian impulse that has always existed at the heart of the enterprise. From Day One this has been a political movement (and a quasi-religious one) and not a scientific effort. Their aim is the accumulation of power and a doctrinal reorganization of every aspect of human affairs.
Why do we still pay attention to these crooks ?
That that is,
is.
That that is not,
is not.
And,
That’s that.
Thank you Lord Monckton, you’ve been my hero for awhile now for exposing the AGW extremists’ exaggerated claims. It seems people are now waking up to the truth and the extremists are crying like babies.
And thank you all you skeptics for doing your part. You guys are my hero, too.
Well done, Lord Monckton! Gives me an erection watching the Global Warming hoax unravelling. Too bad Mr. Obama and his minions haven’t got the memo yet. They are planning to screwing us with their cap and tax plan and EPA regulations. Looks like the leftists intend on getting a return on their global warming investment regardless of the facts. Apparently, exposing junk science and lies is not enough.
Nature finds itself in a hole (they published a lot of rubbish climate science) and yet they keep digging. I’m so pleased to see Lord Monckton take them on this way. Their multiple editorials since December are mind bogglingly unfathomable. They appear so desperate. Quoting Paul Ehrlich in the most recent one that the scientists are “scared shi(r)tless” is simply bizarre. Scared of what, exactly? If one’s science is sound, there’s nothing to be afraid of. Indeed, even if one’s science is flawed, fear shouldn’t be an issue: the process is all about making proposals and testing them until they fall and are replaced after better data are collected. Scared of losing their prominence and funding? Scared of being found out to have engaged in scientific misconduct? Seems more likely. Nature (where I’ve published several papers over more than 25 years), I am so ashamed of you. Stop digging deeper and come back to embrace the scientific method!
Thank you, sir! Keep the pressure on and don’t quit.
Wonder what’s takin’ bc so long to get here?
Great article as usual. However, I am beginning to see the socialist frauds who inhabit the MSM, academia and government starting to fight back to defend the AGW gravy train money. To defeat these frauds we must boot the socialist democrats commie rear ends, who funded this scam, out of office in the next elections.
Yes, “keep the pressure on”. Diminishing the big madam will send a strong message to the AGW prostitution industry.
While I am something of a fan of Lord Monckton, Nature’s bawling apparently rattled his good-sense o’meter. The good Lord thunders about biofuel crops stealing land:
“Result: a doubling of world food prices, mass starvation, and death, leading to food riots in a dozen major regions of the globe.”
I should remind Lord Monckton that a population suffering mass starvation AND death, rarely finds the gumption for a food riot. there is no… appetite.
They should be prosecuted for the crime against Mother Gaia for defacing the most pristine and most beautiful parts of the earth with awfully ugly wind turbines.
Biofuel supporters might like this article:
————-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/07/food-water-africa-land-grab
Land to grow biofuel crops is also in demand. “European biofuel companies have acquired or requested about 3.9m hectares in Africa. This has led to displacement of people, lack of consultation and compensation, broken promises about wages and job opportunities,” said Tim Rice, author of an ActionAid report which estimates that the EU needs to grow crops on 17.5m hectares, well over half the size of Italy, if it is to meet its 10% biofuel target by 2015.
————–
Of course, it is the Marxist newspaper the Guardian, I doubt many people would read it. For the record, I’m fully in favour of modernized farming but not on stolen land, taken from the owners at gunpoint. Unfortunately, small African villages don’t have what it takes to defend their land from takover and the inevitable result is what you see.
Dear Lord Monckton,
I would like to know why in your recent PJM interview you made a number of claims which are not true. Namely;
It was over seven years.
Neither your graphs, nor your prepared testimony, nor your oral testimony showed nor claimed nor claimed to show statistical significance.
He didn’t have a beard.
He didn’t say that.
He didn’t say any of that.
Video and transcripts are available here.
Well done, Lord Monckton!
Like apparently the editorialship of the Lancet, august journals and societies are being taken over by activist uni students without a clue about the world.
My Australian Medical Association has a warmist policy – restating the IPCC dire climate warming ‘facts’ as if they were experts in the field, without attribution to IPCC. When I challenged them – the defense was – all other medical associations do the same! It seems that associations just follow other associations – all stemming from just the IPCC. This huge consensus is not considered consensus, just blind follow the leader.
> Tom Karl spluttered into his beard…He didn’t have a beard…and said, “no, no, no, this can’t be right.”…he didn’t say that…
Wow, you’ve been reduced to this? And you’re still trying?
