Monckton On His High Court Horse

[ UPDATE : Some of the propagandists of the Climategate non-scandal, an event, you may recall, that involved the purloining and publication of thousands of private e-mails, have complained that I published their private e-mail addresses…Oh, such delicious irony ! ]

Monckton’s on his High Court horse, doo dah, doo dah…. yes The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, christen-named Christopher has had it with the BBC. Really had it. You can almost visualise cartoon steam exploding from his auricles, imagine a purple brow with veins a-popping.

And in the process of winging off a torrent of what feel like huffy-puffy blow-your-house-down e-mails, he has managed to send one to me, possibly by mistake, but who knows, really ? I mean, who really knows what is going on in his Viscountnesses’ mind ? Why has he not succumbed to the inevitable and graciously bowed out from the theatre of contention and meekly joined the Glorious House of Scientific Consensus ?

Let’s repeat it one more time – Climate Change is real and it’s happening now. The mid-range projection for average Global Warming is a rise of around about three degrees Celsius, which will be significant in its impacts on habitats around the world, and at the current three quarters of a degree is already causing major disruptions to rainfall and weather patterns and de-stabilisation of the frozen regions, with knock-on effects for plant and animal life and agriculture, as recognised and evidenced by all the world’s leading science academies.

Discounting a wide range of possible positive feedbacks, global warming to a first order calculation from basic Physics will be somewhat over one degree Celsius for a doubling of Carbon Dioxide; and then in addition, about the same again for the increased atmospheric water vapour, a direct result of the initial Carbon Dioxide-induced warming.

Christopher Monckton, is, in my view, wrong to assert that Climate Sensitivity to increasing greenhouse gases is low, when the basic Physics contradicts him.

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

From: Christopher Monckton (3rd Viscount of Brenchley)
Sent: 31 January 2011 20:40:47
Re: BBC 4
To: Rupert Wyndham
(R. C. E. Wyndham, ex-Company Secretary, Sage Group);
John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor)
Cc: John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor); Brice Bosnich (Australian National University, Research School of Chemistry); Christopher Booker (Daily Telegraph columnist), James Delingpole (Daily Telegraph columnist), John Christy (University of Alabama in Huntsville), Nigel Lawson (Global Warming Policy Foundation), Paul Reiter (Pasteur Institute), Richard S. Lindzen (MIT), S. Fred Singer (SEPP), Andrew Collins (BBC Radio Times editor), Benny Peiser (Global Warming Policy Foundation), Gabriel (Gabe) Rychert (Climate Realists), Sally Allix, Angela Kelly, jo abbess, Mark Thompson (BBC Director General), Caroline Thompson (BBC), Anthony Bright-Paul (author), Tony Nicholls, Andrew Montford (Bishop Hill weblog), Humphrey Morison, David Bellamy (naturalist, conservationist), Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen (Hull University), Charles Wyndham, Colin Bradshaw (Rowan Studios), Piers Corbyn (Weather Action), Peter Sissons (ex-BBC), Professor Philip Stott, Hans Schreuder (Tech Know), David Evans (Science Speak), Fred Pearce (journalist, The Guardian, New Scientist Magazine), “CWS”, James Naughtie (BBC), John Humphrys (BBC), John Brignell (Number Watch), Kenneth (Ken) Haapala (SEPP), Rodney Leach (Matheson & Co.), “Physics Services”, Melanie Phillips (Daily Mail journalist), Andrew Revkin (New York Times journalist), The Tablet (Catholic newspaper), Andrew Tyrie (UK Parliament), Martin Rees (ex-President, Royal Society), Anthony Watts (Watts Up With That weblog)

Actually it’s a boorish hatchet job of the traditional BBC kind, but I sued them and made them cut it by half an hour and alter or remove some 16 downright errors and unfairnesses in the programme. Pleasingly, they’re going to have to pay quite a large chunk of the court costs (though I’m going to have to pay some too, because although the Beeb had promised me a right of reply their promise meant nothing either to them or to the High Court). – M of B

