LISTEN LIVE OR CALL IN » CLICK HERE!
Most Popular
Lord Monckton on climate change fraud
Today we are joined by Lord Christopher Monckton, British peer, mathematician, and former advisor to the Prime Minister.
Lord Monckton, currently in Australia on a speaking tour, is one of the most outspoken and influential anthropogenic climate change sceptics, bringing a level of passion and intellectual rigour which is often missing in public debate. He is chief policy adviser to the Science and Public Policy Institute, a non-profit institute of research and education "dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science".
Lord Monckton rose to prominence in the global warming debate with articles published in November 2006 disputing whether global warming is man-made, suggesting that it was unlikely to prove catastrophic, and criticising the science presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Lord Monckton also played a role in a 2007 UK High Court of Justice legal challenge in a bid to prevent the Al Gore film, "An Inconvenient Truth" being shown in English schools without offering alternative, balancing opinions. He was involved in distributing the documentary, "The Great Global Warming Swindle" to schools as a riposte.
During the interview Lord Monckton recounts the reasons why he came to be an anthropogenic climate change sceptic, in the context of his experience as a policy advisor to former PM Margaret Thatcher. He goes on to enumerate some of the more egregious lies and distortions made by the IPCC scientists and then turns to look at the anti-democratic agenda of the politicians and business leaders who he describes as corporate fascists. These interests, he asserts are striving to create a dictatorial, unelected world government which will oppress and exploit ordinary working people on a global level.
Related Links
- Lord Monckton tour dates
- Alan Jones talks to Lord Christopher Monckton
- Lord Monckton is on the fringe: Barnaby Joyce
- Climate sceptic Christopher Monckton to 'prove Rudd wrong'
- British climate sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton slams Kevin Rudd's ETS
- Climate denier lords it over scientists and their `global warning nonsense'
Global Warming Meltdown
Today we turn our piercing laser beam of truth on the facade of anthropogenic climate change - and burn a hole right through it to let you see the inner workings of a corrupted science.
In the first half of the show we run through the latest news in the climate change debate here in Australia and some highlights from the Copenhagen COP15 Conference.
In part 2 we bring you a detailed analysis of a startling story exposing fraudulent manipulation of raw weather data just published on wattsupwiththat.com. This article is of particular interest since it concerns Australia, and because it proves that the corruption of the scientific method in climate science goes far deeper than the "climategate" email scandal would suggest.
Related Links:
- The Smoking Gun At Darwin Zero
- We Are Change Sydney - Walk against warming 2009 - [The debate isn't over!]
- Climate change sceptics triumph
- Big Oil Behind Copenhagen Climate Scam
- Aussies swelter through hottest six months on record
- Climate science dogged by "machination, conspiracies and collusion" - IPCC adviser
- Climategate: Michael Mann points finger at Phil Jones
- Lord Monckton’s summary of Climategate and its issues
Recent Comments
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/dane-wigington-on-infowars-4-4-13/#comment-33658
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:31:03
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:28:20
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.soldierhugs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Geoengineering.pdf
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 11 - 09:19:23
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
the video you linked is a really old conglomerate of all sorts of claims that have been debunked ad nauseam.
What do you think is the ultimate proof for the existence of chemtrails?
Why should we have to assume there is such a thing like chemtrails? How are they different from contrails?
By Josh on 2013 04 10 - 06:59:34
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://realnewsworldwide.com/2008/09/10/chemtrails-ultimate-proof/
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 04 09 - 16:31:36
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
If you open the link you will see the reference to chemtrail area forecasts. The other link I wish to post is refused by the “Truth news” which claims it may be SPAM and “will be moderated”, probably because it mentions chemtrails in the link. However, I will try again by separating the words. http://www.chemtrail forecast.com/main.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 09:02:16
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
about the link you posted - where is the relevance in the discussion about persistent contrails?
By Josh on 2013 03 13 - 08:50:08
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
http://www.haarpstatus.com/status.html
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 13 - 08:44:15
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Leonard Clampett,
after you consistently refused to accept the fact that fuel combustion generates more water than the equivalent of fuel burnt - even when a Qantas pilot confirmed this - I am highly skeptical of your “aviation life experience”. I hope you understand that.
So there are more explanations needed before your claims can be taken seriously.
1. How did you determine that the ambient conditions at the upper troposphere were not conducive to the formation of contrails this summer?
2. How did you determine the causal connection between trails and lack of rain?
3. How did you determine the altitude of the low trail that you saw? How can you be sure it was below the cumulus? Why not above (remember: 3D viewing up to 160m max)? Any pictures maybe?
If you want to do REAL research on the Internet, I strongly suggest to repeat every search query that you issue with the word “debunked” appended. That is the way to do proper research because you see both sides and their arguments. Don’t just fall for sensational claims.
Unfortunately, the Internet is loaded with bunk.
By Josh on 2013 03 02 - 18:06:10
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.
Josh Anonymous,
You apparently do not do much research. Notice how, over the Eastern Australian summer, there have been many chemtrails coincident with usual weather patterns where obvious rain should have been the outcome had the chemtrails not been laid, and it was not, and this during the season when ambient conditions are not conducive to the formation of contrails. Chemtrails are entirely different to what you term “persistent contrails” as you would know if you had sufficient aviation life experience. You may try to explain how there was recently, and I have observed the same many times before, a chemtrail below a layer of fair weather Cu at 8,000 ft and how this could possibly occur without the laws of physics and thermodynamics being turned on their head. I suggest that you do an Internet search for the activities of Bill Gates and geoengineering.
By Leonard Clampett on 2013 03 02 - 13:51:00
From the entry 'Contrails dissipate quickly whereas chemtrails linger?'.