No knockout blow in great climate stoush

jay-ded says:

03:10pm | 19/07/11

Instead of lions, let’s use rampaging elephants!

Erick says:

03:25pm | 19/07/11

Twenty quatloos on the newcomer!

SOB says:

05:04pm | 19/07/11

This Monckton chappy looks like Marty Feldman

MarK says:

05:50pm | 19/07/11

”  SOB says:

  05:04pm | 19/07/11

  This Monckton chappy looks like Marty Feldman”

Of course they do. He had graves disease as well.

Tom says:

06:03pm | 19/07/11

SOB, Hope you are joking. (Graves’ ophthalmopathy)

kd says:

06:41pm | 19/07/11

“Climate change sceptic and mathematician Christopher Monckton”

Wtf.  I think you mis-spelled “delusional astroturfer”

Old Cobber says:

06:57pm | 19/07/11

Moncton 3 V Denniss 2
Big losers are the Australian people via the so called journalistsas evidenced by the last 2 Press Club meetings. Firstly, Julia snowed them as she sobbed about Unley High and the sancitity of working for a litigious law firm. Then called their work “crap"and not one had the guts to stand up and say” We report whats delivered.”  Today The West Australian reporter did his “Look at me,Look at me ” act and was scolded;  A young trainee rabbited on about scientific journals and was put down by both debaters;Some bloke from Ch 7 smartarsed about the House ofLords and was mortally wounded!.  The point is that the National Press Club needs to lift its game or go the way of The News of The World

Erick says:

03:12pm | 19/07/11

I wonder what Warren’s comment is supposed to mean?

Brian says:

03:48pm | 19/07/11

I wonder how Tim Flannery’s predictions are going or how the Earth has NOT warmed as much in the past 10 years as the warmist models have told us it should have?

Un-ignorant says:

03:49pm | 19/07/11

@Erick - Because you go to such lengths to keep yourself deliberately ignorant, Monckton is on the record for saying that he has developed cures for the common cold, HIV, MS, and a host of other diseases and infections.

Michael says:

03:49pm | 19/07/11

Monckton claimed to have invented a cure for a whole wide range of things, including AIDS, MS, and a condition he personally suffers from, the name of which I can’t remember. It’s widely considered a snake oil, and has no backing from the medical community

Warren says:

03:49pm | 19/07/11

Here you go Erick. Straight from the horses mouth:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm-tKEpJs7I

andy says:

04:06pm | 19/07/11

@Erick - Oh, didnt you know about Monckton and AIDS? He has previously claimed to have a cure. Oh and he also said: “.... there is only one way to stop AIDS. That is to screen the entire population regularly and to quarantine all carriers of the disease for life. Every member of the population should be blood-tested every month ... all those found to be infected with the virus, even if only as carriers, should be isolated compulsorily, immediately, and permanently.” Also, while you are checking up on the sources you are supporting, feel free to see how many millions Exxon and other have donated to his “climate research” bodies. Hint: its lots of millions. I am amazed after all the kerfuffle about Julia’s backflip that you guys would support such an obviously ridiculous untrustworthy source. I can only assume it was an oversight and not just being hypocritical.

Erick says:

04:06pm | 19/07/11

Interesting. Why didn’t you link that in your first comment?

Barry says:

04:46pm | 19/07/11

@Andy
Yeah, but at the present time, when Monckton had actually made the comment, if action such as he suggested had been taken, the problem would most likely not be as large as it is now.

andy says:

05:34pm | 19/07/11

@Barry - Thanks for your insight. I reconsider. Anyone with a communicable incurable disease should be locked up for life. Or does this only count against “bad” diseases like AIDS? I am dying to know.

Steve Putnam says:

07:22pm | 19/07/11

Erick prides himself on his ignorance.

Kevin says:

09:52pm | 19/07/11

I don’t understand why you are all so sensitive about Mr. Monkton’s condition,  if you watched his interview in the youtube video clip linked courtesy of Warren, you would know he cured himself while he was fixing all the other major medical problems of the world.

Stephen Fitzpatrick says:

09:59am | 20/07/11

@ Barry, did you consider for a second the cost of testing every single member of the population every month and carring for those locked away?

Markus says:

03:00pm | 19/07/11

Agreed, it’s about as tactful and clever as “If Stephen Hawking is so smart, how come he can’t walk??”

Tim says:

03:04pm | 19/07/11

Why?
People mock ugly, fat, stupid etc here every day.
What is so special about someone having a specific condition?

No 1 Rosie says:

03:21pm | 19/07/11

I totally agree and find it very hard to understand and very difficult to work out the minds of today’s generation of intellectuals. They talk with so much confidence, like to think that the knowledge they have hasn’t been around and known to others. Sadly with all this they lack good old common sense that sometimes it is better to STFU. Sorry guys but STFU I have picked up from here and lots of other things. Ain’t I lucky, I have it all, wisdom of age, common sense and the chance to learn and ignore from this generation of intellects.

