Posted by: Barry Bickmore | February 5, 2016

The Monckton Files: Threatwatch 3

Here’s the thing about making a career out of threatening people.  No matter how much time you put into it, there is just no way to threaten all the jerks who deserve it.  The only possible response for the truly committed threatener, therefore, is to move beyond the impotent moral outrage and organize!  Where separately they fail, an entire organization of threateners may create something that is more than the sum of its parts.  SYNERGY, people!!!!

And so, as Graham Readfearn reports on DeSmog Blog, Lord Christopher Monckton and a flock of his fellow purple-crested crackpots have founded the Independent Committee on Geoethics, which Monckton says was formed “to gather evidence of outright criminality on the part of the surprisingly small scientific clique that has until now got away with foisting its anti-scientific nonsense on just about all nations.”  You guessed it, they’re going to serve the authorities some steaming hot climatologist heads on silver platters.

No, wait!  This isn’t as far-fetched as it sounds.  According to His Pomposity, “it will only be necessary for us to put two or three key fraudsters behind bars, whereupon all the rest will scuttle for cover and the climate scam will come to an abrupt, ignominious and unlamented end.”

It’s already happening.  His Eternal Bombast notes that the UN IPCC’s “dubious activities have already come to the attention of the Bureau de l’Escroquerie, the serious fraud office of Switzerland, where it is headquartered.”  You might be thinking that the Swiss authorities will probably just ignore the IGC, but His Grandiloquence assures us this cannot be.  “The members of the committee are eminent. Their combined scientific weight is considerable. It will simply not be possible for the public authorities to ignore them.”  (Seriously, you owe it to yourself to Google the people on the membership list.  You will be buried in a veritable avalanche of scientific eminence.  I mean it!  Their honorary president is Charles Darwin, who is… well, long dead… but undeniably eminent.)

So you can bank on it, dear readers.  At this very moment, the Swiss authorities probably have an entire team of investigators working around the clock to put away the fraudsters. And whatever happens, you can rest assured that this isn’t just another one of Monckton’s many impotent threats, which he has in the past lobbed indiscriminately upon both sworn enemies and Scottish passersby, apparently for the sole purpose of keeping me amused.  Speaking of which… here is the updated Threats section of Lord Monckton’s Rap Sheet.

Threatening Those Who Disagree With Him

1. Monckton has threatened to instigate academic misconduct investigations and/or libel suits against several professors who have exposed his misrepresentations.  The list so far includes Naomi Oreskes, John Abraham, and myself.  He has even threatened a libel suit against John Abraham.  UPDATE:  Monckton has now threatened to extend the libel suit to include Scott Mandia.  Here is Scott’s reply.  UPDATE:  John Abraham tells me that Monckton has threatened lawsuits against him several more times, and Monckton has also threatened me, once again.  He also wrote my university administration to tell them I was mentally imbalanced, and that I had been sending him “hate mail”.  Well, at least the second part is false.😉  UPDATE:  Monckton keeps claiming (to others) on the Internet that he is going to sic his lawyers on me for Lord Monckton’s Rap Sheet, but miraculously, I haven’t been contacted by his lawyers, either.

2. He tried to get Tony Press (U. Tasmania) fired.  UPDATE:  Monckton also lodged a complaint at a New Zealand university against professors Jonathan Boston, David Frame, and Jim Renwick for “academic fraud” and libel.  The university investigated the complaint, then blew it off.  But before the verdict was in, Monckton threatened to sic the police on the university if they were to… you know… blow him off.  I’m sure the police have an entire unit on the case as I write this.

3. When a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology, Lawrence Torcello, wrote an article saying it ought to be against the law to knowingly spread disinformation about climate change for profit, Monckton led the charge to send letters to the university administration asking for Torcello to be disciplined/fired because Torcello was allegedly attacking free speech and academic freedom.

