Comments on: Monckton may visit New Zealand

By: David

David — Tue, 19 Jul 2011 01:50:34 +0000

Well James Hansen got to see Peter Gluckman. Will Monkton be given the same courtesy?

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:04:02 +0000

Yes, sure, they undoubtedly will.

I suggest that, if we don’t authenticate their ammunition by giving answering fire, they will fling fizzers. Perhaps short, polite replies will suffice? Naturally, we need not be deflected.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:47:27 +0000

Unfortunately, it provides ammunition for the CAGW camp, which deflects from the real issues.
They will, no doubt, make a big deal over this, especially if he comes to NZ.

By: Richard Treadgold

Richard Treadgold — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:42:06 +0000

Well, it’s a setback, and therefore perhaps embarrassing, but it’s just a dispute, where by definition opinions differ. His political party will be embarrassed, but they’re easily embarrassed, and it’s not that Lord M is at fault or has committed a crime. The matter could be appealed, and a higher court might rule in his favour. Neither his personality nor his opposition to the theory of CAGW enter into the dispute. If I thought I might be a member of the highest court in the land by virtue of my father’s membership of it, I might fight to retain it, too.

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 22:24:53 +0000

Richard North’s post over at EuRef isn’t exactly complimentary (referring specifically to the issue of Monckton’s claims to membership of the House of Lords and the House’s open letter to him on this matter)

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2011/07/another-own-goal.html

By: Andy

Andy — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 00:55:19 +0000

I understand that there were some fairly dirty tactics used against Monckton, including setting up phony websites announcing that talks had been cancelled.

It is suspected that these may have been initiated by advocacy group GetUp.

Gillard is now spending $22 million on a carbon tax propaganda exercise.
Things are getting interesting.

By: QuentinF

QuentinF — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 12:03:38 +0000

“Sure we can debate things, but the evidence and observations that are out there, there’s nothing to debate. To debate the whole idea of climate change is long past.”

Moron of the week award.
—————–

Hope Monkton doesnt get closed venues like here in OZ. Good luck over there to get him to speak.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 06:45:22 +0000

and while we’re talking of propagandists, what of our favorite Al Gore and his Climate “Reality” Project.

I think Monckton has been trying to debate him for ages.

BTW, Monckton is an extremely adept debater. He recently won a debate at the Oxford Union where he managed to completely outsmart the opposition with his knowledge of the IPCC reports. All I have see from the opponents of Monckton are ad homs and smears. The efforts of John Abraham seem to be built largely on strawman arguments, from what I can see, thought I started to lose the will to live following the various argumentum ad youtubem tooing and froing between the two.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 06:16:25 +0000

Well, I agree that Monckton is a showman. It would be nice to get the likes of Richard Lindzen, John Christy etc to come to NZ, but clearly there is an opportunity since Monckton is currenlty in Australia

Monckton debated with Barry Brook in Brisbane last year. It was a reasonable debate, and there were some good points made.

By: toad

toad — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 04:57:06 +0000

Andy, if you want to put up a climate scientist who dissents from the IPCC consensus, then a debate with someone like Dr Jim Renwick from NIWA may be worth having. But Monckton is a propagandist, not a scientist. He’s totally unqualified in climate science and cherry picks data and relies on distorting facts and telling outright lies.

Any reputable climate scientist debating with Monckton will only give Monckton’s pseudoscience undeserved publicity and credibility.