Hmm. While on one hand it’s kind of embarrassing that you’re not embarrassed to present this as some sort of evidence of…something, I kind of admire your willingness to pound that long-deceased horse into gooey red paste.
Darrell,
I like how you snip out the bit about statistical significance and the words put into the mouth of Joe Barton, then pretend there’s no substantive issue
It’s also cute how you guys will jump to defend your own.
I guess putting “Lord” in front of your name makes you an instant climate expert (and deters people from calling you a moron).
actually Ed he is a lord, that’s why it’s in front of his name, it’s not something he invented or made up in some kind of egomaniacal delusion. You know like the messiah complex Al Gore is ensnared in.
As for climate expert, it’s about knowing what you are talking about, knowing your subject, anything else is simply argument from authority, which is an unscientific argument for the record. Ed, if you have a scientific point to make, we’re waiting…. Oh wait a snide nonsensical irrational point is all you and your ilk can make.
As for the climate “experts”, who are they, Ed? Phil Jones and others caught crooking and lying and manipulating the temperature data records? Or maybe you mean the inventor of the internet and all-round messiah, Al the Goracle?
Larry70,
As opposed to;
Anyway.
Like not forgetting to count changes in outgoing longwave radiation when calculating climate sensitivity?
Or by not calculating linear trends from the end points of a non-linear function, not ignoring estimates of internal variability, and not using a single year as a baseline?
LW, SW radiation machts nchts. There ain’t no hotspot, except in the distorted minds of the warmists! (Of course, the climate “models” are hopeless in any event; climate includes a significant chaotic component !
And next is the cringe-inducing National Geographic. My son and I ran across very early (c. 1900) bound copies at our local library. Even my marginally interested teenager noticed that the articles were SCIENTIFIC, there were few pictures, and no ads. Over the years wonderful, and not-so wonderful photographs were added. Decent parents began having to pre-screen the pages to prevent their teenage boys from observing a scantily clad female in some exotic local (eww, actually the March ’10 issue has both female AND male body parts flapping in the breeze….). Now a responsible parent has to warn their children of the dangers of believing the non-scientific nonsense that passes for serious articles on those once revered pages. “Don’t you know! Global warming is FACT!! And it’s all your fault!! So buy an over-priced electric car [and electricity comes from where, class?], protect Mother Earth [Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...], eat only local foods [remember scurvy, all of us that live north of Florida?] and stop buying worthless magazines, and save a tree! NO! WAIT!…”
#18 – Jade:
“I’m as big a critic of the AGW crowd as you’ll find, but you’re completely off target with your biofuel rant. It’s just factually garbage to blame biofuels for the run-up in food prices.”
Maybe you can explain why food prices ran up three time as much as other commodities.
Lazar: Get a life and stop shilling for a bunch of frauds lest you be considered one yourself.
Biofuel from sugar cane is practical.
85% of vehicles can run on Sugar based bio-fuel in Brazil.
A sudden gasoline boycott will not faze Brazillians.
It would stop us dead in our tracks, however. PSST: Don’t buy a hybrid. The tiny battery gets you nowhere. They do not move off your driveway without gasoline.
Why must North Americans be such dupes of Exxon and Chevron?
The ROI on our corn based biofuel effort is impractical and next to useless, offering nothing but false hope.Big Oil likes it that way.
And the arrival of electric cars at the dealership is slow as molasses because Big Auto likes it that way.
There, I saved you a bundle by warning you about hybrids. Electric vehicles do have a huge battery pack and you can get around during times when refineries are bombed by fundamentalists. Think it can”t happen? Wise up!
The Nissan Leaf is coming out soon. Should be a reasonable get about vehicle. Google it or check on AutoblogGreen.com
Thank me later.
31. Mr. Perfect:
Why was the IPCC created?
The IPCC was created by the UN to periodically generate reports purporting to show that a global catastrophe is imminent, and that we are all doomed unless we all surrender our respective national sovereignties to an international organization, which happens to be the UN, and pay that same entity trillions of dollars from taxes placed on all international transactions. The combined GROSS income of BIG OIL will be so much pocket change compared to what the UN hopes to rake in; of course the UN also gets to become the World government. That is why the IPCC was created.