Markus says:

03:22pm | 19/07/11

Ugly, fat and stupid are not, in the overwhleming majority of cases, irreconcilable genetic conditions, and thus are free game.

Craig from North Brisbane says:

03:24pm | 19/07/11

Anthony: Even if he didn’t have a condition, why exactly would it be okay to make fun of him based on his appearance?  Laugh at his ridiculous views, not the way that his face looks.

No 1 Rosie says:

03:33pm | 19/07/11

Thank you Anthony for apologizing. If you didn’t learn anything from the debate you would have at least heard Monckton humbly acknowledge the ‘Hilter’ incident and once again responded in a very eloquent way.

Michael says:

03:48pm | 19/07/11

Anthony, Tory did a piece on Monkton within the last ten days or so, she also made fun of his appearance and may have even spelled his name Mongton, possibly a typo, possibly an insult.

Many commented at the time that he had Graves’ still, perhaps you missed it.

AnthonyG says:

04:01pm | 19/07/11

yes i agree That would be like calling our PM Barge assed, pointy nosed and med headed . We wouldn’t dare do that

MarK says:

04:04pm | 19/07/11

Christ almighty Ant I have said, as have many others, on numerous occasions it was disgusting the way his condition was mocked by people such as Badger on this site.

Are you serious you have just discovered this?

I can’t believe this. How can you and Tory really purport to know anything of the man or his beliefs?

Did you really get all your research of his views from the ABC/Drum?

I am seriously in shock here.

WOW. My apologies to you and Tory. You really need to catch up on reading and get back to us. You are not ideologues. You are just under researched.

Tim says:

04:10pm | 19/07/11

Markus,
I don’t think any comments on a person’s appearance should be allowed. They add nothing to a debate
However, If any comments are allowed, then they all should be.

Sodapoppy says:

04:52pm | 19/07/11

Personally, I thought Typical Aussie Battler in the Red Corner came in underdone, and went out like a wet fizzer! And if that’s the standard of our journos, no wonder we’re up It Creek in a barb-wire canoe without a paddle!

Leo says:

05:37pm | 19/07/11

I agree, it seems to happen all too often with the pro brigade that when an opponent puts forward their view the attack becomes personal. I note that Anthony has stepped in and apologized for this particular gaffe. I personally did not think he mean’t to be other than a bit cheeky.

As for Denniss and his comments about the doctors and cancer. Its an analogy referring to the broad support economists are giving the tax but its worth noting this: The vast majority of those very same economists work in the financial sector which stands to reap a fortune from running a carbon trading scheme. Its a bit like a woman asking a sales person if she looks good in a dress they are trying to sell her?

Tom says:

06:02pm | 19/07/11

Ants, is there anything else that you still might be off the pace with as far as this debate goes?

Tom says:

07:06am | 20/07/11

Ants, only because you asked the question, because so many others seemed to know.

... and without disagreeing entirely with your description, this bloke is not just “every attention-seeking yappy Pom that comes along and tells us Aussies how to run our lives?” He is the one you chose to write about.

BTW: Would you describe Al Gore as a “yappy Yank”?

n_dude says:

05:15pm | 20/07/11

But based on the previous postings didn’t Lord Monckton have a cure for Graves disease? as well as one for HIV/AIDS and the common cold. I guess that puts him in the same league as Julia Gillard….

nihonin says:

03:08pm | 19/07/11

David S, ‘The irony is both government and opposition agree that climate change is real and have policies in place to reduce our emissions.  One of those policies is about to be tested through implementation, the other appears to be more a dog whistle to climate sceptics that says ‘we have to have some kind of plan, but don’t worry we don’t really believe it’, and the other side say the same thing about your side, lol, oh rusties you’ve done it again.

Gary says:

10:47pm | 19/07/11

@ David S., In case you don’t know it, Monkton is here because Gina Rhinehart has sponsored his tour.  The same Gina who has bought her way onto the board of channel 10 to lever a timeslot for her lapdog Andrew Bolt to spew forth with her/his anti Government rantings. The same Gina who is currently the richest person in the country, and is tipped to become the richest person in the world in a few years.If she can rid herself of Labor, she can avoid the proposed mining tax, and probably gain extra handouts from an Abbott government.

JT says:

03:22pm | 19/07/11

You didn’t really expect Tors to shift gears and engage her brain did you? After all, if she did, she would no longer be a lefty.

Hamish says:

03:40pm | 19/07/11

You could just feel her desperation to remain true to groupthink…‘must engage global warming as proven truth sequence…the carbon tax is good, the carbon tax is good, the carbon tax is good’

Tony of Poorakistan says:

04:00pm | 19/07/11

If I trusted that all Monckton’s figures and papers cited were true and representative, he’d win, but because I don’t, Denniss wins
 
Not much point going then, or was there free champagne?

Hamish says:

04:20pm | 19/07/11

ToP, what about this one, ‘I thought the best bit was when Monckton said Abbott’s plan was as pointless as Gillard’s’. No way! What a turn up! Tors’ favourite bit was when Monckton bagged out Abbott…What. A. Suprise.

