Heated moments mar Monckton

Viscount Monckton

Janet Albrechtsen in The Australian wisely counsels Lord Monckton against falling into the same trap as the alarmists:

When Monckton talks about the science he is powerful. Watch on YouTube his kerb-side interview of a well-meaning Greenpeace follower on the streets of Copenhagen last month. With detailed data behind him, he asks whether she is aware that there has been no statistically significant change in temperatures for 15 years. No, she is not. Whether she is aware that there has in fact been global cooling in the past nine years? No, she is not. Whether she is aware that there has been virtually no change to the amount of sea ice? No, she does not. Whether, given her lack of knowledge about these facts, she is driven by faith, not facts. Yes, she is driven by faith, she says.

To those with an open mind, Monckton’s fact-based questions demand answers from our political leaders. To this end, he will impress his Australian audience over the next few days. Unfortunately, while Monckton has mastered the best arts of persuasion, he also succumbs to the worst of them when he engages in his made-for-the-stage histrionics. In Copenhagen, when a group of young activists interrupted a meeting, he berated them as Nazis and Hitler Youth. Elsewhere he has called on people to rise up and fight off a “bureaucratic communistic world government monster”. This extremist language damages his credibility. More important, it damages the debate. You start to look like a crank when you describe your opponents as Nazis and communists. You can see how it happens. Talking to a roomful of cheering fellow travellers, the temptation is to hit the high gear of hyperbole. But if your aim is to persuade those with an open mind, this kind of talk will only turn people away. Warning people about the genuine threat to national sovereignty from a centralised global-warming bureaucracy is one thing. Talking about a new front of communists marching your way is another. It sounds like an overzealous warrior fighting an old battle.

Read it here.

Comments

  1. Agree entirely. Yes the commies are coming but we need to use the correct science in this debate and not do the same “name calling” that the alarmists use. The commies/envronmentalists/whackos have taken over the various organisations and socialist propoganda is rife. But and it is a big but we must not diverge from the main argument – ie the science for AGW is flawed.

    I can understand why Lord Monkton lost his cool and name-called. This type of behaviour is typical by alarmists. Just go to any seminar/talk by them and you will not see any science but a lot of pretty pictures (Polar bears included, of course) and a lot of negative talk about the opponents to this. Even the psychologists have entered the fray. My profession has me liaising with these types every day – and it is obvious a hot day in summer is always used as evidence – I mentioned the snow falls down south and the reply was “it’s the weather”. Of course it is, how stupid of me. There you go.

    The question required here is why have the MSM, politicans etc been so keen to grab hold of it? We need to address this question as well. Especially now that ClimateGate has exposed this for what it really is – a scam. Jo Nova has exposed the money trail for this and it is unbelievable how this gravy train holds so much gravy.

    Stick to the main aim – man cannot control the climate (at this stage anyway). Lord Monkton is a brilliant speaker and has really done a lot to expose this scam. I would nominate him for a Nobel Peace Prize!!

    Simon, excellent blog.

  2. There maybe more to the story than you or I will ever know about. So rather than speculating, why not just ask why Lord Monckton does what he does?

    Oh, BTW great site, I was only just introduced to it a few days ago.

    Thou hath now been bookmarked 🙂

    • @Ed Darrell: Monckton speaks in great detail about the science. He knows far more about it than any of your “celebrity warm-mongers” like Gore. And your comments about the funding of his tour are just plain ignorant. It is being funded by private donations, if you’d bothered to do any research. Yawn.

  3. astonerii says:

    “This extremist language damages his credibility. More important, it damages the debate. You start to look like a crank when you describe your opponents as Nazis and communists.”

    The start of the brownshirts in nazi Germany was very reminiscent of the tactics used by the people for which Lord Monckton called out in that meeting. Ask the people who were at the meeting, some of whom were also victims of Nazi Brownshirt intimidation as Hitler rose to power. When you forget history, you are likely doomed to repeat it.

    As for the “bureaucratic communistic world government monster” quote, that pretty much is perfectly descriptive of what the United Nations was envisioning happening from Global Warming, and in fact one of the leaders in the United Nations said this is the beginning of World Government. How does the United Nations function? As one of the most bureaucratic institutions man has ever made. What is the mode of operation of the United Nations? It is much closer to communistic than to simple socialism and is very far removed from democracy. What does the United Nations represent? The world. So the only questionable part of the statement was the descriptive term monster, and I guess the only real question would be if you like democracy what else would you call a “bureaucratic communistic world government” with the power to dictate what energy you are allowed to use, the food you can consume and what light bulbs are right for your home, not to mention the massive redistribution of wealth that will go along with all that power.

  4. Yes, I hope he tones it down a bit. The average aussie, having been shielded all these years from debate, will find Monckton’s revelations about the corrupt state of climate science more than enough to digest. (Mind you, the average aussie might be blissfully unaware of Monckton’s visit.)

    Add to that a real, functioning Opposition Leader in Parliament, and the average aussie will have quite a lot to chew on.

%d bloggers like this: