27 thoughts on “What a load of F words!”

  6. I have two suggestions for the name of the prize. The second may be too off-color here, so I will understand if it is deleted.

    Fearless fumer of fugly flatulence

    Fantabuluos fallater of fossil fuel’s flopper

  7. Lucia,
    We understand that you don’t particularly like Monckton [just like there are those who don’t like the way Conrad Black expresses himself -said in passing, Black is a gifted writer and highly regarded historian and biographer-] but you should really see and hear some of the alarmist kooks the good Viscount has been taping on video in Cancun for some perpective in jaw-droppers, if nothing else.

  13. Hmmm I don’t think Lucia dislikes Monckton, I think she just doesn’t appreciate his haughty British tone. Then again, his opponents really hate it. The funny thing about Monckton is that he seems to know a lot about everything. Just look at his list of duties when he served as Margaret Thatcher’s adviser. A good way to think of Monckton would be to call him the British version of Karl Rove. I think it is pretty amazing that Monckton knows so much more about the climate system than actual climate scientists do themselves. And this is not a slap at climate science; it is just that there are so many clowns who have injected themselves into the issue that they’ve ruined the credibility of the entire field.

    Something very telling to me was when Richard Lindzen was asked on a radio program where the average person should go to obtain a better understanding of climate science. Lindzen recommended a book written 10-15yrs ago by an economist. Yes, that is right, an economist. That tells me he has almost no confidence in his peers, which he should not anyway. They have been embarassing themselves and hold no integrity. How can they honestly predict severe consequences for increasing co2 when there has been more co2 in the atmosphere? I’m going to continue asking this question until I get a satisfactory answer. It is illogical.

  14. “I think it is pretty amazing that Monckton knows so much more about the climate system than actual climate scientists do themselves.”

    I think it is pretty amazing that you think that.

  15. I’ve said elsewhere in regard to Monckton, that anything sounds more convincing when spoken with a proper received pronunication accent. And we all love a good alliteration — remember “nattering nabobs of negativism”? [Safire, I think, came up with that one.]

    Although it lacks fricatives, perhaps Monckton’s missive mañana might mention that Cancún catastrophe cackling creates climate crisis by conglomerating canards. Reason rarely runs rampant; regard ’round the rhetoric.

  16. HaroldW

    I’ve said elsewhere in regard to Monckton, that anything sounds more convincing when spoken with a proper received pronunication accent.

    I think this is true for some all listeners and not others.

  17. A professional politician perforce practices proper pronuciation, preferably prior to performing in Parliament before peers, lest the press predict a pompous pratfall, practically precipitating plummeting popularity amongst polled people.

  18. Lucia: “I think this is true for some … listeners and not others.”
    I’m sure you’re correct. But in the States, I suspect that one is more likely than not to have that prejudice. Well, at least this one.

  19. In the UK he has no significant status at all. At best he’s a penny a dozen public school ranter and a second tier one at that. Unless it’s in comedy, or comes from the odd pointless contrarian columnist, most people here think people who write like Monckton are a bit juvenile.

  20. Shooshman (#63495),
    “How can they honestly predict severe consequences for increasing co2 when there has been more co2 in the atmosphere? I’m going to continue asking this question until I get a satisfactory answer. It is illogical.”

    First of all, it is the climate scientists themselves using ice core data that elucidated the long-term high and low levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and estimates of the corresponding temps. This is not new observations or insights that you are bringing to the table.

    See data for last 400,000 years: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/temperature-change.html (note the total change of 8-9 degrees in the cycles and note that we have for some time been at a maximum in the current cycle)

    In the past orbital changes that produced changes in available energy form the sun were the primary forcing agents for the ca. 100,000 year cycles seen in the data, with CO2 serving as one of many positive feedbacks. Lags between the two were due to a slow response in the uptake or release of CO2 from the oceanic reservoir.

    Currently, we are seeing a change from the maximum level to a new, higher maximum. It corresponds with and can be explained by a corresponding increase in CO2.

  24. Super Selection Boris and Lucia

    A cute link Boris!

    Lucia, next time I shall wait much longer before deciding that my comment didn’t upload due to a turbulent air flow through my modem.

Comments are closed.