Geoff Davies you have just shown how and why you people are no better than those you criticise.

Unless I read it incorrectly then the most egregious comments were those Monckton was quoting as having been said by others, namely Hansen.

As for the failure to pay just terms for preventing someone from using their property it had nothing to do with the land being salty.That was an excuse, not the reason.

As for the precious dears who pass themselves off as GW scientists in this country, it might help their cause if they were more consistent and displayed a reasonable ethical and moral base.

They didnt mind being photogrhaped attending the screening of Al Gores AIT and rated it very highly as being consistent with the science, but have been remarkably silent since it was exposed as a flawed and exaggerated nonsense.

Al Gore is an unmitigated crook who blatantly used the AIT as an prospectus to increase his personal wealth ..and still the scientific community remained silent... as they did also with Mann's infamous hockey stick.

Naturally we wont mention the shonkiness being exposed by the Climategate CRU affair, involving as it does, fraud and corruption of the Peer Review system,as well as bastardry of the highest order.

So if Monckton has upset your delicate sensibilities ..tough. He probably has good reason.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/10/un-ipcc-chief-pachauri-under-fire-in-india-for-conflicts-of-interest/#more-15101

Not only Gore but Pachauri as well .. and he is the Chairman of the IPCC and ha so many conflicts of interest it is simply unbelievable.

Monckton is doing us all a great service by coming here and raising the profile of just what the hell has been going on.

Doesnt look that flash to me.

Isn't it nice to see some balance in this debate.I can hear the grinding of teeth and seething venom from the AGW religion from some of the posts here.They are feeling a bit frustrated since the whole charade is coming asunder.

Not only should Kevin Rudd be charged with crimes against humanity,he should be charged with treason for trying to sign our freedom and sovereignty away at Copenhagen in the name of this Global Govt.

As I said in the email Christopher Monckton,you will be more than welcome.There will be much weeping and gnashing of teeth from the AGW worshippers.Can you find them a new religion to comfort them?

The only sensible point made in this diatribe from Lord Monckton is his reference to biofuels, particularly their potential to divert land from food production thereby creating scarcity and increased prices, a subject I wrote on last month. He might have pointed out that their production and use has more to do with the escalating cost and scarcity of oil than it does with reducing greenhouse gas emissions produced by burning it.

Monckton tells us that starvation in Haiti is due to diversion of land away from food for production of biofuels. He claims this is due to an international conspiracy led by the IPCC and fiendish scientists cunningly placed world-wide in meteorological offices calling for reduction of greenhouse gas (CO2-e) concentrations in the atmosphere.

Simply asserting that global warming is not occurring and that CO2-e emissions or their level of concentration in the atmosphere is not causative, does not make it fact. Nor do his other claims. They need to be supported by evidence and cogent argument which Monckton does not provide.

Australians are not fools, even if Monckton chooses to treat them as such by using vituperative language coupled with disjointed and irrational thinking as a substitute for supporting evidence, facts and data. We have seen the way he has previously presented “supportive” material. From this we could rightly conclude that he is by no means averse to distorting and misrepresenting facts, even making them up.

Anyone has the right to be skeptical about global warming and its causes or. hold the view that climate change is simply not occurring, as some do. However, they must be prepared to defend their position by at least calling into question by showing that the scientific basis on which an increasing number of people base their beliefs is wrong.

Lord Monckton does not do this. He does a disservice to those who genuinely believe that global warming is either not occurring or has nothing to do with CO2-e emissions. Their position is not supported by the use of extreme language to express extreme views, the best that Monckton offers.

Geoff Davies, Snake, E. Sykes (surely not the comedian?) and Jedimaster seem to have been taught that carbon dioxide is a pollutant. Suggestion, hold your breath for sixty seconds every minute and you will start reducing that life supporting gas.
Jedimaster accuses the more intelligent, less gullible readers of OLO of abusive responses. I doubt very much that he has had very much education because it is the AGW alarmists that have been abusive.
To listen to Kevin Rudd last year was to hear a great list of abuse. With the holocaust in mind, those of us who are not gullible well remember the German death camps of WW2 and we remember those in the world that deny that six million people were ruthlessly exterminated. We are not to be confused with them.
It is the AGW religious zealouts that have set the standard for abusive language.
So I will finish in their language.
What you claim is a brain is fooling you into believing that humans are so powerful that we can alter our climate. Your brain is telling you that a CPRS tax will reduce the frequency of CO2 in our atmosphere. It is sending you into a religious frenzy where your pathetic beliefs are highlighting your ignorance.
If you know how to use a search engine, search SEPP or NIPCC. When found, settle down and try and understand that therein lies the truth.
Finally, congratulations OLO on your enlightened position on this crime against humanity. Well done indeed.

A POINT OF ORDER

I assume Monckton is referring to James Hansen's article in New Scientist explaining why he (Hansen) believes that huge sea level rises are possible – not certain – within the next century. The article was posted on the New Scientist website on 25 July 2007. Here is a link (subscription required)

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19526141.600-huge-sea-level-rises-are-coming--unless-we-act-now.html?page=1

It is a carefully reasoned article based on the mechanics of ice melts. Hansen freely admits that most glaciologists do not agree with his analysis.

Quote from Hansen article:

"Indeed, the palaeoclimate record contains numerous examples of ice sheets yielding sea level rises of several metres per century when forcings were smaller than that of the business-as-usual scenario. For example, about 14,000 years ago, sea level rose approximately 20 metres in 400 years, or about 1 metre every 20 years."

In other words much gentler warming than the one we are now experiencing caused rises of 5 metres per century.

I do not know enough about the mechanics of ice melts to judge whether Hansen is correct. All I can say is that from a strictly mechanical point of view his hypothesis of a catastrophic DISINTEGRATION of the ice shelves appears PLAUSIBLE.

Were the ice sheet in Greenland to disintegrate entirely it would cause a 7 metre rise in sea levels. A catastrophic Antarctic disintegration would produce a much greater sea level rise.

As is ever the case when climate change deniers rant the basic physics underlying AGW theory is ignored.

The situation in Haiti is tragic. Diverting agricultural land to produce biofuels could rightly be described as a crime against humanity. Not sure what this has to do with the basic science of AGW.

I can find no reference to Hansen calling for anyone to be killed. If he did it would be appalling and he would deserve the sack.

If Monbiot's allegations that Plimer lied and fabricated are correct then Plimer definitely deserves the sack. I do not think that tenure should protect Plimer if he is guilty of deliberate falsification.

So far it appears Plimer will not sue. 'Nuff said.