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

—–Original Message—–
From: Rupert Wyndham (R. C. E. Wyndham, ex-Company Secretary, Sage Group)
To: John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society)
Cc: John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor); Brice Bosnich (Australian National University, Research School of Chemistry); Christopher Booker (Daily Telegraph columnist); James Delingpole (Daily Telegraph columnist); Christopher Monckton (3rd Viscount of Brenchley); John Christy (University of Alabama in Huntsville); Nigel Lawson (Global Warming Policy Foundation); Paul Reiter (Pasteur Institute); Richard S. Lindzen (MIT); S. Fred Singer (SEPP); Andrew Collins (BBC Radio Times editor); Benny Peiser (Global Warming Policy Foundation); Gabriel (Gabe) Rychert (Climate Realists); Sally Allix; Angela Kelly; jo abbess; Mark Thompson (BBC Director General); Caroline Thompson (BBC); Anthony Bright-Paul (author); Tony Nicholls; Andrew Montford (Bishop Hill weblog); Humphrey Morison; David Bellamy (naturalist, conservationist); Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen (Hull University); Charles Wyndham; Colin Bradshaw (Rowan Studios); Piers Corbyn (Weather Action); Peter Sissons (ex-BBC); Professor Philip Stott; Hans Schreuder (Tech Know); David Evans (Science Speak); Fred Pearce (journalist, The Guardian, New Scientist Magazine); “CWS”; James Naughtie (BBC); John Humphrys (BBC); John Brignell (Number Watch); Kenneth (Ken) Haapala (SEPP); Rodney Leach (Matheson & Co.); “Physics Services”; Melanie Phillips (Daily Mail journalist); Andrew Revkin (New York Times journalist); The Tablet (Catholic newspaper); Andrew Tyrie (UK Parliament); Martin Rees (ex-President, Royal Society); Anthony Watts (Watts Up With That weblog)

Sent: Mon, Jan 31, 2011 4:50 pm
Subject: BBC 4

John

Don’t know if you’ve noticed, but Monckton is the star turn tonight from 2200-2300 hrs. There’s the usual weasel worded lead-in within the pages of the Radio Times as, indeed, there was for last week’s Horizon. It’s also interesting to see the BBC going into contortions not to abandon the party line – note, Horizon for warmistas was at peak time (2100 hrs), but this evening’s ‘off message’ contribution is slotted an hour ahead, when Corporation spin doctors no doubt expect that fewer people will access it, by then very sensibly preferring instead their mug of Horlicks and an electric blanket. The BBC will, of course, laud the exercise as a conspicuous example of its vaunted impartiality.

It is noteable too that JS in the RT, whoever that turkey may be, states that: “The film’s impossible task is to be rigorous enough to unpick his arguments without giving sceptics the impression that any criticism is just part of the conspiracy.” Climategate in mind, with this as just a Freudian slip? What say you?

Well, on this subject if not his Petri dishes, you, I and many another could unpick Sir Paul Nurse faster than a puppy could a bog roll.

With him and his cronies ’tis but a matter of being able to read ‘FRAUD’, writ large in neon lights. In the case of attempting to unpick Monckton, one might just have to undergo the inconvenient preliminary of actually acquiring a little knowledge.

Anyway, I’ll record it. It’ll not say anything that’s unfamiliar, but it will, nonetheless, do so effectively and well. Plainly, JS is bothered,

as well he might be, given the evidence of crass ignorance.

ATB

R

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=

From: Christopher Monckton
Sent: 31 January 2011 19:52:46
To: Hans Schreuder (Tech Know), Rupert Wyndham (R. C. E. Wyndham, ex-Company Secretary, Sage Group), John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor)
Cc: John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor), Brice Bosnich (Australian National University, Research School of Chemistry);, Christopher Booker (Daily Telegraph columnist), James Delingpole (Daily Telegraph columnist), John Christy (University of Alabama in Huntsville), Nigel Lawson (Global Warming Policy Foundation), Paul Reiter (Pasteur Institute), Richard S. Lindzen (MIT), S. Fred Singer (SEPP), Andrew Collins (BBC Radio Times editor), Benny Peiser (Global Warming Policy Foundation), Gabriel (Gabe) Rychert (Climate Realists), Sally Allix, Angela Kelly, jo abbess, Mark Thompson (BBC Director General), Caroline Thompson (BBC), Anthony Bright-Paul (author), Tony Nicholls, Andrew Montford (Bishop Hill weblog), Humphrey Morison, David Bellamy (naturalist, conservationist), Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen (Hull University), Charles Wyndham, Colin Bradshaw (Rowan Studios), Piers Corbyn (Weather Action), Peter Sissons (ex-BBC), Professor Philip Stott, David Evans (Science Speak), Fred Pearce \n (Journalist, The Guardian, New Scientist Magazine), “CWS”, James Naughtie (BBC), John Humphrys (BBC), John Brignell (Number Watch), Kenneth (Ken) Haapala (SEPP), Rodney Leach (Matheson & Co.), “Physics Services”, Melanie Phillips (Daily Mail journalist), Andrew Revkin (New York Times journalist), The Tablet (Catholic newspaper), Andrew Tyrie (UK Parliament), Martin Rees (ex-President, Royal Society), Anthony Watts (Watts Up With That weblog)

There is a greenhouse effect; increases in greenhouse-gas concentrations add to it; CO2 is a greenhouse gas; at the quantum level it mimics the dipole moment of a more complex molecule; accordingly at its characteristic absorption wavelengths a quantum resonance is established in the molecule, radiating heat that would otherwise have passed harmlessly out into space; and, therefore, adding CO2 to the atmosphere, as we are doing, will cause some warming. It is trivially correct to say that the climate object’s only method of losing heat is by radiation to outer space: however, if some of that heat is retained in the atmosphere, radiating here via the quantum resonance in CO2 molecules rather than radiating harmlessly out to space, warming will of course result. I have already set out, in the simplest terms, the half-page of not particularly difficult undergrad physical math that establishes the fact and magnitude of the greenhouse effect in the whole atmosphere. I sent it to Siddons some time ago, but he remains unconvinced by what is proven mathematics.

The question, therefore, is not whether our adding CO2 to the atmosphere causes warming, but how much warming will result. This is the central scientific question in the “global warming” debate. Broadly speaking, climate scientists who address that question by measurement and observation tend to favor low climate sensitivity (i.e. not much warming); those who address it by modeling lean toward high climate sensitivity. My own most recent calculations, currently under peer review, suggest lowish climate sensitivity, with the IPCC having perhaps exaggerated it by double (this is a rather more cautious estimate of the exaggeration than that of many climate scientists). Remove even a twofold exaggeration and the climate “problem” vanishes. Where science is proven, one should adhere to it unless there is evidence that the proof is wrong. Like it or not, the fundamental equation of radiative transport, which establishes inter alia that there is a greenhouse effect, is long and definitively proven by reference to Planck’s blackbody law. Nothing from the Slaying the Sky Dragon book provides any serious or credible basis for challenging that proof. Until a serious case is made and submitted for review in the usual way, suggestions to the effect that there is no greenhouse effect are not likely to be taken seriously – and nor should they be.

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley

—–Original Message—–
From: Hans Schreuder (Tech Know)
To: Rupert Wyndham (R. C. E. Wyndham, ex-Company Secretary, Sage Group); John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor)
Cc: John Gahan (Farnham Geological Society, New Forest councillor); Brice Bosnich (Australian National University, Research School of Chemistry); Christopher Booker (Daily Telegraph columnist); James Delingpole (Daily Telegraph columnist); Christopher Monckton (3rd Viscount of Brenchley); John Christy (University of Alabama in Huntsville); Nigel Lawson (Global Warming Policy Foundation); Paul Reiter (Pasteur Institute); Richard S. Lindzen (MIT); S. Fred Singer (SEPP); Andrew Collins (BBC Radio Times editor); Benny Peiser Benny Peiser (Global Warming Policy Foundation); Gabriel (Gabe) Rychert (Climate Realists); Sally Allix; Angela Kelly; jo abbess; Mark Thompson (BBC Director General); Caroline Thompson (BBC); Anthony Bright-Paul (author); Tony Nicholls; Andrew Montford (Bishop Hill weblog); Humphrey Morison; David Bellamy (naturalist, conservationist); Sonja A Boehmer-Christiansen (Hull University); Charles Wyndham; Colin Bradshaw (Rowan Studios); Piers Corbyn (Weather Action); Peter Sissons (ex-BBC); Professor Philip Stott; David Evans (Science Speak); Fred Pearce (journalist, The Guardian, New Scientist Magazine); “CWS”; James Naughtie (BBC); John Humphrys (BBC); John Brignell (Number Watch); Kenneth (Ken) Haapala (SEPP); Rodney Leach (Matheson & Co.); “Physics Services”; Melanie Phillips (Daily Mail journalist); Andrew Revkin (New York Times journalist); The Tablet (Catholic newspaper); Andrew Tyrie (UK Parliament); Martin Rees (ex-President, Royal Society); Anthony Watts (Watts Up With That weblog)

Oh Dear!

Even more luke-warmers will be borne from this man’s incorrect views of reality.

Has he read the latest papers on the extra cooling that is the only logical effect that can be ascribed to atmospheric carbon dioxide?

Is he aware yet that his beloved “climate forcing parameter” is a phantasma like phlogiston ever was?

He has all the formulae but they are meaningless if the computed parameter does not exist in reality.

When oh when will they learn to add one plus one and make two, not 2.2 or even 3 ….?

Little wonder than that this man is heralded by the BBC as the “voice of climate scepticism” – it suits them well as his arguments are easy pickings.

We’ve tried in vain to make him see where he goes wrong. States that the “only debate in town is the degree of warming” when the harsh reality is that no warming at all can come from adding carbon dioxide to our atmosphere.

Consider just these few words by Alan Siddons:
Surrounded by a vacuum, the earth has only one means of losing heat: by radiation. Gosh, could it be that radiating CO2 assists that process?
Ever considered that the vacuum of space has no temperature and is in fact the best possible insulator we could wish for? Earth does not need a blanket to keep it warm, never mind the electric blanket that the beloved “greenhouse effect” is concocted to deliver us.

Our atmosphere in toto always acts as a cooling mechanism and as a delaying cooling mechanism when the sun doesn’t shine on it.

We’d be a darn side warmer if we had no “greenhouse gases” to help radiate solar heat away into the vacuum of space.

Best regards,

Hans Schreuder
www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com
www.slayingtheskydragon.com

=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=