But wait, there’s also this pearler, ‘The sycophantic smug chuckles on both sides, everyone enjoying having their entrenched positions confirmed by people in the spotlight.’ Tory, self-hatred is a horrible thing…but hey, you can console yourself that no matter how sycophantically you may have chuckled, at least you’re on the right side, you know, Julia and the press gallery’s.

Joan says:

04:50pm | 19/07/11

Yep… why would Moncktons papers,figures be less reliable than any other Climate Science details ?  I would trust his stuff more than the dodgey adverts Gillard is flogging to Australian people paid for with their money

jay-ded says:

03:13pm | 19/07/11

So which is he, your nephew or your grandson?

cpill says:

03:20pm | 19/07/11

and that’s what it boils down to for you, theater, and if one can be swayed by style. I see that that is what’s wrong.

cpill says:

03:21pm | 19/07/11

and that’s what it boils down to for you, theater, and if one can be swayed by style. I see that that is what’s wrong.

bobw says:

03:23pm | 19/07/11

I can’t help but suspect that he might be fictitious…

amcoz says:

03:29pm | 19/07/11

No. 1 Rosie, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

I think those young journos trying to make a gotcha statement have many years of hard work ahead before they can truly call themselves journalists.

And that goes for Tory and Ant, too.

Joan says:

03:43pm | 19/07/11

@ bobw

Yep, just like Rosie’s “niece”, or whatever she was supposed to have been, “Eddie”. This “nephew/grandson” will comment soon to tell us all how wrong we are. The fact that he’ll have identical poor grammar and syntax to “Rosie” will be just a coincidence.

No 1 Rosie says:

04:08pm | 19/07/11

jay-ded

He is my nephew who is here because his Mum, my sister in law is away on a well deserved holiday. She is a single Mum but I have grandchildren ages 5 and 3. You know what jay-ded my husband comes from a big family, 8 children.

I find it difficult for you and others not to understand that a 13 year old is not capable of saying what he said. Even my grandchildren know that their grandmother talks nothing much these days but Julia Gillard, Tony Abbott and carbon tax. I cannot come in here and fight the good fight without watching and reading about it before making my own judgements.

It is the school holidays and we are always fighting over the TV and the computer. My golf has suffered big time but I feel I need to come in here and stand up for Tony Abbott.

I have just asked him again and these are his words; “Give me a break, how about climate change, stop mumbling on about Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott. We are not fricken mugs, we can decide for ourselves who we want to believe.” Get stuck into him whatever your name is.” Words from the horse’s mouth, I just did the typing.

I don’t need Tony Abbott, Julia Gillard or Monckton to tell me how to think etc. I am proud to be what some of you call ‘old’

Tim says:

04:14pm | 19/07/11

Yes scientists should forget the scientific method and focus on showmanship. It will make them far more credible.
You know it makes sense.

No 1 Rosie says:

04:24pm | 19/07/11

The false Joan The Badger The Harass

I know I am winning because you just can’t help yourself playing your duplicity harassing game.

If you are going to criticize me, the least you can do is make it from The Badger. Have the guts to do it and not be a gutless coward, otherwise remain in your burrow.

Joan says:

04:46pm | 19/07/11

@ Rosie

Winning?

Charlie? is that you?

Entertainment over Facts says:

05:23pm | 19/07/11

And that there is the entire debate summed up - “The big companies and the Liberals put on better ads and juggle for us, therefore it PROVES that pollution is good for us!!!  Lets ignore the experts and the facts, we the Australian people will only decide something based on how entertaining it is.”

Knemon says:

06:23pm | 19/07/11

Rosie old dear, I think what jay-ded was getting at….you started off telling us about your nephew and then he morphed into your grandson!! I’m, so glad you and whoever enjoyed the performance of ‘Monkey’, it was entertaining stuff indeed.

Blampa says:

08:48am | 20/07/11

Lefties can’t win the debate, so they attack ad hominem.  Typical.  It also vindicates recent studies at Harvard University which have shown that those of the left are of on average lower intelligence than those on the right, even though they genuinely believe they’re superior.
Don’t worry lefties, just keep attacking the man and not the message after all; it’s all you’ve got, especially Tory and Ant.

n_dude says:

05:20pm | 20/07/11

Rosie I pity your grandchildren and your nephew having to listen to you babling on about politics.

Voxpop says:

03:21pm | 19/07/11

Well we know it’s true that he’s not a Lord and we know it’s true that he doesn’t have a Nobel Prize.  We also know he’s a clown and show pony - so yes great entertainment value but zero credibility.

Warren says:

03:22pm | 19/07/11

Why don’t you do some research @Simonious. John Abraham (Associate professor in the School of Engineering at the University of St Thomas in Minnesota) has taken the time to go through Monkton’s claims & debunked them:

http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham

To put it bluntly. I would rather trust a scientist to understand the science of climate change than Monkton who studied the classics and is a known liar.

Seanr says:

03:26pm | 19/07/11

That would take too much effort Simonious and may imperil Tory’s very belief in AGW….can’t have that.

Jay Santos says:

03:49pm | 19/07/11

“...To put it bluntly. I would rather trust a scientist to understand the science of climate change…”

Yet you believe Gore, Flannery and Garnaut.

Explain yourself.

Martin says:

03:54pm | 19/07/11

With due respect Warren a professor of engineering is an engineer not a scientist. BTW, if Moncktons presentation is so debunkable, why did Denniss have so much trouble doing so.

Michael says:

03:54pm | 19/07/11

That’s the problem, they aren’t well researched. He quotes papers as sources that directly disagree with what he says, then when questioned he claims to know the content better than the authors.
See here for a partial list, as well as Warren’s link:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/

bobw says:

04:24pm | 19/07/11

@Jay Santos:  You do realise that “Gore, Flannery and Garnaut” aren’t actually primary sources when it comes to mainstream climate change science, right?  You’re going to have to impugn the credibility of much more authoritative figures if you want to go down that path.

@Martin:  I suggest you check out slide 3 of Warren’s link.  And then perhaps compare slide 4.

Jay Santos says:

06:17pm | 19/07/11

“...You do realise that “Gore, Flannery and Garnaut” aren’t actually primary sources when it comes to mainstream climate change science, right?...”

They have heavily influenced the political inculcation of the incumbent government and their fear-mongering has shamefully shaped public education and policy direction.

That makes them far more dangerous and reckless than some geek in a white coat.

Both David Karoly and Ove Hoegh-Guldberg’s doomsday prognostications about the sea levels and the barrier reef have found to be crap.

What’s more they cannot even retro-model the observed historical record.

Next.

B says:

06:23pm | 19/07/11

@Warren

That presentation has been shown to be false on many occasions

bobw says:

06:45pm | 19/07/11

@Jay Santos:  Good one, Mr Logic.  Let’s rewind here.  You demanded that Warren “explain himself” for “believing G, F and G”.  Chances are, though, that he doesn’t so much “believe” them as he believes the scientists whose work underpins the mainstream understanding of climate change science.  Even if you’re correct in your implicit assertion that “G, F and G” have no credibility, it has no real bearing on the credibility of scientific orthodoxy more generally.

Monckton, who is basically a salesman, may be the highest authority available on your side of the fence, but I’m afraid there’s a bit more heft over here.

Warren says:

07:04pm | 19/07/11

@B. By whome?

Jay Santos says:

10:24pm | 19/07/11

@bobw

Rentseeking and carpetbagging academics and corrupted Big Climate scientists do little toward providing “heft” to ‘your’ “side”.

But thanks for proving my point.

Richard Lindzen and John Christie are but two eminent climate scientists who challenge the proselytic orthodoxy you have unquestioningly embraced…and done so without a scrap of empirical evidence.

How did you become so gullible?

bobw says:

11:07pm | 19/07/11

@Jay Santos:  You have a point?  Really?  Let’s get it straight, then:  you’re suggesting that all of the scientists and peak scientific organisations who have contributed to, and/or support the orthodox position on climate change are “rentseekers”, “carpetbaggers” and/or “corrupt”, and therefore not to be trusted?  There are rather a lot of them, you know.  Care to substantiate?  Are they all in on some kind of conspiracy?

Happy to ignore your silly assumptions about the basis of my opinion.

Ben N says:

10:16am | 20/07/11

@ Warren
Monckton has prepared a detailed and lengthy rebuttal of Abrahams claims here:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/response_to_john_abraham.pdf

Erick says:

03:29pm | 19/07/11

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/07/18/funny-pictures-tango-immediately-regretted/

RyaN says:

03:59pm | 19/07/11

@wolf: Oh common, you know we all prefer “animals close-up with a wide-angle lens!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBu9nAOlRRE

andy says:

03:52pm | 19/07/11

Well I used to base my logic on facts and figures, but now I understand its about trust, right? If everyone can call Julia out then why not the same for Lord Monckton. Is he still claiming to be a Member of Parliament and a Nobel Laureate? Haha, oh man. The arguments of a lying unqualified media attention seeker with a fabricated resume must apparently be evaluated at face value! Monckton lied directly and without ambiguity. The PMs lie was more about going back on a previous statement. It doesnt seem she intended to lie at the time. Which is worse? The answer is obvious to all but the terminally stupid. Climate “skeptics” are almost all incompetent at being skeptics, and massive hypocrites over how much proof is needed depending on which side of the argument the proof falls.

Richard Marston says:

04:14pm | 19/07/11

Monckton’s arguments have been comprehensively debunked by real climate scientists elesewhere but he continues to repeat them like a mantra.  He fobbed off that journalist who pointed out that his so-called peer reviewed paper was in fact published in a non-peer reviewed journal.  His genius argument was that someone somewhere had reviewed so it was peer reviewed.  Looks like all papers are peer reviewed to him.  Same brainless logic in dismissing the clerk of the House of Lords.  People buy this guff and applaud it.  Astonishing!  The problem with the debate is that the non-scientist Monckton quotes references with no scientist present to refute guff.  At least the non-scientist Dennis guy was honest in sticking to the point of the debate.  Publicly debating science using non-scientists is a recipe for catastrophe for decision making.  Dennis deserves a win for sticking to the nature of decision making and policy

amcoz says:

04:18pm | 19/07/11

I cannot for the life of me understand (randy) andy’s reply to your rational and logical comments, which I agree with completely. Why do we have to impoverish ourselves for absolutely no discernible gain other than to make a few nutters (and @ndy comes to mind) feel less nutty, and at my expense, too.

MarK says:

04:26pm | 19/07/11

Wow andy do keep up with current events or at least know where the “lies” you accuse Monckton of come from and his answers to them.

And by the way son what you are accusing me of is exactly what Tory says she does. Wrong target but wail away if it make you feel better.

PJ says:

05:25pm | 19/07/11

MarK well said.

Why is it so hard to agree not to disagree. Watch the debate, accept it and judge for yourself.

My problem is some people didn’t think Monckton should be allowed to debate his beliefs on climate change at the sanctimonious Press Club in front of holy as thou journalists. Where did free speech go? What with the beating sounds of socialism heading the way of dictatorship it is bothering me greatly.

andy says:

05:45pm | 19/07/11

@MarK - did you see this: http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/ ?? Apparently they had to publish it because the private letters teling him to stop making this claim had no effect. Also, look into the climate research organisations he is involved with and where they get there money from. I’ll give you a hint: there are many millions of dollars, and one of the donors is Exxon.

andy says:

06:06pm | 19/07/11

@PJ - “free speech”? I assure you, Moncktons speech is not free. Companies including Exxon pay many millions to the various “reseach organisations” he is a member of. Also, “dictatorship”? Don’t be so ridiculously overwrought. You want “free speech”, prepare to be challenged, and constantly.

MarK says:

06:56pm | 19/07/11

oh hush andy.

Did you see Monckton’s public reply?

Hmmm?

B says:

07:55pm | 19/07/11

@andy

So its overwrought when it is claimed the left is dictatorship like?  Have you ever read the definition of socialism and dictatorship?  Because you DONT know what they mean mate.

The left has, for the last 20 years pushed a VERY socialist agenda.  PJ is right.  The natural evolution for a socialist society is a dictatorship.  Look where the USSR ended up.

Go and learn your history.  Then we may not be doomed to repeat the same mistakes.

bobw says:

08:16pm | 19/07/11

B:  “So its overwrought when it is claimed the left is dictatorship like?”

I’m not sure that’s exactly what andy was saying.  But in any event, the answer is:  Yes.

MarK says:

04:12pm | 19/07/11

“Should all of them do nothing too? “

Yes

Richard says:

04:30pm | 19/07/11

Pretty much Eli.

Time to face facts bud, there is a vast, vast amount of environmental damage being done as China undergoes the largest Industrial Revolution of all time. If the AGW theory is true, and China does keep Industrialising, we’re all cactus. Simple as that.

And then when India Industrialises… well. I know its not PC, but facts are facts: China and India’s populations are too vast to be allowed to Industrialise. Us de-industrialising our tiny nation of 23 million will not compensate for the rapid Industrialisation of 3 Billion Indians and Chinese.

I don’t know what we can do about it, but I do know that pursuing a policy of de-industrialisation ourselves is NOT a solution.

Bevan Pidgeon says:

05:24pm | 19/07/11

pathetic example s of comment could just one of the believers please explain how much the temperature and seas have risen in the quarter of a century that this crap has been peddled to us, as goebels once said if you tell the same lie often enough for long enough it will become accepted as fact Monckton by a country mile Dennis did not prove one point just kept up the same crap that is fed to us everyday

Brad says:

08:21pm | 19/07/11

And richard has it in a nutshell. The western world might as well sit and fap itself in a corner because until we either stop population growth dead or tie China abd India irrevocably to pollution standards you could piss away all of the GDP of this country and many, many others and not achieve any reduction in carbon emissions. so DON’T waste our money doing useless sh]t because you’ll need it later when some genius actually hatches a plan that will work and a way to make us all stick to it. At least India has the foresight to go nuclear, but we won’t even sell them the fuel, which is probably THE most cabon reductive strategy this country could pursue.

Barry says:

05:06pm | 19/07/11

You’re just bitter cause you couldn’t solve his puzzle.

RichardM says:

10:01am | 20/07/11

Barry the puzzle was solved by genuine mathematicians who know how to do mathematics.  Monckton is not a mathematician and certainly could not solve his own problem. That he misrepresents himself as a mathematician should tell you all you need to know about him.  His misreprepresentations about being a member of the house of lords, about papers published in peer reviewed journals etc. should tell you all you need to know about his trustworthiness.  Shame the journos he hectored could not have follow up questions to call his bluff.

David C: says:

04:26pm | 19/07/11

i insure my house, sure .. costs me about $1300 a year , the issue is would I do that if it was $30,000 a year?

Vin says:

04:40pm | 19/07/11

You are absolutely right Jay Santos, I cannot believe that a “Professor” may come up with stupid analogies like he put it forward all the time walking away from the debate. The English debater cleaned the floor with the Professor & the stupid journalists that you could tell miles away that the stupid learn it their job just memorizing & repeating like Parrots. Now all journalists, freaking Leftists that could not control their real colours tried to outsmart the English debater but the stupids shoot their own foots; what a shameful debate for Australia. Now watching the debate between the Aussies & the Pommy it’s not doubt to me why the English are number 4 in the worlds one of the most powerful nations of the world just being a tiny country & the Aussies being the richest country of the world are number 40 in the world, not perhaps, maybes etc. Now if the leftists were right to going in personal attacks or mocking people what about to put in doubt the mental capacity of the Leaders of the Greens the after so many years his brain being washed by semen? When you jump into personal attacks you must be careful otherwise it will come back to bite you.

Sara says:

05:14pm | 19/07/11

The QLD gov found insurance was more expensive than paying outright so set aside money for disaster. Insurance wouldn’t cover roads which was a major portion of the cost and so they decided it was more cost-effective to save the money. They didn’t anticipate a disaster as expensive as the floods turned out to be, and so required assistance from the federal government when their savings couldn’t cover it. Anna Bligh herself explained this on Q&A!

Joan says:

05:40pm | 19/07/11

The bulldust collector blew up when $12million spent on Gillard dodgey adverts, adverts that are plain crazy and dodgey put out by delusional liar Gillard, to cover her No Carbon Tax lie, and courtesy of Gillard she sends the bill the hard working tax payer.

Tammy says:

12:05am | 20/07/11

Holly did you watch the debate or are you commenting for the sake of having your name in here?

Outraged says:

04:29pm | 19/07/11

@Tory: when are you going to personally apologise for making fun of Monkcton’s congenital eye deformity?

I know it is impossible for you to admit you are wrong…so can you just admit you were ignorant?

Michael says:

04:32pm | 19/07/11

Because Monckton has been repeatedly proven incorrect, and has been revealed as repeatedly misrepresenting scientific evidence. When he is caught out, he frequently claims to understand the science better than the scientist who wrote the paper.
He has also claimed to be the Science Adviser to Thatcher. Her auto-biography claims otherwise.
He has also claimed to be a “non-sitting, non-voting” member of the House of Lords. The House of Lords have refuted this just today, after he again claimed it yesterday on ABC radio: http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2011/july/letter-to-viscount-monckton/
Try http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM to have Monckton’s rubbish disproven. It is a 5 part series. Start with one or two of them, and you will understand just how difficult it is to believe anything Monckton claims

MarK says:

05:05pm | 19/07/11

Sigh.

Tory the caption at the top still has “The eyes have it” under the picture.

You are the editor as you like to keep reminding me /shrug.

Also you happily repeated this “humorous” line

“Since antibiotics got on top of syphilis the poms seem to be running short of truly potty peers,”

in your personal attack on the Lord of a few weeks ago.

Please don’t persist in saying you haven’t denigrated him by referring to what you have not said or poked fun at.

You have been personal so people will fight back personally.

I still think you should give him the right of reply to your piece or a column on climate change on these pages since you seem to have a problem with him.

This is Australia’s best CONVERSATION isn’t it? Conversation denotes two voices normally.

You might even find some material to debunk yourself if you give him voice here since I have seen nothing from you that disproves anything he has said. You just seem to say he has been debunked and leave it there. Convenient isn’t it.

Expat Ozzie says:

05:35pm | 19/07/11

Can’t help it but, “There is none so blind as those who will not see”, will you lot find some new one liners to try and underline your comments with. This one is becoming seriously boring!!!

P.S bit off topic but meh

Tex says:

09:22pm | 19/07/11

Dear Tory Shepherd,

You made the statement and I quote “but have seen so many debunkings of Monckton ” so it beggs the question where are ALL these debunkings? Are they credible debunkings?

  You would thing Tory with all the vast resources of web publishing of the punch at your disposal you could just create a “Monckton De-bunked ”  super site laying out all the debunks one by one so then, we your audience can review whether the debunkers are A: credible or B:  just the Blogertariat Warmist Left with an Axe to grind or C: Monckton Denialists who think he should be silenced.

Fair call don’t you think?

If you have justified levels of doubt please share your research, as Bob Brown said Last week you just have to wonder how much opinion is being reported as fact these days.

Tory looking forward to the “Monckton Debunk super site” were all these Debunkers who have been debunking are held up to the light and their credentials and arguments are well tested, call me charitable I know but hey I’d like to help you justify your opinions and improve your ability as a Journo to report facts, or as Julia says “don’t write crap”.

Tory in advance don’t thank me for helping you better your skill set,  after all It’s Bob Brown you have to thank , he really has made me question your industry lately.

Cheers

Tex

Labor Ruined this Country says:

06:31pm | 19/07/11

Too many big budget Hollywood ” Day After Tomorrow ” flicks for you my friend. If you have a look at where on the Earths surface humans live you would find that we are pretty good at adapting to different conditions. But I also realise that those who have an apocolyptic view of the future, worship it more as religion than science so don’t let common sense get in the way.

richardM says:

05:48pm | 19/07/11

He didn’t “put down” the reporter he actually verified what she said.  He basically redefined peer review to suit the fact he hadn’t published in a peer reviewed journal.  His new take on what peer reviewed publishing actually means kicked up enough dust for the ignorant to be blinded.  The reporter should be commended for her research and Monckton should apologise to her.  Monckton needs to do some research on the meaning of peer review and the definition of peer reviewed journals.  But he won’t, its all part of his form, witness the bluster about the Clerk of the House of Lords.  Things are what they are, not what Monckton says they are.

Sceptic says:

04:39pm | 19/07/11

Journalists are allowed to mock the disabled.  Where’s Angry Cripple when you need him?

Tammy says:

12:38am | 20/07/11

Yes Journalists are allowed to mock who ever they want. “Shit happens” and wow didn’t Abbott get it!

Late at night, have to mention the joke I heard today. Hope Punch will publish.

On a plane about to crash was 3 parachutes, Obama, Howard, Gillard and Howard’s 7 year old niece. Howard said that because Obama was the USA President he should be the first to jump. Julia you next as you are the PM of Australia. The 7 year old was now crying and she said Mr Howard you should take the last parachute as you were Australia’s PM for a very long time and adored by the people. Howard replied don’t worry dear, PM Gillard took the bag pack.

Adrian says:

08:56pm | 19/07/11

‘Bias’. So says a guy that regards Andrew Bolt’s writings as the gospel truth. What was stopping the skeptics from buying seats? Does the Press Club prefer GetUp’s Visa, as opposed to the Skeptic Waa Waa card?

Adrian says:

09:00pm | 19/07/11

The National Press Club hosted the debate, genius. Multiple channels, including Sky Channel, broadcast a feed. The ABC had nothing to do with who spoke when.

MarK says:

05:10pm | 19/07/11

There is a HUGE difference between Gore and Monckton.

Monckton will turn up and debate.

Gore hides like the lying no nothing coward he is and will not even do an open press conference.

RichardM says:

06:44pm | 19/07/11

Neither are climate scientists.  Denniss stuck to his area of expertise - what should intelligent people do to determine policy considering the available evidence.  Monckton strayed way outside his area of expertise and training to pull all sorts of rabbits out the hat (references, figures) secure in the knowledge no scientists would be present to challenge him.  Wonder if any of the journos will follow up on his assertions with experts - highly unlikely.  Rubbish debate, rubbish summary, rubbish science.  If this is the way the public is to be informed we are clearly doomed.  Science is about reality not opinions.  Opinions do not need to conform to reality

Denise says:

05:20pm | 19/07/11

The only way his title can be revoked is by royal decree. His is an inherited title and cannot be revoked by parliament

Dazza says:

09:48pm | 19/07/11

“As Monckton says think, research, read and do not believe what others want you to believe.”

A line Monckton uses in many of his performances to give the impression of credibility. It’s just a pity his followers don’t heed his advice.
Surely there couldn’t be a person on this planet that has been debunked more times than Monckton? A google search on “Lord Monckton debunked”  returns over 240,000 hits. Perhaps Ben, Rosie her nephew / grandson could get together one day and watch some of the videos.

Benny says:

09:05am | 20/07/11

The most intelligent comment here!  The climate has been constantly changing since the beginning of this planets existence and there is nothing we can do to change that.  The planet warms, the planet cools.  It’s perfectly normal.

Freeman says:

07:43pm | 19/07/11

Ant’s coverage wasn’t much better.

“was pretty heavily swayed by Denniss when he spoke of consensus. Not just the scientific consensus on human-induced climate change, but the consensus to act among people like BHP chief Marius Kloppers, and indeed every Liberal leader before Abbott. That said, I was impressed with Monckton’s line that any action Australia takes on carbon emissions will reduce global warming by 1/14000th of a degree. Which hardly seems worth it”

None of this is new information, it’s been said a 1000 times. surely there was more substance to the debate than this.

andy says:

07:50pm | 19/07/11

If we can have JuLiar constantly hurled, then the rather disreputable Lord Monckton will have to deal with his legacy. His record of lies far exceeds any normal mortal’s. He constantly cites studies which show the opposite of what he claims, then when the authors of those studies complain, he says he understands the study better than they do. The only reason he has a following is because he loudly and confidently proclaims what a lot of people want to hear.

nicko32 says:

03:55pm | 20/07/11

@John
Here is one to start. There are tens of these already from reputable scientists, some who’s work Monckton used.
http://theconversation.edu.au/hear-ye-hear-ye-moncktons-medieval-warming-tale-is-climate-heresy-2326

stephen says:

12:07am | 20/07/11

No, he is not and we cannot attack him thus.
But Monkton is a Pom. The Liberals have brought him here to show us the way.
Julia should engage the CSIRO to respond.
(Actually they need the publicity and the English need the notoriety.)

Demeter says:

09:11am | 20/07/11

Al Gore well what I think of him is unprintable, managed to overcome that & read your link.
Overpopulation is the “Elephant in the Room” no-one seems to want to talk about. Remember watching Dick Smiths doco on this subject, if memory serves me correctly he was heavily criticized for it. He bought up many pertinent & valid points in regards to population, food, housing etc but as I stated above he was heavily criticized.

Seems it is politically correct to spend vast vast vast amounts on the “Red Herring” & to throw Trillions around trying to capture & control the “Red herring”.
Don’t get me wrong there totally agree that finding new & improved ways of energy, water, resource efficiency etc is of paramount importance let’s face it civilisation has been doing this since the beginning of time, hence the fact that we are no longer living in caves & hunting & foraging for food….amazing the advances that have been made over the centuries when you stop & think about it!  ....Sorry I digress.

Have always found it abhorrent that in the 21st Century Billions are being spent on Foreign Aid yet we still have such a disparate proportion of people unable to access clean drinking water, food, basic health care, education etc etc & often wonder why this is so given the said Billions that “appear” to be spent by Govt’s around the world in trying to remedy the situation many countries & people face in regard to this. Would seem it is more PC to spend Billions & Trillions on the “Red Herring” than it is on Humanity, gee I wonder if a certain party gives any thought to how far $10 Billion dollars would go if directed to actually implementing farming, health, clean water etc in communities in 3rd world countries what’s that saying “give a man a fish & he feeds himself, teach him to fish & he can feed a village” I wonder if the guy who invented the wheel had a $10 Billion dollar fund to help him…no didn’t think so…again since the beginning of time the ingenuity of people & later companies has been astounding…..sorry I digress again
Part of the reason also that what the activists did at the CSIRO with the GM crop of wheat & barley was so despicable (seems as though they are only interested in the “Science” that suits them & their beliefs) can only imagine how many things may have never seen the light of day if these activists had been around say when Alexander Fleming was doing his research into Penicillin or Madam Curie’s research into Radium or Jonas Salk & his vaccine for Polio…. Ah Sorry I have digressed again.

I read your link as far as the “Baby Credits” which bought me back to the “Red Herring” & considering the “Red Herring” in humans is the second most abundant element by mass of about 18.5% after oxygen, then possibly “Baby Credits” & “Red Herring” credits go hand in hand in attempting to control the “Elephant in the Room” as both ” Baby credits” & “Red Herring Credits” are inextricably linked.
Thankyou again for the link & your post was very thoughtprovoking….& guess I qualify for a “Silver Star”

John Oh says:

11:12am | 20/07/11

You obviously havent seen the Aussie scientist and advisor Dr David Evans.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Di5FyndJbz0
If you want to know the truth, dont view this….

Sydney Gee says:

05:57pm | 21/07/11

Totally agree Frank and you can see why the delusional global warmers fought so hard to ban the Lord. The childish questions of the Press dopes were an embarrassment.  No wonder the Lord told them to do their homework. lol.

Anthony says:

09:41pm | 21/07/11

Ah, what? Lord Monckton is 100% a lord by hereditary right as a peer of the realm. His correct term of address IS ‘Your lordship’. The question whether he is a member of the house of lords - a subset of peers - is the only contention.

Succinctly then, the House of Lords passed a bill that removed all hereditary peers from membership to the house - however the bill is actually powerless since by the law itself, only a specific bill per Lord, or a Monarchical decree can remove that membership - and neither has happened.

Whether Monckton is a member of the house of lords or not, he IS a Lord as a Viscount, and his correct form of address regardless if “Your Lordship”.

Just another bit of dishonest tripe from mainstream media that you’ve picked up.

MoncktonLies says:

12:27pm | 20/07/11

Monckton is Chief Policy Adviser at something calling itself the Science and Public Policy Institute. It’s hard to tell where this Institute gets its funding or how much it pays Monckton and the rest of its hired-gun deniers. Its website is opaque on how it is supported.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/personnel.html

Anthony says:

09:55pm | 21/07/11

Monckton is on record that he doesn’t get paid for his work for SPPI. He is independently wealthy.

Oh sorry, another perfectly good aspiration to cast against the man, down the drain.

Sydney Gee says:

05:01pm | 20/07/11

I do not agree with name calling.  All my friends call Julia the Wanker from Wales but I will have no part of that, even though it may be correct.

Anthony says:

09:52pm | 21/07/11

The man suffers from a disease and cannot help his eyes or fixed smile. It shows very eloquently that you have no argument, no facts, and no moral or ethical character when you sink to criticizing a man’s appearance over his words and actions.

Sydney Gee says:

09:03am | 22/07/11

Oh!  also read the news story in todays Press that sea levels are NOT rising in Australia. The BS lies are being exposed and Australians are not mugs as Julia will find out.