JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Books

Gatecrashed by the Lord (Monckton)

What more could a skeptic ask? We’d organized our first ever skeptics social event, to celebrate that last month Australia missed an emissionary bullet. Forty people met, honored to be able to talk to the only man in Australian parliament with a PhD in science–Dennis Jensen. There were toasts all round for his insight and courage in speaking out years ago, when hardly anyone else did.

Then in one of those few moments in life when the truly unlikely happens, Christopher Monckton appeared. Having just flown from the UK to Sydney, arriving only this morning on the other side of the country, he and his wife Juliet had flown to Perth for a meeting tomorrow (an extra 4000 km each way). There was no other night this could have happened. The crowd were delighted.

Both Monckton and Jensen were in fine form.

I highly recommend connecting skeptics together. One of the rewards of working hard to expose the way science has been exploited is that I meet great people: independent thinkers, conscientious people, passionate and dedicated souls.

That’s one thing I’ll miss when every man and his pet fish knows how exaggerated the claims are for AGW–it won’t work as a filter to find the gems.Thanks to Anne-Kit for looking after all the details, and thanks to Mark C for putting two and two together at just the right moment and bringing the man to the party.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
Gatecrashed by the Lord (Monckton), 10.0 out of 10 based on 1 rating

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/28sx2qt

59 comments to Gatecrashed by the Lord (Monckton)

  • #
    Otter

    That must have been a Great time, Jo. But you are right- it is going to be tough to do ever again, once the bottom is blown out of the fraud of AGW.

    But in the meantime there are going to be several years of comdey, anger and royal Stupidity to document, as the politicians and scientists involved around the globe work to tear each other apart, in order to save their own skins. Worse, however… I suspect eco-terrorists like Greenpeace will step up their efforts, and a lot of ‘common’ people will join in.

    YOur blog ain’t done yet, not by a long shot.

    10

  • #
    Tony

    There is never such an unbearable person as a convert. I think we could all stand it.

    10

  • #

    Ohhh looking forward to Monckton and Jensen’s lecture in Sydney.
    Going to try and bring as many people as possible :)

    10

  • #
  • #
    buzz345

    Check out John P Costella’s analysis of the climategate e mails here http://assassinationscience.com/climategate/ and my open letter to Australian MP’s on the subject of dodgy science makes bad laws http://www.climategate.com/an-open-letter-to-australian-members-of-parliament
    I am delighted that Lord Monckton has made the effort to come to Australia and hope as many people as possible will hear his message; doubt it’s going to be reported in local media though; any opportunity we get we should write to local media outlets reporting on the dates and venues

    10

  • #
    Lawrie

    A Republican win in MA (can’t spell Massachusets)and lots of new research AND researchers coming on line. Looks encouraging. Still slow getting into the MSM but the message is getting out.

    This is OT but I know you would like to see it
    http://justdata.wordpress.com/2009/12/28/step-by-step-debunking-climate-change/.

    the guy has gone to a lot of trouble and it deserves a look. No one has checked it yet as far as I know and the author is looking for feedback.

    10

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    That’s one thing I’ll miss when every man and his pet fish knows how exaggerated the claims are for AGW.

    You are absolutely right – from now my fish will be told nothing!

    10

  • #
    Keith

    That’s great.
    What about this ?
    No time for complacency.
    Start emailing your local members of parliament.

    Still no venue set for Monckton in Canberra. Does anybody have an update ?

    10

  • #
    J.Hansford

    I’m pleased to know that it was an entertaining and informative night for you Jo, and that Lord Monckton and Mr Jensen were in good company. As you said, it is important for skeptics to come together.

    Also. AGW is just the tip of an iceberg of intellectual laziness and elitism within science, politics and academia…

    The fields of Astronomy, Geophysics, Marine Biology, Biology, Archeology, History, environmental science, etc, are degenerate political tools that no longer apply the scientific method while soaking up public funds…. If we wish to live in an era of enlightenment…. We are going to have to try much harder and allow the true thinkers to proliferate, while rejecting those who seek power and position without achievement.

    The Nobel prize is now a complete joke…. A cereal box toy title, handed out as a media tool for propagandizing pretend achievement about nothing…. Elites patting themselves on the back congratulating themselves for manipulation rather than accomplishment. I use Gore and Pachauri as just two examples. Arafat and Obama as two more examples of spurious Nobel achievement… and there are many more.