4. The funny part about that last one is Monckton’s flagrant hypocrisy.  Not too long ago, he  threatened to have IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri jailed for fraud (see #13 below) and whipped up an Australian crowd, chanting about having all the corrupt climate scientists jailed.

5. Now Monckton is even threatening his fellow climate contrarians (Leif Svalgaard and Willis Eschenbach) with lawsuits and trying to get them fired from academic jobs.  And he’s probably threatening to threaten me, again.  We’ll see.  UPDATE:  Svalgaard hasn’t heard back from Monckton.

6. He launched a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission in the UK against The Guardian because of a column George Monbiot wrote about Monckton’s antics.  The PCC threw out the complaint. In a bizarre twist, George Monbiot reported that someone claiming to be Monckton and using Monckton’s IP address had tried to edit his Wikipedia page to falsely claim that he had won a £50,000 settlement from The Guardian because of Monbiot’s article.

7. Monckton lobbed threats against Arthur Smith after Arthur objected that Monckton (and the Science and Public Policy Institute) had violated copyright.  Smith had written a rebuttal of one of Monckton’s articles, and was trying to get it published.  Monckton put the entire thing up on the web along with his comments, and altered the article to imply that Smith had written it at the behest of his employer, the American Physical Society, which was not true.  Arthur prevailed after threatening legal action, because he was clearly in the right.

8. John Mashey pointed out an instance where one contrarian had plagiarized from Monckton (and cited papers that had been challenged and withdrawn), and then Monckton turned around and praised the work.  When Richard Littlemore reported this, Monckton left a comment on the page saying that Mashey was “under investigation” for breaching “doctor-patient confidentiality,” and that he was guilty of “interfering in an unlawful manner on the blogosphere.”  To this day, I don’t think anyone has any idea what Monckton was talking about.

9. George Monbiot chronicled how Monckton has threatened several times to sue The Guardian for libel.  The U.K. has libel laws that are absurdly in favor of plaintiffs, and yet, these lawsuits have never materialized.

10. Senators John Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe wrote an open letter to Exxon-Mobile, urging them to stop funding climate-contrarian “think-tanks,” whose tactics resemble those of the tobacco industry, Lord Monckton wrote an open letter to the senators, in which he said, “In the circumstances, your comparison of Exxon’s funding of sceptical scientists and groups with the former antics of the tobacco industry is unjustifiable and unworthy of any credible elected representatives. Either withdraw that monstrous comparison forthwith, or resign so as not to pollute the office you hold.”  Ok, so this isn’t really a threat, but Monckton’s language is so bombastic and filled with fake moral outrage that it almost feels like a threat.  I should note that 1) in his letter, Monckton falsely claimed to be a member of Parliament, and 2) Naomi Oreskes, a prominent science historian, and Erik Conway, have shown that not only do the most prominent organizations fighting mainstream climate science follow the same playbook as the tobacco industry, but it’s often the SAME organizations and people doing the fighting on both fronts!

11. Monckton launched yet another complaint to the Press Complaints Commission against New Scientist magazine, which had the temerity to point out that Monckton’s article on climate sensitivity in an American Physical Society newsletter was not peer-reviewed, among other things.  Of course, the editor had specifically noted that the newsletter is not a peer-reviewed publication, but Monckton said he had the article critiqued by a “Professor of Physics,” i.e., someone who isn’t a climate specialist.   The complaint was not upheld.

12. His Lordship complained to Ofcom, the British regulator for TV and radio programming, that he had been unfairly treated by the producers of the BBC documentary, Earth:  The Climate Wars.  Ofcom found that the show’s producers should have given more information to Monckton upfront about the nature of the program (even though Monckton expressed familiarity with how the BBC had covered the issue in the past.)  However, they found that the lack of informed consent did not result in any misrepresentation of Monckton’s views by unfair editing.  The complaint summary linked above is a fascinating read, if you have about 15 minutes.

