The AGU climate policy statement as redrafted by Monckton

The AGU climate policy statement as redrafted by Monckton (2013-08-07). Anthony Watts posts a “guest essay” from the denialism’s leading intellectual, the publicity-seeking self-promoting fringe politician Lord Christopher Monckton.

Monckton gives us the denialist fantasy version of the American Geophysical Union’s periodically restated policy on climate change. No link to the true document provided by Watts or Monckton. In Monckton’s fevered imagination, “Our influence on the climate is minor but beneficial.” So, sorry everyone! False alarm.

His version would be correct if the AGU’s scientific go-to guy was a demented fringe politician with a journalism diploma who publishes Sudoku books instead of fifteen real and highly qualified scientists.

Journalist, AIDS curer, Nobel Prize Winner!

Monckton’s verbal acrobatics can be entertaining as he tries to simultaneously obscure his flimsy arguments and showcase his ‘towering intellect’ through wacky insults, but I won’t bothered wasting my time on the underlying debunked garden-variety nonsense. Try wottsupwiththatblog or HotWhopper if you want to figure out what he’s squawking about.

6 thoughts on “The AGU climate policy statement as redrafted by Monckton

  1. I really like this blog but if you are going to put Sudoku writers in with the likes of Monckton….. I happen to have some excellent Sudoku books ;)

    [We must have the moral courage to acknowledge the accidentally useful contributions of even the most truculent pompous clowns. – Ben ]

  2. Ad hominem and all that (sorry) but, still, I can’t help but think of an over-cooked prawn every time I see a mug shot of the good lord and then hafta laugh when I remember that’s how he, with a complete lack of self-awareness, had referred to Dr. John Abraham after Abraham had just thoroughly exposed and debunked him. As I recall, he also peppered it with threats of lawsuits.

    [The usual advice to them wot find themselves in hole is to stop digging. Monckton just tries to dig faster! – Ben]

  3. It appears to me that wattsupmybutt is just getting more and more extreme by the day. The numbers of readers is dropping – I suspect as much from the ‘reasonable’ deniers being put off by the comments from the extremists, and the continual Gish Gallop publishing of any idiotic idea from the usual crowd of idiots like Monckton and Eisenbech. If you add to that a moderation policy which excludes anyone who does not worship at the alter of the great Willard, and hypocritically allows any ad hom comment by a denier, the site has become a joke (more so that it was in the past).
    You will probably have to find something new to do in the not to far distant future Ben.

    [I can’t think of a better turn of events… – Ben]

    • I think your observation is correct. I’ve been reading WUWT for about 5 years now and have noticed the recent decline in what little quality there was to begin with. (I stopped reading a year ago, relying now on the strong stomachs of those who rebut it to keep me up to date without having to go there.)

      I noted a while ago (I think it was when Muller’s research sided with the science) that Willard’s response would probably be to just get meaner, nastier, and weirder. I think that’s come to pass. Yes, he appears to have lost those deniers who can’t keep up with the 2+2=5 mentality of the few writers Willard has left.

  4. Aside from the sheer entertainment value (in a Jeremy Kyle way, I’m from Britain) of reading anything WUWT and other deniers spout, I tend to avoid them like the pox they show themselves to be! I choose to be well informed, not wilfully ignorant!

  5. so successful is “watts up with that” that this website had to be drummed up,

    Ooops!!!! shot yourself in the foot with that one. But a good idea as you will pick up readers by mistake when they come here. I am guessing by the limited of comments it will be an uphill struggle for you.

    [Yes, my website is a result of instructions from “The Committee”, desperate to deflect Anthony’s accurate scientific scrutiny! Or is it the product of clear-thinking individual disgusted by Anthony’s baseless, dishonest attacks? – Ben]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s