Sancho - wasn't that back in 1987 at the height of the AIDS fear? When a lot of people didn't know what AIDS was or how it was transmitted, when we had media campaigns here with the grim reaper with a bowling ball, killing young teens - everyone feared an epidemic, you probably did too. The UN was gearing up for one of its pandemics from memory, a bit like swine flu wasn't.

What possessed you to dish up something like that, 33 years ago? Jeez you folks must be worried to try crap like that? What was that, shrill skeptics, no I think shrill and desperate "climate scientologists".

Come on, what's that to do with the excellent job Lord Monckton is doing giving some balance to the subject of Climate Change and expose the UN for the biased position they hold?

At least he gives some air to the skeptical side of things, a bit like you all tolerating Al Gore, because he brings attention to the AGW end of the world hysteria, so I think people like Dr Ian Plimer and Lord Monckton bring attention, whatever their personal faults, to the counter side of things and the mixed profiteers like the UN and "climate scientology" industry.

An excellent and refreshing article, I enjoyed it very much, it is such a change from the gloomy, end of the world, all in CAPS "MY BIG PROBLEM IS .. ", yes we know, whatever it is you don't like about skeptics, or some particular person.

As if politicians are ever going to do anything worldly, we can't even get a decent and reliable water supply in Australia. Not because of a lack of water, it floods regularly enough, but the lack of infrastructure.

Graham Young issued a timely warning. If this forum is to be relevant, shrill and unreasoned posts directed at people personally, ought to be banned. Lord Monckton made some rather good points. We currently have nine scamming cheating governments in Australia, breaking the law every day, and a sadly ineffective and ineffectual Federal Government. When the compact that created Australia was given a Royal Identifier, the blessings of Almighty God were free to flow down from above, and the people free to flourish and prosper in freedom.

In all Christian Churches of all denominations in Australia today, the same message is passed on to the people. Almighty God is King. This fundamental principle, is undermined by the assertion of State Sovereignty. The fate of Peter Spencer is held in the hand of the Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police. If he cannot convince Peter Spencer that he, the Commissioner has the power under S 8 Australian Federal Police Act 1979 to ensure that when Peter goes to court again, he will get a fair trial, then he should give a better man a go at the job.

The assertion of State Sovereignty, by the State of New South Wales and its use by the Howard Government, to scam the world about Australia’s global warming credentials, not only from New South Wales but all over Australia, is a crime against humanity. No one should be sent to prison except on the judgment of his peers. Sentencing is a farce, in Australia because Judges do it, not the judges prescribed by s 79 Constitution.

Its not just Peter Spencer it is everyone who is affected. An organized crime gang has taken over Australia, and its roots are in the legal professions that exercise monopolies in every State. From cradle to grave we are governed by lawyers, who say they follow the laws made by Parliament. They are very selective about it, just as the AGW people are very selective about what data they accept. I am sure right now the Northern hemisphere could use a little more global warming

It seems that "This article hits a new low in viciously emotive language, irrelevant hyperbole and hysteria, and parades some of the usual egregious myths about the science. The local Alf Garnett fan club will love it of course, the ones who would agree with old Alf that Jesus was an Englishman (have a look:"

including its references to "Alf Garnett" does not constitute "flaming" but responding to it does.

So, in sanitised form I repeat

AGW and Climate Change are frauds

An excuse dreamed up by the collectivists who infiltrated the environmental movement 20 years ago (or so) and have found the panic button for international hysteria needed for their cause

Vis as Lenin said “A revolution is impossible without a revolutionary situation; furthermore, not every revolutionary situation leads to revolution.”

“AGW / Climate Change” was simply the “revolutionary situation” needed for the left to foment their little revolution, now it has been seen as a fraud and has failed, just as their policies and politics always fail.

Of course they (the collectivists) will try again.

30 years ago the fear of “global warming” was a fear of “global cooling”

I wonder what barmy bulltish the "left" will hang their hat on next?

Almost everything Christopher Monckton says about climate and climate science is wrong. More astonishing than how much he gets wrong is how many commenters are so willing and eager to accept his rantings as relevant.

Andy1 what utter rubbish you go on with yet again, there is no "war on science" that's just you being melodramatic, there is skepticism about climate science, since we've discovered, after much suspicion that the measurements you go on about are all tweaked, and "brought into line".

There is no war against medicine, physics, mathematics, cancer research, any other field, nor is there a war against climate science, those in climate science though are bringing it into disrepute, and try to justify this as someone else's fault - it's not, you are your own worst enemies.

Try to get off the hysterics and be rational, give out the raw data to people who ask for it - reposition the temperature sensors so they collect true measurement - the satellites currently are the only trustworthy sources. Don't try to win arguments by authority, it just seems like a cosy club you keep company with.

Too many people in the AGW community have too much to gain to be trusted as independent or objective and greed is a strong driver. Billions are available to climate change research, and yet you seem to think there is no problem with every piece of research being tainted with, "and the effects of climate change" tacked on to get that precious grant, or PHd or promotion.

"Climate change snalyses consistent with the basic laws of physics and chemistry", so climate is simple is it, why don't the models forcast the future then, why isn't weather predictable, if it is "simple"?

"With consequent rise of CO2 and methane during the last part of the 20th century and first part of the 21st century at rates which exceed any known in the geological record of the last 55 million years", so what - what does that prove, as Lord Monckton says, there is nothing more than coincidence.

You're asking us to gamble with the world's future because you can't back up the "climate science", no thanks. Please don't whine about being called out, when you clearly are trying to be adversarial to skeptics.

Who is financing Viscount Monckton's tour of Australia?