How did I come to this conclusion? Because when the summary of each report is published the UN demands that it be put in charge and that to pay for it the UN must be allowed direct tax revenue and not be restricted to relying on the “dues” of the several member states. Despite all of its weaknesses what doomed USA’s original Articles of Confederation was the weakness of the Federal Government due to its near total reliance on revenue handouts from the several member states. Despite all of its strengths the USA’s Constitution would have failed but for the fact that under it the Federal Government had the power to directly tax the people without reliance on the several states. Now the states rely on the Federal Government.
I’m not preaching black helicopter conspiracy theory BS from the hinterlands of Michigan or Idaho. I am just pointing out the obvious and clearly intended consequence of scaring the world into allowing the UN the direct taxation powers that it is pining for and using the warmmonger scare to obtain.
But the warmbots put their hands over the ears and drone on that the “deniers” are paid shills of the oil companies – repeat as necessary hoping they and the facts just go away – while never questioning the far bigger prize sought by the warmmongers.
Nice one, your Grace!
Meanwhile, back here in Australia, the Commonwealth Industrial and Scientific Organisation joins forces with our Bureau of Meteorology to publish an eight-page leaflet that they call their report on climate change. In dumbed-down wording reminiscent of an undergraduate assignment they reveal that temperature maximums (sic) are increasing, and sea levels are still rising. In five lines they present their evidence for ocean acidification. And they wonder why no-one believes them!
Dullshooter,
As if I would care… what you ‘thought’.
Lord Monckton: I saw you at the “Defending The American Dream” AFP summit this past weekend in WI Dells. I even stayed for the “Climate Change” discussion in the afternoon with our WI Congressman James Sensenbrenner. You were great.
I still think there’s a possibility of actual fraud charges being leveid against Al Gore — that is, when one or more of his big financial donors wakes up and realizes that he’s been defrauded. I’d be interested in finding out if there are any class action suits or actual charges being discussed against Gore and the IPCC.
Mom in Wisconsin
That’s your right ! (Of course one may wonder why you think anybody should then be interested in YOUR opinion!)
Monckton,
Did you notice that 30 or 40 years ago many industries were moved by the people who control that segment of our economy from Western democracies to the much lower wage milieu of Third World countries?
Did you notice that the resulting hue and cry from ordinary citizens of those countries garnered enough political attention so that the process was slowed?
Did you pickup on Crichton’s observation that populations were easiest to government when they existed in a state of fear?
Did you notice the attempt to induce panic in the minds of the scientifically naive by paid spokespeople and the proffered solution of moving manufacturing jobs that paid from $30 to $100 an hour in the developed economies to third world countries where, with any luck, they might pay two or three dollars an hour?
I mean, governments exist to do the will of the people, right?
Do you think that maybe some factions of our ruling elites stand to reap windfall profits if Al Gore and those of his ilk are successful?
There has never been a shortage of people on this globe who would sell their souls for a little money.
Spot-on and amusingly written. Thank you, Lord Monckton.
There’s a tragic irony to the claims of the AGW alarmists. One reason they stated for taking urgent action to curb global warming is that a warmer globe would destroy crops, causing mass hunger and food riots (as a gardener in a northern climate, I can’t imagine how a longer growing season would lead to massive crop failures, but I’m sure they had some reasoning behind that, however warped). To avoid warming-induced famine, we turned our crops into bio-fuel, thus decreasing the world’s food supply and causing the very hunger and riots we sought to avoid.
Christopher Monkton writes,
“The sheer shrillness of the true-believers, such as Nature’s zit-bespattered editors, has woken up the sleeping giant of public opinion, and the giant will not go back to sleep however often Nature maunders on about the fundamental science being agreed among all parties. After 15 years with no statistically significant “global warming” (Nature didn’t tell you that), nine years of a rapid global cooling trend (Nature forgot to mention it), sea level growing at just 1 foot per century (Nature didn’t get around to reporting that), and sea ice showing no global trend in 30 years (Nature somehow missed that one), no one is believing the true-believers any more.”
How true his words are and thank the Lord that the public – at large – are now seeing something of the distortions of these people.
We must all keep sounding a warning about these people.
RA.
Theres a Party in G. Bush’s Backyard, bring a shotgun, pesticide and some deisel fuel ya’ll. Lets burn us some liberals that don’t want to kill somebody! Come on ya”ll, Call up Palin too and she can bring the Grizzy bean Chowder and her daughter Miss, Alask-Q-Out. Hell we’ll even come up with some other country to go out and attack on the publics dime and will tell’em the CIA said de’m folks got nukes. Round up now, Fires a start’n!