    There is still plenty to do for science after this brittle AGW fabrication shatters…. Very likely there is a whole Universe of discovery that awaits us….

    10

  • #
    LINDA

    Lord Monckton thankyou for travelling such a vast distance to attend a meeting in WA, but more so for your online opinion article 11th january 2010 and the mention of PETER SPENCE, and the recognision of his plight.
    I note you will be back in WA in Febuary, is there any hope of having Peter Spencer as a guest speaker at the WA event.

    Since the beginning of the green movement , billions of dollars of taxpayers funds have been wasted for little or no benefit at huge costs , to health, education , social housing and many other areas have been neglected far to long.

    Senator Dennis Jenkens is also to be congratulated for taking the hardline and finding a better way , and bringing about some home truths on programs and policies that have no benefit for the Australian communities.

    JoNova site for giving all Australians a voice , and the oportunity to participate in what is really important to Australians so all can attain prosperity and equal rights.

    It is now up to each person to participate and be a voice for your children and grandchildren.

    That Lord Monckton could travel such a vast distance for a small meeting that was important to many speaks volumes.
    Minister Rudd could not travel 60klms to Cooma that was a matter of National importance and the life of Peter Spencer at risk , is and was a valuable lesson for all the world , he is unworthy of the position as the Australian Prime Minister.

    00

  • #
    LINDA

    correction
    Senator Dennis Jensen , i mis spelt your name.

    00

  • #
    chris Edwards

    Dont worry about the filter, the warmist thought it was a done deal and shot their mouths off so we all know who they are (or google will) I would call it the “fit to serve” test, only those who neglected to board this particular bandwagon are in fact “fit to serve” and as that is what all public servants are supposed to be it is a good test, it will leave us short of people on the taxpayers payroll, mind you this is a good thing as there is far too many of them anyway.

    00

  • #
    Baa Humbug

    Speaking of the great Lord, I have just spent the whole night reading an analysis of the leaked climategate emails by John P Castello. The whole thing reads like a Grisham novel, I couldn’t “put it down” until I finished at 5am.
    Dissected like a Barrister would, if this doesn’t result in some of our “hockey team” spending jail time I’d be very very surprised.

    link here

    00

  • #
    pat

    Financial Times:UN abandons climate change deadline
    But Yvo de Boer, the UN’s senior climate change official, admitted that the deadline had in effect been shelved.
    “By [the end of] January, countries will have the opportunity to . . . indicate if they want to be associated with the accord,” he said. “[Governments could] indicate by the deadline, or they can also indicate later.”
    “You could describe it as a soft deadline,” Mr de Boer said. “There is nothing deadly about it. If [countries] fail to meet it, they can still associate with the Copenhagen accord after.”..
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87479ee2-0600-11df-8c97-00144feabdc0.html

    SMH: AAP: Greens propose temporary climate scheme
    There’s a new climate change plan before federal parliament – an earlybird, temporary carbon tax to make a start on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
    The Australian Greens have proposed the hybrid scheme, which would start earlier than the government wants, in July this year.
    The two-year scheme would impose a carbon price of $23 a tonne on greenhouse polluters.
    The Greens say the scheme is not perfect but will be a crucial first step in starting to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions.
    “The alternative is to do nothing,” Greens leader Bob Brown told reporters in parliament house.
    “Our job is to help get this bus going again.”..
    Prime Minister Kevin Rudd plans to try again next month but it appears the ETS could struggle to pass the Senate.
    The Greens’ new proposal represents something of a compromise from the party. It does not include a target for reducing emissions by 2020, which is a contentious issue.
    http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/greens-propose-temporary-climate-scheme-20100121-mn1o.html

    bob brown: we’ll settle for the ‘alternative’.

    00

  • #

    Jo,

    Fantastic evening.

    Thank you very much for that.

    Regards,
    Matt

    00

  • #
    Nick

    Has everyone seen this pdf file? I think it is probably the best analysis of climategate to day. At least.. it is the best that I have seen yet. I’m always interested in more and better though. Take a look. http://tinyurl.com/yl8o3t8

    Cheers all…
    Nick.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Jo,

    What a spledid surprise MC arranged! Thoroughly enjoyed last night as well. Well done!

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Nick

    Your link to the SEPP article is interesting but he makes one fundamental error – science is not debated – it is tested by experiment. Using the scientific method to bolster debating points isn’t science, but technically sophisticated argument. The whole idea of a debate is to convince someone of your point of view, and again this is not science but scientology.

    Otherwise his summary of climatehgate is very good.

    00

  • #
    Nick

    Louis,
    Thanks for this! Wish I had thought of that. What an excellent description of what it really is. Your use of language is superb! I will get a huge amount of mileage out of this at this end (here in Canada – where there are still a few “warmers” left).

    Cheers…
    Nick

    00

  • #
    Campbell

    Agree with inference of an earlier comment that local Press are not very likely to give much coverage to Lord Monckton’s visit. Which visit is a matter for applause and appreciation. Really hope and have some confidence that what Lord Monkton has to say will indeed by heard and accepted by many, to a point where perhaps Mister Rudd et al will have to do some listening too. Fat chance?

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Nick,

    Why thank you – mind you I work as a professional exploration geologist and use the scientific method professionally on a daily basis.

    AGW is therefore simply scientology.

    Science is about explaining novel observations using extant scientific knowledge.

    Incidentally I would have thought the warmers in Canada would have been disabused of their belief by physical reality by now; you are in a very cold winter are you not?

    00

  • #
    Nick

    Louis,
    Yes, you would think there would be few warmers left here. However, I don’t know what “your Liberals” are like there, but in Canada, they have been trained by 75 years of Liberal rule. We are well into the 4th or 5th generation of people that don’t know what to think until they are told. Canada is the quintessential social programming experiment.

    00

  • #
    Dinah

    Keith
    I was told by the National Press Club they have a booking for him 3-5pm on 3 Feb. They said he originally requested 12-2pm but they couldn’t give him that time.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Keith

    Oh that is interesting – Monckton and Plimer are in Perth 3 Feb 2010

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Nick

    Our “Liberals” are the Australian Labor Party (present incumbents) and alas, they seem as independent in thinking as your lot are – but they share a common political ancestry with the English Fabians.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Dinah

    Sorry I should have addressed it to you but Monckton and Plimer and scheduled here in Perth 5:30 pm in the Parmelia Hotel, so maybe the National Press Club are information challenged?

    00

  • #

    I was gutted enough already that I couldn’t make it last night and now I’m even more so! Glad you all had a good time! See you all at the Hilton :)

    00

  • #
    jaytee

    Dinah and Louis,
    The National Press Club website has no mention of Monckton appearing. It was reported somewhere that they have invitations out to some prominent pollys at that time, Julia (oh how did I get roped into this mess? ) Gillard being one, and they expect one of them to accept.

    00

  • #
    jaytee

    Nice pics, Jo. Pity Bolta couldn’t be there. He deserves it too!

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    I just went through the various venues from the organisers of the tour and it looks like Canberra is the National Press Club on wednesday 3 feb. Houston, we have a problem.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    No, I have a problem, It is Februaryy the 8th that they are in Perth, and 3rd of Feb in Canberra at the National Press club.

    The Perth invite had a large RSVP date of 3 Feb but its first in first served I subsequently discovered.

    00

  • #
    Baa Humbug

    Louis Hissink:
    January 21st, 2010 at 3:21 pm

    Louis did you even read that SPPI article of 149 pages?
    The author doesn’t study the science. He has studied the individual leaked emails, organised them in a timely and relevant way with accurate narrative of what’s been going on behind closed UEA doors.
    Anyone with basic knowledge of the UEA “cabal” or “hockey team” would I think find the article fascinating and informative.

    There is enough info in the article to make a barristers eyes light up.

    The author is fully aware of scientific procedures, he uses it to hold the “team” to account on dozens of occasions.

    I urge you to read it Louis. I also believe it would make a good adjunct to Mohib and Jo’s 30yr Timeline paper.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Baa Humbug

    My only criticism was directed at the idea that science is debated, not the content of the article itself. I don’t need to read it in any case.

    00

  • #
    Baa Humbug

    Louis

    “Your link to the SEPP article is interesting but he makes one fundamental error – science is not debated – it is tested by experiment”.

    ” Otherwise his summary of climatehgate is very good”.

    From the above I assumed you read the article, decided the author had made a fundamental mistake and explained what the mistake was.

    ” I don’t need to read it in any case”.

    My error, I won’t pursue it any further.

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Baa Humbug,

    I am not sure what point you are making, but the rules of science are not like a criminal case where legal advocacy dominates.

    He wrote: “Why is this so? Because the mechanism by which scientific debate has been “regulated” to avoid anarchy”.

    As I wrote above science is not debated.

    His error is assuming that science is debated following specific rules of engagement, of evidence etc.

    And as I also wrote, above, I have no criticism to make of the rest of his article, just specifically the idea, obviously held by many who are not trained in the scientific method, as the author himself admits, that science is debated; it isn’t. He might believe that scientific debates is “regulated”, and my point then would be that as there isn’t any debate in science, needing moderation, then what he is describing is, then, under this definition, not science but pseudoscience.

    The sceptical movement generally makes this mistake as well, thinking that pointing to alternative explanations better explains the AGW hypothesis, than the “evidence” produced by the AGW camp.

    The extinct Mahorasy blog, for example, was a battle field between claim and counter claim, each backed by peer-reviewed literature.

    Sciences in which in-situ experiments are not possible, such as astronomy and astrophysics, archaeology, and in some respects, geology, become dominated by the deductive method and find themselves bogged down in a debate over dogma.

    Take the energy source for the Sun as an example. Firstly we cannot do in-situ experiments to work out what is inside the Sun – our instrumentation would simply vaporise into plasma. Hence various speculations are offered to explain the source of solar energy, and the Standard Model, is that of a nuclear fusion process in the Sun’s core. This explanation is problematical from a scientific stance because in science we are only allowed to explain observations in terms of extant scientific fact.

    In terms of extant scientific facts, nuclear fusion as a stable source of energy remains a fantasy – it has not been experimentally demonstrated in the laboratory despite 50 years of intensive research. It therefore cannot be used as an explanation for the Sun’s energy source in terms of the scientific method, because it is not an extant scientific fact.

    Yet it is believed by mainstream science that it is, and as Christopher Monckton points out, science is not about belief, on which vigorous debate does and must occur, but on experiment.

    As we cannot do in-situ experiments on the Sun, then, if we are to faithfully follow the scientific method, we must limit our scientific explanations to those extant, and the only known physical laws which could explain the solar physics are those incorporated in the Plasma Model using the laws and equations of Maxwell and Lorentz. Using these laws plasma physics can easily model galaxy physics, as demonstrated by Anthony Peratt in various publications by the IEEE.

    Mainstream science instead relies on ad hoc imaginations, such as black holes, dark matter, dark energy, etc, etc, to explain their observations.

    Climate science, but then climate is an abstraction of weather, and not a physical science, and thus not science per se.

    Sorry if I have waffled on a bit, but the sooner we realise that science is not based on a debate, the quicker the nonsense of AGW is terminated.

    00

  • #
    Ali Waller

    Full information re the Canberra talk had been updated under Joanne’s post titled Monckton & Plimer Tour Australia: Dates & Venues on Jan 13th. For details go to this link or Contact Alix Turner: alixturnerATbigpond.com. I was told by the Press Club that they would not host Lord Monckton so well done Alix and team for getting him a spot!

    00

  • #
    Baa Humbug

    Louis

    I understand and don’t disagree with “science is not debated”. My reading of this article indicates he wasn’t using the word debate as in a verbal stoush, but “debate of published papers”, let the research do the talking so to speak. The full quote from your post says…

    “Why is this so? Because the mechanism by which scientific debate has been “regulated” to avoid anarchy—at least since the second half of the twentieth century—has been the “peer review” process”.

    The peer review process as we know relates to papers submitted for publishing, “the MECHANISM by which scientific DEBATE…..etc

    Also re: criminal case

    “Everyone knows what happens if police obtain evidence by illegal means: the evidence is ruled inadmissible;….The justice system is not saying that the accused is necessarily innocent; rather, that determining the truth is impossible if evidence is not protected from tampering or fabrication.
    The same is true in science: scientists assume that the rules of the scientific method have been followed, at least in any discipline that publishes its results for public consumption”.

    My take on the above isn’t one of a debate between 2 lawyers per se, but the integrity of evidence gathered in support of a particular research. I thought it was a good analogy.

    By the way he is a scientist it turns out

    John P. Costella – B.E.(Elec.)(Hons.) B.Sc.(Hons.) Ph.D.(Physics) Grad.Dip.Ed.

    ps Louis I’m not having a go at you. I was surprised by the difference in our understanding of the same article.
    I’ll be disabled for a while, if I don’t respond asap it’s not coz I’m ignoring u :)

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    Baa Humbug,

    I generally agree with your assessment of the article which I had no quibble with, and your comment concerning data integrity is spot on, but not what my initial comment was directed at.

    Our difference of the article seems more to misunderstanding than anything else – I did, after all, write that apart from the scientific debate fallacy, that I had no criticisms of it.

    :-)

    00

  • #
    MattB

    Oh Bah Humbug – don;t give up so easily. “no debate in science” what a crock.

    00

  • #
  • #
    P Gosselin

    That must have been one hell of an experience!
    I bet that energised the folks in attendance.
    Shows that you Aussies down there are really moving things. Congratulations!

    00

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    Pierre,

    UKIP is the only political party in the UK that has sensible policies on getting out of the EUSSR, energy and climate change. Many people are considering voting for it at the upcoming general election. UKIP will split the Conservative vote unless the Conservative “green” leadership does a radical rethink. Many prospective Conservative candidates do not rate climate change as an issue. It will be an interesting election.

    00

  • #
    Tony

    Any activity whether it is a business, a school, or a scientific laboratory, will always be corrupted by government funds. The only way to ensure honesty in an enterprise is to have honesty in its funding.

    00

  • #
    Keith

    Dinah, Louis, Ali,
    Thanks for the info. The NPC website still shows nothing. Must be a state secret or something.

    00

  • #

    Louis,

    Fair call that science does not proceed by “debate” as in Debating, but as Baa Humbug points out I meant it as a generic term for the to-and-fro of boiling down scientific claims.

    More importantly, now I’m really looking forward to Lord Monckton’s appearances here in Melbourne on Monday week … :)

    00

  • #
    Allen Ford

    “doubt it’s going to be reported in local media though; any opportunity we get we should write to local media outlets reporting on the dates and venues”.

    At least one local newspaper, The Weekly Times here in Sydney, has covered the tour, and provided editorial comment. John Booth, the editor, has maintained a consistent, anti-AGW stance for quite some time, much to his discomfiture from the usual suspects. I fully expect TWT will give more than adequate coverage to the actual lecture.

    I will be attending Lord Monckton’s lecture in Newcastle next
    Thursday, rather than in Sydney, so as not be frozen out by the screaming hordes!

    00

  • #
    Macha

    It was a very interesting and entertaining night in Subiaco – Perth, WA. Both Jensen and Lord Monkton spoke well and were encouraged by those present.

    It was a little bit of preaching to the converted (or can I say aware and well informed?), but it was a good point that Lord Monkton raised – here he is without formal qualifications in climatology and yet no-one with specific training that support AGW is willing to stand toe-to-toe with him?!!! I find that odd when there’s plenty that will pull him (or others) down for not being ‘qualified’, and plenty more that get offended by any suggestion that their work (20-30yrs worth?) is being professionally denigrated. Why won’t at least one of them stand up and be counted in the MSM?

    PS. A good idea getting the sun-downer to happen Jo – its was nice to meet you too.

    Cheers,
    Pete

    00

  • #
    Louis Hissink

    John Costella

    Quite – I do realise you used it in a generic sense but it’s the prevailing view that science is debated which is the real problem that needs to be focussed on, and which I think many don’t fully understand. I think that distinction has now been clarified by this particular discussion.

    It gets a bit frustrating when climate sceptics counter the AGW position by pointing to papers etc supporting their view of scepticism, like my peer reviewed sources are better than yours, nya nya, when all they should have focussed on the falsification of the hypothesis. As you rightly point out, it’s been politically driven from the start and equally a predictable outcome given the political beliefs of many of those who populate academia, especially in the softer “sciences”. As those academics live in a world n which a truth is determined by debate, then it’s pretty obvious that they have also imposed their world view on “climate science”, and this is the real problem.

    It becomes a somewhat sensitive issue when it’s pointed out that this crappy science is a logical outcome of the philsophical and political beliefs many have, especially when they are in the majority.

    The Lord Monckton will give a splendid performance, I’m sure. I just wish I could be present at the Brisbane venue when he intellectually iviscerates Barry Brook and that other alarmer.

    00

  • #

    Louis Hissink:

    Thanks greatly for the explanation; I now understand what you meant, and don’t disagree with it.

    Cheers
    John

    00

  • #
    Leah

    Hi All

    Perhaps I can help with the Lord Monckton dates. I am working with the crew organising locations, dates etc. Canberra is the 3rd of Feb, but perhaps the confusion might be that they are trying to get a second date at the press club being the first event of the year. Apparently.. traditionally this is offered to Rudd or Opposition, so they are waiting for them to reply. Perhaps once they get wind of the fact that Monckton may take that date with full press and tv, radio coverage, they might jump to ensure that does not happen!!

    If anyone requires any further information on any dates or details please contact me leah2604@gmail.com as there are too many details to write here in the blog! We are booking fast on most venues so wise to contact me asap if you intend going!

    00

  • #
    Mark

    It may be of interest that Lord Monckton will be a guest of Alan Jones at radio 2GB on Monday morning (I think).

    00

  • #
    Leah

    Hi all

    Just to let you know there WILL be a debate here in Australia on Lord Monckton’s tour. It will be a special event held at the Brisbane Hilton on the 29th of January a luncheon. This is a totally different event to most of the others, as it will be $130 per head and organised by the Brisbane Institute. If you are interested I can send you a copy of the flyer (email me Leah2604@gmail.com). The debate is between Prof. Barry Brook and Journalist Graham Readfearn and of course Lord Monckton and Prof. Ian Plimer. Normal “Town Hall” type events are $2- $20 entry, ensuring maximum amount of people are able to attend.

    As far as I know this will be a “world first” and tickets are at about the 400 sold mark but I believe they can fit in around 550.

    My husband and I have arranged for a film maker friend of ours to film this event and are hoping to make the complete footage available on YouTube when finished. We also hope to put together a short movie of the tour, and will be having one on one interviews with Prof. Plimer, Prof. Carter and Lord Monckton. We realised the importance of getting the message past the walls of the Hilton. In saying that I actually have to wait till we get the o.k. back from Barry and Graham that they too agree to be filmed. Fingers crossed.

    The media has stepped up dramatically over the past few days and I don’t think we will be short of footage… in what light, lets cross our fingers for a “fair” outcome. We have also had word that an international film crew is flying over right now to catch the tour, will provide further details later when official.

    I have been absolutely amazed at the wonderful people coming forward on a daily basis offering help.

    A lot of prominent highly educated people will be attending many of the events, subsequently my inbox is overflowing daily with requests for information, it will no doubt be a wonderful success, thanks to people like Jo Nova and everyone who keep plugging away at it daily.

    To give you an idea I received an email from Jo and another from Lord Monckton at around 2am and 4am this morning so lots of hard work is being done by many to ensure we fight for our rights to the truth, before it’s all too late.

    I believe the next action is mass email to the Politian’s, etc. at a particular time to ensure maximum impact, I will pass that through to you when I hear more.

    00

  • #
    Mark

    Leah, we’re all indebted to you and your “significant other” for the effort.

    I just hope to heaven that Lord Monckton has had time to prep Ian Plimer for media presentation.

    00

  • #
  • #
  • #
    T Rex

    http://www.npc.org.au/upcomingSpeakers.html

    Unless Barnaby has arranged a surprise stand in, looks like Lord M will not be at the National Press Club.
    If not it will be a great shame as he would kill single handedly the propsed ETS.

    00

  • #

    I thought Lord Monckton (or Case Smit) explained that he is talking after the luncheon; Barnaby would be the luncheon speaker?

    00

  • #
    T Rex

    John Costella, thanks, will that be on TV?

    00

  • #

    T Rex:

    Sorry, mate; I don’t know.

    00