13. Monckton threatened to have IPCC Chairman Rajendra Pachauri jailed for fraud because he used an IPCC graph that turns out to be correct, but misleading.  In his letter to Pachauri, however, His Lordship used a temperature graph that had already been shown by several scientists to be blatantly fabricated.  I’m sure Monckton is on his way to Scotland Yard right now to give himself up.

14. The BBC aired a documentary called “Meet the Climate Sceptics” which apparently focused largely on Lord Monckton.  (Click here to see the trailer.)  In fact Monckton unsuccessfully attempted to have the courts stop the BBC from airing it unless they allowed him to insert a 3 minute video rebuttal into the program.

15. The ABC (Australia) aired a rather stunning gutting of Monckton and his crowd.  Journalist Wendy Carlisle brought up several instances where Monckton’s sources contradicted him, the fact that he falsely claims to be a member of Parliament, his miracle cure-all, and more.  So of course, Monckton threatened to sue unless given airtime to reply.  They blew him off, and Monckton filed a complaint with the Australian Communications and Media Authority, but the ACMA found that the ABC report did not violate its standards for impartiality and factual accuracy.

16. Monckton threatened to have Al Gore jailed when Gore gave a speech in Gibraltar .  “If you come to any British territory and you talk the rubbish you’ve been talking elsewhere, then you will be arrested and prosecuted.”

17. The Gibraltar Chronicle printed a redacted version of a letter Monckton wrote.  When Monckton’s PR guy threatened them with legal action unless they printed an unredacted version, the Chronicle told them to shove off, because the parts they took out were probably libelous.  The Chronicle article about the bullying incident seems to have been taken down, now, but I have a PDF copy.)

18. Monckton threatened William Connolley and Kevin O’Neill for suggesting that he created a graph that was included (and referenced) in a newspaper article written by His Lordship.  Then he threatened the proprietors of the VisionLearning site, which also made the same attribution.

19. His Lordship told random Scots that he would have them jailed for racism when they yelled, “Go back to England” at him as he preached against Scottish independence.

21. Monckton issued thinly veiled threats to send Peter Sinclair to jail for FRAUD!!!! because of a perfectly reasonable video Peter made about satellite temperature series.

22. Now Monckton has helped found an entire organization with the goal of jailing those nasty climatologists.  Really.

 

 


Responses

  1. Er, Lord Monckton died many years ago. There is one Monckton, a viscount, left, and he’s an asshole.

    • My understanding is that Monckton’s father was given peer status because he earned it, not by inheritance. And we know Monckton has earned no such thing.

  2. If Monckton were a USA citizen, he would be one of the “open carry” clowns running around with hand guns (i.e., penis extenders) that most USA citizens loathe and despise.

  3. […] John Christy racconta bufale sulla temperatura gobale e si lamenta di un blogger che non abbocca; Christopher Monckton dalla rosa saracinesca ha fondato un club di negaioli prezzolati e nutters – tra cui Albert Parker […]

  4. For more information on Monckton’s mental problems, please see the “Pathological Liars and Narcissism” section at:
    http://www.durangobill.com/GwdLiars/GwdLiarsChristopherMonckton.html

    In particular:
    1) “The paranoid delusions of the narcissist are always grandiose, “cosmic”, or “historical”.”
    2) “The narcissist feels that he is at the centre of intrigues and conspiracies of colossal magnitudes.”
    3) “Put simply, he provokes people to pay attention to him by misbehaving or behaving oddly.”

    • You beat me to it. Yes, Monckton is a classic narcissist, the grandiosity, prolixity, the attention-seeking and the audacious delusions of competence speak to his personality disorder.

      His aggression towards scientists is driven by feelings of inadequacy. He craves the authority he perceives the scientific community carries, has falsely represented himself as a scientist in public, and rejects correction with threats.

  5. Here’s an attempt to raise this sorry blog out of the gossip column category.

    Comparing wind power by nation, China led in 2014 at 114,763MW, followed by the the U.S. at 65,879, Germany at 39,165, and Spain and India at over 22,000MW. In 69th place came Russia, right up there with Ecuador and Guyana, at 16.8MW. The question arises, why does Russia care so little about windmills? Let us posit a few possibilities.

    1) The wind dont blow in Russia. (it does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Russia )
    2) It’s too cold for windmills. https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/de-icing-wind-turbine.jpg
    3) They have plenty of natural gas.
    4) Windmills are expensive.
    5) They don’t believe in Global Warming: http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/29/russias-putin-says-global-warming-is-
    a-fraud/
    6) They want it whether they believe in it or not: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-soviet-scientist-who-
    dreamed-of-melting-the-arctic-with-a-55-mile-dam
    7) They don’t like to invest in technology that only works when the wind blows.
    8) They don’t believe in windmills and they’re happy to see the West go bankrupt building them. (“We will bury you.” –NK)

    China, on the other hand, is investing in all kinds of energy: windmills, coal plants, nuclear plants, etc. They can’t get enough. They’re using all the coal they can dig up and want to import more. They’re opening coal
    plants at the rate of one every week or two (for every coal plant we shut down they build a dozen or so). Germany is replacing its nuclear plants with lignite coal plants. India is building both.

    Such developments have led James Hansen to call the Paris talks a farce, and to renew his calls for massive investment in nuclear energy. http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/03/world/nuclear-energy-climate-change-scientists-letter/
    He really takes his global warming seriously. But Naomi Oreskes responded by calling Hansen a “denier”: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/16/new-form-climate-denialism-dont-celebrate-yet-cop-21 Therefore…

    Is Oreskes working for

    a) the Koch bros.,
    b) the windmill conglomerates, or
    c) Putin;
    or
    d) is Hansen working for the nuclear industry?

    At least we can be sure the science is settled. –AGF

    • Repaired link for #6 above: http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-soviet-scientist-who-dreamed-of-melting-the-arctic-with-a-55-mile-dam

      • Repaired link for #5 above: http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/29/russias-putin-says-global-warming-is-a-fraud/

        • So now you’re appealing to an ex-KGB agent to “support” your ideology…

          And he also thinks that Monckton is a classic loony peer and completely insane. Do you agree with him on that too? Remember, you DID want to get back on topic, and this topic is about Mad Monkfish.

          • So you’ve got the skinny on Putin on Monckton? Let’s hear it.

            • You already have it, angry fart. Asking for it again merely so you can avoid saying whether you agree with the ex-KGB agent you have so much respect for the opinions of when it comes to the ON TOPIC discussion of mad monckfish is particularly ridiculous denier drivel.

              Do you agree with him on his opinion of the mad hatter monckton? This shouldn’t be a difficult question to answer: yes or no. Even if you feel the need to put qualifiers on the end of it, you can still say yes or no.

              You just won’t.

            • Ah yes, the phantom link, Wow’s favorite tactic. We are expected not only to take the word of a pathological liar that it exists when he refuses to provide it, but to somehow know what it says. Astounding. –AGF

            • I’ve given scores of links. Even when they’ve been to words you’ve said that you claimed not to have said, and then linked to where you’ve also claimed never to have said them, you refuse to acknowledge that they’ve ever existed.

              So why take effort putting a link that you won’t even know is there?

          • Still avoiding saying yes or no.

            Pathetic.

            • Yes or no to what? Putin on Monckton? Monckton? Express an opinion on Hansen vs. Oreskes and I’ll give one on Monckton. But you said “he [Putin] also thinks that Monckton is a classic loony peer and completely insane,” and of course that is a pure fabrication on your part. You are never to be taken seriously. –AGF

            • *Still* avoiding saying yes or no. Now you’re pretending that you don’t know what question you were asked so that you can avoid nailing your colours to the mast.

              Because you don’t want to say you agree because you LOVE monckfish’s idiocy, he says the idiot things you want to hear, but you don’t want to say you DON’T agree with him because you then need to explain why he’s an authority on climate change and not on the potty peer.

