Thread: Christopher Monckton - Climate scam: A dire threat to sovereignty

RIGHT TO REPLY

Climate scam: A dire threat to sovereignty

Exclusive: Christopher Monckton of Brenchley comments from U.N.'s Doha confab

Published: 20 hours ago
by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

DOHA, Qatar – Ms. Christiana Figueres, chief secretary of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, has told a press conference here that the 18th Conference of the States Parties will bring about “a complete economic transformation of the world.”

She does not have in mind a democratic, free-market transformation. The intention of these 18 successive annual vacations for the world’s pampered dictators in exotic, sun-drenched locations is what it always was: to create a treaty binding more than 190 nations to do as the Secretariat says. Democracy? What’s that?

Todd Stern, the U.S. lead negotiator, was similarly upbeat at his own press conference here. With all the fervor of an evangelical preacher in an Alabama mega-church, he predicted that the “Doha Way Forward,” following the “Bali Road-Map,” the “Durban Platform,” etc., would achieve a second Kyoto Protocol – a treaty that all the nations of the world would ratify.

At least one nation will not ratify any such world-government power-grab by the world’s ruling elites. In 1997, while Al Gore was president of the United States Senate, it voted 95 to nil not to accept any treaty like the Kyoto Protocol.

The menace to democracy your senators recognized in the absurdly expensive, drawn-out U.N. climate “process” is grave. Shortly before the Copenhagen climate conference in 2009, Dr Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Institute for Astrophysics sent me an urgent email with a link to an obscure U.N. website that carried a draft of the then-intended Treaty of Copenhagen.

The 186-page draft was a remarkably detailed blueprint for world government, with the grim Framework Convention Secretariat as its ruling junta. Nowhere in this monstrous document were the words “democracy,” “election,” “ballot” or “vote” mentioned.

It was at once clear that the sole purpose of the climate scam, as the U.N. saw it, was to serve as a Trojan horse allowing it to achieve its long-held ambition of destroying national sovereignty and transferring all real political power to itself.

They demonize capitalism and freedom … and it’s working! Read Brian Sussman’s new book, “Eco-Tyranny: How the Left’s Green Agenda Will Dismantle America”

For this fell purpose, it was essential that the scare be maintained even after all scientific credibility had been lost. That became clear to the U.N. after the catastrophic failure of the Copenhagen talks, helped along by the coldest winter weather Denmark had ever experienced.

Ever since then, the U.N. has been doing its dishonest worst to talk up the climate scare.

Here are some recent remarks by its dismal secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon:

November 9: “Extreme weather due to climate change is the new normal … Our challenge remains, clear and urgent: to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to strengthen adaptation to … even larger climate shocks … and to reach a legally binding climate agreement by 2015 … This should be one of the main lessons of Hurricane Sandy.”

Nov. 13: “The science is clear; we should waste no more time on that debate.”

Nov. 14: “Two weeks ago, Hurricane Sandy struck the eastern seaboard of the United States. A nation saw the reality of climate change. The recovery will cost tens of billions of dollars. The cost of inaction will be even higher. We must reduce our dependence on carbon emissions.”

At the U.N.’s annual yakfests, it is traditional for “scientists” to come forward with lurid papers describing how Things Are Worse Than We Ever Predicted. That is becoming harder after 16 years without any statistically significant global warming, but they are still at it.

I watched as a head-bangingly sycophantic youth televised an interview with Dr. Riccardo Valentini of the University of East Anglia (where else?) in the makeshift “Climate Change Studio” at the Doha Conference Center.

“Dr. Valentini, today, you’ve published an important and wonderful paper in Nature Climate Science saying that CO2 concentration is rising so fast that there will be 4 to 6 Celsius degrees of global warming by 2100. Is that right?”

The paper – by an amazing coincidence that always seems to happen at these conferences – had come out that very day. The author said CO2 concentration in the last two years had been rising very fast, leading to 4-6 Cº of warming by the end of the century.

“So this is really, really serious and urgent, isn’t it, and governments must do a lot more to cut carbon emissions straight away?”

Yes, said Dr. Valentini, urgency was important. Much more money must be spent.

No one was allowed to ask questions, but I caught Valentini on his way out. I asked how much CO2 would be in the atmosphere by 2100 on present trends. Valentini did not know, but he thought it might be around 700 parts per million.

I said there was nothing new in that projection: The IPCC’s previous assessment report in 2007 had assumed 713 ppmv by 2100. On that central estimate, they had projected only 2.8 Cº warming by 2100 (shortly to be revised downward to 2.2 Cº). Why was he now saying the warming would be 4-6 Cº?

His reply: “I’m not a climate scientist.” He had simply assumed that the climate models 16 years without global warming had proven wrong were right.

I asked him whether trying to prevent that warming would be likely to cost more than letting it happen and adapting to it. He said he rather agreed with that analysis.

The unspeakable BBC featured his paper and his conclusion on all of its main news bulletins. Yet it did not ask him any of the right questions. Like the other true-believers here, it had followed the definition neither of science nor of genuine enquiry but of faith. It had believed without doubting. And without checking.

The climate scam is a mortal threat to democracy. However, if America stands firm for just a few more years, until it becomes obvious to all that the mad scientists were more concerned with grants than with truth, we may yet prevent the world government that Mr. Ban longs for.

A leading U.S. senator “gets it” — read James Inhofe’s book “The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future”

Climate scam: A dire threat to sovereignty

Fmr. Thatcher advisor Lord Monckton evicted from UN climate summit after challenging global warming -- 'Escorted from the hall and security officers stripped him of his UN credentials'

Monckton to UN: 'In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming'
Calls to 'deport Monckton' from UN conference in Qatar


Thursday, December 06, 2012By Marc Morano – Climate Depot

After the news conference, and as diplomats gathered for the climate conference president's assessment of how close countries are to agreement, Monckton quietly slipped into the seat reserved for the delegation of Myanmar and clicked the button to speak.
"In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming," Monckton said as confused murmurs filled the hall and then turned into a chorus of boos.
The stunt infuriated negotiators and activists here who gather every year to address what they believe is one of the world's top threats, the steady rise of man-made global warming.
As Monckton was escorted from the hall and security officers stripped him of his U.N. credentials, several people noted that just a few hours earlier a group of young activists had been thrown out of the convention center and deported. Their crime: unfurling an unauthorized banner calling for the Qatari hosts to lead the negotiations to a strong conclusion.

By late today, several activists attending the conference had posted calls to "deport Monckton" on their Twitter feeds.
#


Fmr. Thatcher advisor Lord Monckton evicted from UN climate summit after challenging global warming -- 'Escorted from the hall and security officers stripped him of his UN credentials' | Climate Depot

Related links on 16 year global warming pause:

UK Daily Mail: 'Global warming stopped 16 years ago' according to UK Met Office 'quietly released' report -- 'Pause' in warming lasted about same time as when temps rose, 1980 to 1996' -- 'The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land & sea, was issued quietly on internet, without any media fanfare, & , until today, it has not been reported. This stands in sharp contrast to release of previous figures 6 months ago, which went only to end of 2010 – a very warm year...From beginning of 1997 until August 2012 there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temps.'
UK Daily Mail: 'Claim that there has been any statistically significant warming for past 16 years is therefore unsustainable' -- Reaffirms 'a 16-year 'pause' in rising temps' -- 'Two new separate peer-reviewed studies, published in prestigious academic journals last week [challenged 'Hockey Stick'] -- 'The level of warmth during the peak of the MWP in the second half of the 10th Century, equaled or slightly exceeded the mid-20th Century warming.' There was also a pronounced warming period in Roman times'
Flashback 2011: A PNAS peer-reviewed admission that 'global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008'
Prof. Judith Curry on 16 year global temps: ' Nothing in Met Office's statement...effectively refutes [UK Daily Mail] Rose's argument that there has been no increase in global avg. surface temps for past 16 years' -- Curry defends UK Daily Mail article: 'How does this refute Rose's argument? No statistically significant positive trend, and it makes it look like [warmist Skeptical Science] hasn't done their homework with the latest data'
Prof. Curry: 'I think Rose's 2nd article is well done. He lays out arguments the other 'side' is making, & provides his response. It is a reasonable portrayal of debate surrounding this issue' -- Judith Curry: 'The trend since 1997 is very small, much smaller than the decadal trend of 0.2C that we have been led to expect by the IPCC for the early part of the 21st century...'
Prof. Judith Curry on 16 year global temps: ' Nothing in Met Office's statement...effectively refutes Rose's argument that there has been no increase in global avg. surface temps for past 16 years' -- Curry defends UK Daily Mail article: 'How does this refute Rose's argument? No statistically significant positive trend, and it makes it look like [warmist Skeptical Science] hasn't done their homework with the latest data'
Lüning/Vahrenholt On HadCRUT's 16 Years Of No Warming: 'Tough Times Ahead For Climate Science' -- 'It turns out that everything that had been suspected was confirmed'
Analysis on 16 year 'pause' in global wamring: 'Regarding the significance of the period from 1997, recall that Dr. Ben Santer claimed 17 years was the period needed' -- 'They find that tropospheric temperature records must be at least 17 years long to discriminate between internal climate noise and the signal of human-caused changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere.' -- MIT Professor Richard Lindzen said something similar in a WUWT guest post: 'There has been no warming since 1997 and no statistically significant warming since 1995.'
Lüning/Vahrenholt On HadCRUT's 16 Years Of No Warming: 'Tough Times Ahead For Climate Science' -- 'It turns out that everything that had been suspected was confirmed' -- 'This is a completely unexpected development when one considers how all the boldly confident forecasts from the IPCC predicted more warming. The release of new HadCRUT figures occurred almost in absolute silence, without any media buzz whatsoever...One really has got to wonder that Jones has suddenly extended his personal threshold of pain to 20 years, and now claims that phases of no warming 15-16 years long had always been expected.'
Prof. Judith Curry: 'The data confirms existence of a 'pause' in warming': 'The natural variability has been shown over past 2 decades to have a magnitude that dominates greenhouse warming signal' -- Curry: 'It is becoming increasingly apparent that our attribution of warming since 1980 and future projections of climate change needs to consider natural internal variability as a factor of fundamental importance. I sincerely hope that the AR5 provides an assessment of what we know and what we don't know and areas of disagreement, rather than trying to manufacture a consensus.'
New Phil Jones quote: 'We don't know what natural variability is doing' -- 'We don't fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans' -- '...and because we don't fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don't know what natural variability is doing..'
Climategate's Phil Jones 'insisted that 15 or 16 years is not a significant period: pauses of such length had always been expected, he said' in 2012 -- 'Yet in 2009, when the [temperature] plateau was already becoming apparent and being discussed by scientists, Jones told a colleague in one of the Climategate emails: 'Bottom line: the 'no upward trend' has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.' -- 'In other words, though 5 years ago he seemed to be saying that 15 years without warming would make him 'worried', that period has now become 20 years'
Flashback 2009: Prof. Pielke Jr.: 'Kudos to NOAA for being among the first to explicitly state what sort of observation would be inconsistent with model predictions -- 15 years of no warming'
'The UK Met Office says world has warmed by 0.03 deg C per decade since 1997...But what the Met Office doesn't say is that this is statistically insignificant' -- 'There is no case to be made for a statistically significant increase in global temperatures as given in the Hadcrut4 dataset between 1997 and August 2012. The Met Office says the 15-year standstill is not unusual. This is true but again the Met Office is being economical with the truth'
NOAA's '15 year statement' from 2008 puts a kibosh on the current Met Office 'insignificance' claims that global warming flatlined for 16 years -- 'Yet, today, we see evidence of the goalposts being moved again as the Met Office tries to paint this lack of warming 'plateau' as being insignificant...So we are at 16 years, soon to be 17 years. What happens when we hit 20 years? Either the models are worth something or they aren't. In this case it seems they aren't'
UK Met Office: CO2 causes warming; other factors cause cooling -- 'We have known for some time that [multi-decadal oceanic cycles] may act to slow down or accelerate observed warming trend' -- 'We also know that changes in the surface temperature occur not just due to internal variability, but are also influenced by 'external forcings', such as changes in solar activity, volcanic eruptions or aerosol emissions. Combined, several of these factors could account for some or all of the reduced warming trend seen over the last decade – but this is an area of ongoing research'
Analysis: Global Warming Standstill Confirmed: 'There is now no consistent increase in temperature seen in this data. The data, displayed this way, reveals that far from showing a steady underlying rate of warming the global temperature has had two standstills, with curiously, the 1998 super El Nino delineating them.'
UK Daily Mail: 'Claim that there has been any statistically significant warming for past 16 years is therefore unsustainable' -- Reaffirms 'a 16-year 'pause' in rising temps' -- 'Two new separate peer-reviewed studies, published in prestigious academic journals last week [challenged 'Hockey Stick'] -- 'The level of warmth during the peak of the MWP in the second half of the 10th Century, equalled or slightly exceeded the mid-20th Century warming.' There was also a pronounced warming period in Roman times'
Prof. Curry: 'I think Rose's 2nd article is well done. He lays out arguments the other 'side' is making, & provides his response. It is a reasonable portrayal of debate surrounding this issue' -- Judith Curry: 'The trend since 1997 is very small, much smaller than the decadal trend of 0.2C that we have been led to expect by the IPCC for the early part of the 21st century...'
Flashback 2010: Oh My! 2010 tied for 'hottest' year?! Relax, it is 'purely a political statement' -- Even NASA's Hansen admits it is 'not particularly important' -- Prof. mocks 'hottest decade' claim as 'a joke' -- 'Claims based on year-to-year temperature data that differs by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree'
Watch Now: CNN Climate Debate! Climate Depot's Morano Debates Bill Nye the Science Guy on Piers Morgan -- Updated Transcript Includes Citations

1. German Meteorologist Klaus-Eckart Puls: Sea Level Rise Has Slowed 34% Over The Last Decade!
2. Fmr. Thatcher advisor Lord Monckton evicted from UN climate summit after challenging global warming -- 'Escorted from the hall and security officers stripped him of his UN credentials'
3. Update: Read Now: CNN climate debate between Morano & Nye now has enhanced transcript with embedded links to Morano's citations for all of his key points
4. Watch Now: Sen. Inhofe Video Message for UN Climate Conference: 'Obama Quietly Handing Over Billions of Dollars to the UN in the Name of Global Warming'
5. New Report: 'Extreme Weather Report 2012': 'Latest peer-reviewed studies, data & analyses undermine claims that current weather is 'unprecedented' or a 'new normal'
6. More Warmists Upset at Morano CNN debate: 'Every Voice Does Not Deserve a Microphone': 'Goddamnit, CNN: you don't need to 'cover' both sides of a 'story'
7. CFACT to hold press conference in Doha — Thursday: Climate Depot 'will release 'Extreme Weather Report 2012' showing there has been no increase in severe weather events due to AGW'
8. Reality Check on Sandy: Warmists 'insist Sandy was 'unprecedented' and 'proof that climate change is real'
9. Monckton of Arabia! Lord Monckton reports from his camel from Doha:
10. South African Scientist rips 'Alice in Wonderland science'
11. UN summit 'the most secretive ever': Lord Monckton reports from Doha: 'How the UN hides secret talks in public'
12. Yet more problems with Anderegg et al 'denier black list' paper
13. Bill Nye vs. Marc Morano: 'Piers Morgan opened program up for a spirited debate on climate, inviting a pair of experts whose respective opinions place them on polar opposite ends of spectrum'
14. Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook's new paper: (P. 4 of PDF): 'Groupthink & IPCC' 'Groupthink infuses a moral-like fervor to protect mankind from catastrophe. Silence is equivalent to consent & loyalty'
15. Warmist Dem Sen. Whitehouse Debunks Himself in Hysterical Anti-Denier Speech