Lord Christopher Monckton

In polite conversation lords and leaders will discuss how it is important to be considerate of others. When civilized people pray at the dinner table to their god, they usually (if children are at the table), include things like: Lord, thank you for this food... and then somewhere they add, and Lord, please take care of all the poor and hungry...

All well and good, as long as that doesn't really happen. That would only cause things like 'redistribution of wealth' and 'socialism' and 'communism' and 'dictatorships' and the 'destruction of democracy'.

If Yoda, from 'Star Wars', could chime in on this one, he might say of Lord Monckton 'The hypocrisy is thick with this one.'

It is important to debunk Lord Christopher Monckton by direct rebuttal and reason. Facts included! Read on:

Lord Monckton was born into his title. Apparently he has chosen to use his position and risk his reputation by spreading disinformation regarding the science of global warming. His opinions aside, his perspectives on the matter can best be described as naive, ignorant, or at worst fraudulent, or some combination of the three.

As to his title 'Lord' Monckton admits: "I'm afraid I do exploit it quite shamelessly."

His main claim to fame is having worked for Margaret Thatcher as a policy adviser. It seems he was not very good at it though, at least not in the context of global warming. Margaret Thatcher was a very vocal proponent of moving quickly and meaningfully on the challenge of our time, that being 'human caused global warming'.

Main Entry: char·la·tan

1: quack 2
2: one making usually showy pretenses to knowledge or ability : fraud, faker

Main Entry: in·flam·ma·to·ry

1: tending to excite anger, disorder, or tumult : seditious
2: tending to inflame or excite the senses

Inflammatory speeches are the hallmark of Monckton's method. Whether using facts out of context or appeals to emotion, his misrepresentation of fact and his use of 'facts out of context' are clearly visible to the discerning mind.

It turns out that Monckton's main claim to fame contradicts his current position on global warming.

His main claim to fame is having worked for Margaret Thatcher as a policy adviser. It seems he was not very good at it though, at least not in the context of global warming. Margaret Thatcher was a very vocal proponent of moving quickly and meaningfully on the challenge of our time, that being 'human caused global warming'.

Margaret Thatcher

(first world leader to warn of the dangers of global warming)

Margaret Thatcher on 'Global Warming'

"The danger of global warming is as yet unseen, but real enough for us to make changes and sacrifices so that we do not live at the expense of future generations".

"That prospect is a new factor in human affairs. It's comparable in its  implications to the discovery of how to split the atom. Indeed its results could be even more far reaching."

"No generation has a freehold on this earth. All we have is a life tenancy with a full repairing lease."

October, 2009

Lord Monckton has found another way to "shamelessly" take advantage of his inherited title by thrusting himself into the position of being a 'defender of American democracy'. He relies on building straw man arguments while he appeals to the emotions of the American people.

What is he saying now?

World Government; Communism, Global Climate Treaty; Transfer or Redistribution of Wealth; Climate Debt; CO2 less than 1/6 than IPCC estimates (Lindzen). He claims President Obama said during his election campaign that the US Constitution is only a piece of paper (one might think that that would have come up during the election campaign though?). Actually this sounds like a rehash of the rumor that President Bush said the constitution was 'just a piece of paper' in 2005. Monckton has merely replaced the name Bush with Obama. The degree of chicanery in Moncktons remarks remains high.

Essentially, he is making a false argument. Monckton states:

"What they're now going to do is to set up a world government and the word government actually appears in the treaty. But, you heard it hear first, the word election, democracy, vote, or ballot, does not appear anywhere in the 200 pages of the treaty. It's going to be a dictatorship."

and

"What we are talking about is a fledgling world government and because it's not elected, it's essentially a communist world government."

A veritable litany of error and contextual misrepresentation (see spin here & here). First the document he is referring to is a 'draft document'. It is trying to set up governance (administration) for the treaty (and yes, governments will need to be involved in the treaty). Without governance, how can the treaty be enforced (without enforcement, why make a treaty)? Second, it is unlikely it will be signed this year anyway, based on all that we are hearing about how things are going with COP15.

Monckton is making the rounds on CNN, Glenn Beck, etc. He has figured out how to get the spotlight to shine on himself and will hold on to that as long as he can.

Simply put, Monckton, and others that are delaying action, are making money and gaining fame, at the expense of everyone on the planet.

Reality

He claims recent evidence proves sensitivity is lower than estimated. This of course based on the work of Richard Lindzen. Apparently, Lindzen is connected through a string of associations with lobbyists that exist to protect fossil fuel industry profits. We, the people, need to be aware of what it really costs if we do nothing. According to work done at MIT, combined with the Center for Strategic Analysis, the cost is hard to even fathom.

A global treaty is needed to begin to address global warming in a meaningful manner. The majority of studies indicates that climate may be more sensitive that models are prediction. Without a treaty, democracy itself will ultimately fail. History has shown repeatedly, that when resources get scarce, democracy suffers.

If the goal is to protect democracy, then we need to rapidly address global warming mitigation and adaptation issues.

Monckton thinks short-term, in the sense that if he were not inflammatory on the issue, he would not be making money talking about it, and he would not get to appear on national television. We, the people will need to be less emotional about the issue and more realistic. Increased CO2 and other greenhouse gases from industrial sources are affecting the climate. Inaction will ultimately destroy the world economy. How fast? It begins now.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown, October 19, 2009:

...in just 25 years the glaciers in the Himalayas, which provide water for 3/4 of a billion people could disappear entirely. IPCC estimates tell us now, that by 2080, an extra 1.8 billion people, equal to a quarter of the worlds current population, could be living and dying without enough water.

Draft of Treaty: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2009/awglca7/eng/inf02.pdf

Climate Debt

To not address climate debt is to agree that Americans to not believe in justice. America was founded on certain principles including justice, liberty, fairness. If we abandon the founding principles of fairness, freedom and justice, on what basis can one claim to be American, on what principle? America has emitted or been responsible for the emission of the majority of greenhouse gas emissions. Those that will suffer first, and most, in the beginning, live in countries that have only emitted 8% or less of global emissions. On what basis can those responsible for the largest amount of emissions claim no responsibility for the result of that emission?

Summary

Monckton is playing to the crowd and he has an audience. He is taking it a bit far though. When his spin of the message goes so far out into unsupportable claims, eventually, his words will be ignored. In the mean time, he knows he has found a spotlight that he can make sure shines on him, so it is doubtful he will let that go easily.

Links

• Material courtesy: http://www.ossfoundation.us/christopher-monckton