2 thoughts on “Lord Monckton’s trip to New Zealand – August 4-6”

1. I spent an unfortunate several hours actually listening carefully to Monckton’s arguments and comparing them with John Abraham’s arguments, and checking the foundations of both. I watched the whole series of presentations, back and forth, and my, was it a waste of time. Monckton persistently avoided answering Abraham’s main points, focusing only on details where there seemed to be any possibility of establishing uncertainty — and he did a bad job of even that. But he certainly talked a lot, and if one had not heard the opposite side of the argument, one might have come to the conclusion that all that talk actually amounted to something.
   I’m not keen to leap into believing in the catastrophe that Abraham is suggesting awaits us (along with the majority of scientists in any field related or even unrelated to climate). But I have a science background, and I have pursued the evidence for and against, and it would seem intellectual high treason to deny the overwhelmingly strong case the evidence paints.
   Also, I can recognise an oil-sponsored corporate lackey (and I’m talking about Monckton, _not_ Al Gore) when I see one (or rather, when I check out his affiliations and background).
   It seems the phrase “climate realist” has been abused here, perhaps along the lines of “Jewish Holocaust realist”: where “realist” actually means “apologist denier”. To all those who took the bait of believing that catastrophic climate change is a lie fed to us by big corporations, ask yourself: what would they hope to gain by frightening us away from business as usual? Surely the fact that the majority of these scientists are NOT supported by corporations, while the deniers mostly have clear affiliations with oil companies, would tend to paint the opposite picture?
   The experts are pretty much all saying that this is one of the most important issues to face humanity, that it could have enormous consequences for humans and all life on the planet. Before we dismiss them, and especially before we campaign to have them discredited, I think it behooves us to educate ourselves on both sides of the argument, use our critical judgement very carefully, and make sure we’re not just sucking eggs.
   As a past home-schooler, one of my most highly valued attainments is the ability to think for myself.

2. In reply to Ben Whitmore August 2, 2011 at 2:25 pm.

   Ben,

   In ‘the overwhelmingly strong case the evidence paints’ could you please cite the paper or papers that convinced you, that we have

   a) unnatural, runaway, dangerous global warming

   b) human carbon dioxide emissions are the major cause

   Chris

Comments are closed.