              You have NO class, NO intelligence and NO sense of shame.

              You’re a denier.

    • Funny, angryfart, you really only managed to head deeper in to gossip column there.

      It’s almost as if you don’t want to know what your nutters are doing, or what sort of clowns you’re supporting.

      • Hey Wow, care to make a relevant point? Where do you stand–is Hansen right or Oreskes? But all this goes way over Wow’s head, the idea that if the science should be taken seriously then serious solutions should be considered. –AGF

        • It was relevant to your “point” angryfart.

          You complained about what you then delved even deeper into creating one yourself, hence you clearly do not mind gossip column, as long as it doesn’t show up against those morons you desire.

          • Always amazed at the dazzling intellect of the believers. –AGF

            • Well, yeah, we’re hella smart compared to you deniers.

              We believe in the facts, for a start. That’s a goo place to start being smart.

              How’s denying the facts and lying working out for you deniers?

            • Brilliant!

            • Yes, I am.

    • So, Monckfish is a loon, you love him and you are torqued by the fully justified scorn talking about his antics raises.

      So you flail around trying to get it derailed.

      Pitiful.

  6. Whatever Monckton’s peculiarities, he is driven to expose the climate scare for the junk science it is, and he does so admirably enough to gain the animosity of the quacks like Wow and BB. And their response is to ignore the science almost entirely while dwelling on the eccentricities of a relatively minor player: Monckton is for the skeptics what Gore and Oreskes are for climatics in the degree of their evangelism. And if he were to take the trouble to show up here I have no doubt he would do a better job than I could of making his case. But he has better things to do, so I’ll make his case for him –not any defense of his private person but of the science we both espouse.

    I have juxtaposed Hansen and Oreskes, both major players on the propaganda scene and both parting the ways on how to address the supposed problem. Naomi Oreskes coauthored “Merchants of Doubt” and James Hansen wrote “Storms of My Grandchildren.” Hansen headed NASA GISS until 2013, and turned it into a propaganda machine. His more extreme views have been rejected even by the IPCC, and the book mentioned has been debunked in print by Pielke Jr. and Adam Sobel. At least Hansen is a climatologist while Oreskes is not; she is a historian of science, and she knows almost nothing of climatology.

    But Hansen lately has become persona non grata at the White House, writing of Obama’s approach to the Paris conference: “so gross, it is best described as unadulterated 100 percent pure bullshit.” ( http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/11/prominent-climate-scientist-offers-scathing-critique-of-obamas-paris-plans/ ) In spite of the fact that Hansen has probably corrupted the surface temperature record to a point beyond repair, he really seems to take the climate danger seriously, and most economists consider carbon taxes and trading to be nothing but window dressing. They reckon several trillion dollars will save us a hundredth of a degree of temperature rise. So the “settled science” comes apart when it comes to deciding how to address it: real solutions or window dressing.

    Because Hansen is right for once: windmills and solar cells cannot save us from CO2; only nuclear technology can. And for taking the alarm seriously he becomes an outcast. Obama shuns him and Oreskes calls him a denier. What this tells us is that neither Obama nor Oreskes was ever interested in solving the problem (or ever took it seriously, for that matter), but only in establishing global taxation and greater international control over money.

    So yes, the greatest scientific fraud the world has ever seen was treated like so much junk science by the Paris conference. Putin was obviously not in on the conspiracy or he wouldn’t have gone about advertising the fraud, but he’s come to recognize of late that it’s to his advantage to let the West spend themselves into oblivion. (2) Or so it seems. –AGF

  7. Nice post, thanks.

    The link to the trailer from #14 seems to be broken.

    Or as Monckton would put it “Deliberate and premeditated incompetence vis-a-vis making this (actually exonerating) video available as you are legally and morally obliged to do has set in motion a chain of event at Interpol and Scotland Yard which will shortly lead to Baby Bickmore’s arrest and public execution.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: