Lord Monckton and the "Climategate" conspiracy

aurelius79

I believe Lord Monckton is a misinformation agent employed to lie about the truth about global warming. Just look at his credentials. Business consultant, policy adviser to the Thacher regime. He is the typical NWO puppet. Global warming is real. The more we deny it the more damage it will cause because we will not be prepared for the devastating weather changes.

I absolutely agree that the NWO is trying to capitalize on this with carbon taxes and calls for more centralized government. They seem completely unwilling to employ clean, sustainable energy because there's just no money in it. The NWO are just using this possible disaster to make as much money as they can just like they do with any other disaster.

This does not change the fact that global warming is a real threat and I honestly don't think there's anything we can do to stop it.

I can sum up Lord Monckton's true agenda of supporting Big Oil with a quote from Alex Jones' radio interview.

"...they want to stop the world from burning Co2 when they must know that the consequence...to kill people in the poorest countries who need, above all else, to use fossil fuels to lift themselves out of poverty..."

That was quoted from this Youtube video right about 4:50

Who is giving these poor countries oil to get out of poverty? Big Oil certainly isn't. Look at Big Oil companies already in Africa and East Asia. They take all of the oil, pollute the drinking water so people have to buy bottled water, poison the earth so they have to buy food, and give absolutely nothing back to the country.

Oil and coal revenues are two of the biggest incomes for the NWO, and Lord Monckton is guaranteeing them even more money if we listen to him.

We need free, clean, renewable energy. Wind, solar, tide, hydroelectric, geothermic, it's all available to us. That's what will save the poor countries of the world and everyone else, not We just need to stop arguing and fighting and just build the damn power stations and but people like Monckton want us to keep arguing, keep burning oil. Just ask yourself why? Because you can't make billions/trillions from renewable energy. What good is that to the NWO?

I hope you read this and begin to question Monckton's motives and other misinformation agents like him.

"Climategate" is a lie. There were no leaked e-mails.

uglyjohn

anyone with a brain can see how mush of an idiot he is. he mixes cherry picking of data with outright lies. I honestly cant believe he's gotten the amount of press he has.

bladespin

uglyjohn wrote: »

anyone with a brain can see how mush of an idiot he is. he mixes cherry picking of data with outright lies. I honestly cant believe he's gotten the amount of press he has.

He'll fit right in on either side so, neither could be described as rational or open minded.

mysterious

aurelius79 wrote: »

I believe Lord Monckton is a misinformation agent employed to lie about the truth about global warming. Just look at his credentials. Business consultant, policy adviser to the Thacher regime. He the typical NWO puppet. Global warming is real. The more we deny it the more damage it will cause because we will not be prepared for the devastating weather changes.

I absolutely agree that the NWO is trying to capitalize on this with carbon taxes and calls for more centralized government. They seem completely unwilling to employ clean, sustainable energy because there's just no money in it. The NWO are just using this possible disaster to make as much money as they can just like any other disaster.

This does not change the fact that global warming is a real threat and I honestly don't think there's anything we can do to stop it.

I can sum up Lord Monckton's true agenda of supporting Big Oil with a quote from Alex Jones' radio interview.

"...they want to stop the world from burning Co2 when they must know that the consequence...to kill people in the poorest countries who need, above all else, to use fossil fuels to lift themselves out of poverty..."

That was quoted from this Youtube video right about 4:50

Who is giving these poor countries oil to get out of poverty? Big Oil certainly isn't. Look at Big Oil companies already in Africa. The take all the oil, pollute the drinking water so people have to buy bottled water, and give nothing back to the country. One of the biggest incomes for the NWO is oil revenues and Lord Monckton is guaranteeing them even more money if we listen to him.

We need free, clean, renewable energy. Wind, tide, hydroelectric, it's all available to us. That's what will save the poor countries of the world and everyone else. We just need to build the damn power stations and turbines but people like Monckton want us to keep burning oil. Just ask yourself why? Because you can't make billions/trillions from renewable energy. What good is that to the NWO?

I hope you read this and begin to question Monckton's motives and other misinformation agents like him. "Climategate" is a lie. There were no leaked e-mails.

I agree totally with your sentiments. To make another point, I do find it insulting for anyone to be called "lord"

It makes it even more sickening.

PirateShampoo

mysterious wrote: »

I agree totally with your sentiments. To make another point, I do find it insulting for anyone to be called "lord"

It makes it even more sickening.

Its a just a Title, do you put Mr in front of your name? Which historically only a Gentalman use as a mark of respect.

bonkey

Lets not get into a discussion of etiquette here.

aurelius79

bonkey wrote: »

Lets not get into a discussion of etiquette here.

Thank you Lord Bonkey.

So yeah, it all of this just a ploy to alleviate our fears on global warming so we continue to burn oil like there's no tomorrow?

What proof do we have that these "hackers" are not just CIA agents or some other similar agency that leaked false e-mails to the press? From what I can understand, all the e-mails originated from the University of East Anglia. UEA has a long list of alumni that are now political leaders, media executives, and writers. Not too many scientists.

PirateShampoo

Sorry for off topic.

And yes i agree with the idea that it has nothing to do with climate change, if African country's started to develop on mass there would be massive oil shortages we only need to look at china for proof of this. And the only way for Africa to develop safely is to use modern technology's which western country's really don't want to share.

DangerMouse27

My thoughts are that we as humans have little impact on our climate but massive impact on our environment...and yes there is a difference.

Firstly il attempt to use facts to back up my thoughts..
Weather forecasting has only been happening since the 1840s and before that pattern recognition was largely the method of weather forecasting.
We only knew what weather was like at certain times of the year in years or decased gone by,through studying ice cores,providing a detailed history of the climate in the same way as the rings of a tree signify age.

I believe that this is a pattern of worsening weather but its a natural pattern.
Unlike the other human climate change sceptics,i do believe its good to continue to live greener lives,in as much to protect our environment(ANIMAL SPECIES ETC) as much as to change our climate.

Abrupt Climate Change:Inevitable Surprizes; National Research Council Washington D.C.

This is one of the many sources of my info.

If you want to get involved in this debate,please bring data..dont just rant and go..'Your wrong!' 'are you 12?'

meglome

DangerMouse27 wrote: »

Firstly il attempt to use facts to back up my thoughts..
Weather forecasting has only been happening since the 1840s and before that pattern recognition was largely the method of weather forecasting.
We only knew what weather was like at certain times of the year in years or decased gone by,through studying ice cores,providing a detailed history of the climate in the same way as the rings of a tree signify age.

But don't those ice cores show that the planet is warming in an unusual way?

DangerMouse27

Oh yes,it has but very minimally since before the indistrial age began and nothing to suggest that we as a species have done something over the lost two hundred years.That time frame by the way is blink of an eye stuff in the lifespan of this planet.

The climate change we are seeing now is very rapid,too much for it to be unnatural.But here is my dilemma for the sceptics,myself included.Id much rather believe that we have a control in our destiny,that we can change and go green and reduce the emissions but that voice is saying..wonder if we are on the brink of ice age 2 but this time with emails

Nehaxak

aurelius79 wrote: »

I believe Lord Monckton is a misinformation agent employed to lie about the truth about global warming. Just look at his credentials. Business consultant, policy adviser to the Thacher regime. He is the typical NWO puppet.

I know the guy, I've spoken with him, I've also corresponded many times personally with him via email some years back and have had long long discussions with him. He speaks the truth and backs it up with evidence and scientific facts. I have nothing but admiration for him.

I've also in the past and with his permission, posted segments of our emails plus documents and scientific/mathematical facts right here on Boards (AH if I remember rightly).
I could probably find my old outlook pst's and dig out the old emails and documents if required to back up his standpoint if really needed.
He's being going on about this for years and has debunked it over and over with actual facts since the start. He debunked and rubbished (with actual facts and maths) the initial findings that were used to facilitate the whole crap surrounding "global warming".
The leaked emails proved what he had said years ago, that the findings were false, the maths were false and the figures massaged to suit a green hippy treehugger agenda.

Global warming is real. The more we deny it the more damage it will cause because we will not be prepared for the devastating weather changes.

No, it's not and what you're saying is typical of rediculous doomsayers and people who come out with other absolute populist green agenda (hippy tree hugger) rubbish.

This does not change the fact that global warming is a real threat and I honestly don't think there's anything we can do to stop it.

What fact(s) ? They're all theories, which others of a more scientific mind have been going on about for years as absolute hogwash and more recently been exposed as lies by the "hackers", whoever they were.
There's no such thing as global warming, the planet heats up and cools down in regular or irregular cylcles but either of which are natural and nothing out of the ordinary.
If you want to point the finger at anything to blame, point it at the sun, the moon and whatever other natural and uncontrollable energies that exist (tidal, solar, gravitational, etc.,) - not at the human population who are just doing what we need to do, survive and progress as a species without being held back by feeble minded loud mouths who'd love nothing more for us all than to go back to our hunter gatherer beginnings, living in a forest picking berries and having sexual relations with sheep.

We need free, clean, renewable energy. Wind, solar, tide, hydroelectric, geothermic, it's all available to us.

No, we need nuclear, there I said it, shoot me.
All that other hippy stuff is ultimately just a waste of time and money.

That's what will save the poor countries of the world and everyone else, not We just need to stop arguing and fighting and just build the damn power stations and but people like Monckton want us to keep arguing, keep burning oil. Just ask yourself why? Because you can't make billions/trillions from renewable energy. What good is that to the NWO?

No, because renewable energy is just a hippy treehugger buzzword to throw around to make people sound like they love the planet and are in touch with their more metrosexual self. It's all horseshít and always was, it just became a fashionable thing to support. Even in this country we have people feeble minded and stupid enough to vote politicians into power who base their whole agenda on this absolute crap. Totally and utterly pathetic.

I hope you read this and begin to question Monckton's motives and other misinformation agents like him.

By all means do question him, he's more than willing to correspond with people so long as you have half a brain to actually debate and discuss the topic with him without resorting to wild/crazy/rediculous/pathetic doomsayer preaching.

"Climategate" is a lie. There were no leaked e-mails.

:rolleyes:
Who is doing the mis-information thingy again ?

The real conspiracy theory here is that global warming is and always was a lie with no evidence to back it up and anything presented as factual mathematical evidence were nothing but lies and manipulated figures, somewhat proved as such by the hacks that occured recently and previously debunked by Monckton and many others ad nauseum, but which were denied fair air time they deserved by main stream media outlets.

aurelius79

Nehaxak wrote: »

If you want to point the finger at anything to blame, point it at the sun, the moon and whatever other natural and uncontrollable energies that exist (tidal, solar, gravitational, etc.,) - not at the human population who are just doing what we need to do, survive and progress as a species without being held back by feeble minded loud mouths who'd love nothing more for us all than to go back to our hunter gatherer beginnings, living in a forest picking berries and having sexual relations with sheep.

No, we need nuclear, there I said it, shoot me.
All that other hippy stuff is ultimately just a waste of time and money.

No, because renewable energy is just a hippy treehugger buzzword to throw around to make people sound like they love the planet and are in touch with their more metrosexual self. It's all horseshít and always was, it just became a fashionable thing to support. Even in this country we have people feeble minded and stupid enough to vote politicians into power who base their whole agenda on this absolute crap. Totally and utterly pathetic.

Here's an idea, try making an intelligent argument without the childish insults?

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Renewable energy is the only way forward. Nuclear has proven itself to be too costly and extremely dangerous.

You know what? Forget it, I'm not going to argue the point with someone as small-minded and ignorant as you.

aurelius79 warned for personal abuse.

Nehaxak, tone your argument down a notch.

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IdFVTTq8hc

King Mob

Thanks for the video Flamed Diving.

Previously I have not been familiar with the scientific evidence for AGW, now I'm digging this guy's video series.

aurelius79

Thanks for the video Flamed Diving. The following is taken from the University of East Anglia's website. It's a press release dated 3 Dec 2009.

Sir Muir Russell to head the Independent Review into the allegations against the Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

http://www.uea.ac.uk/mac/comm/media/press/2009/dec/CRUreview

Well this is great, right? Well, not if you know who Sir Muir Russell is. He was widely believed to be primarily responsible for the massive overspend on the new Scottish Parliament Building and was criticised by Lord Fraser of Carmyllie's enquiry for failing to keep the politicians informed that the expenditure was far in excess of the budget. The project ended up in excess of 400 million pounds, well above the initial 40 million estimate.

He took office as Principal of the University of Glasgow on 1 October 2003. He has been criticized for receiving pay rises which were much greater than the rate of inflation. He also attracted much criticism for his handling of the 2006 lecturers' strike, as well as a decision to close the University's Crichton Campus in Dumfries, which was reversed after intervention from the Scottish Government. He retired in October 2009.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/pound-23-000-pay-rise-for-university-principal-1.871413

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8393449.stm

So this is the man who has been put in charge of investigating possible corruption and deception? Surely the British government could have found a more competent person.

aurelius79

Flamed Diving, thanks so much for introducing me to this guys videos! Here's a great one for the denialists and the media frenzy they rely on for their information and opinions.

bonkey

guys - there is a forum for discussing Green Issues.

Lets keep this one for the notion that there's a Conspiracy Theory hidden in there.

aurelius79

I don't think we've diverted from the topic. We're trying to prove that "Climategate" is just an attempt by various governments to pull out of any obligations made about Co2 emmissions before the Copenhagen fiasco. This constitutes a conspiracy theory between media and governments. My last video was just illustrating the point that media scew data to fit their agenda, as Mr. Latif clearly explains in his presentation.

The e-mails contain nothing more than conversations between scientists trying to figure out discrepencies or anomolies in the data. They admit they do not have all the data to explain why there was a cooling period beginning in the 1940s but they have never denied global warming. They also do not speculate as to why this is happening then claim those speculations as fact as many climate deniers seem to do.

tricky D

aurelius79 wrote: »

"...they want to stop the world from burning Co2 when they must know that the consequence...to kill people in the poorest countries who need, above all else, to use fossil fuels to lift themselves out of poverty..."

Guy is talking rubbish. How can he have any scientific credibility if he goes on about burning CO2. It's non-flamable. Basic chemistry fail there. Now carbon, that's a different matter.

DangerMouse27

I actually dont deny the climate is changing but is it us that has done it..no and you have no proof that it is us thats doing this.
There is a big difference to changing your environment and changing climate..we cant do anything either ways,if it gets too hot or cold then we have no solutions.
Our worst weapons(nuclear or biological) barely scar this planet so how do 'we' change our climate.

To think we have any say in what this planet does,how long its going to last,how cold its going to get is the biggest delusion of all.We can change nothing,we only think we can.

Nehaxak

aurelius79 wrote: »

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Renewable energy is the only way forward.

Yes I do. Furthermore, you've ONLY come out with nothing but rhetoric.
You've not debated anything you've said and only used your posts and this thread for soapboxing and taking potshots at one man who has stood up for so many years to speak out about the biggest sham of all, climate change/global warming/whatever you want to call it.

The green hippy feeble minded agenda has been pushed and forced upon people around the world for too long and it is a sham, it always was a sham and always will be a sham.
It is and has been used to try and create a false economy around "green" energy and jobs.

The ONLY conspiracy theory here in this thread of any worthyness is that of climate change/global warming being a conspiracy in itself as it has absolutely no hard facts or figures to back it up whatsoever other than hearsay and made up maths which have been proven as lies as the figures were massaged and manipulated to suit the green agenda.

I'm all for re-use and recycle but me arse am I going to swallow filthy lies by a bunch of tree hugging hippies.

aurelius79

DangerMouse27 wrote: »

I actually dont deny the climate is changing but is it us that has done it..no and you have no proof that it is us thats doing this.
There is a big difference to changing your environment and changing climate..we cant do anything either ways,if it gets too hot or cold then we have no solutions.
Our worst weapons(nuclear or biological) barely scar this planet so how do 'we' change our climate.

To think we have any say in what this planet does,how long its going to last,how cold its going to get is the biggest delusion of all.We can change nothing,we only think we can.

Ok, if global warming is not man-made, then why is there so much effort by Big Oil and industry into convincing people that global warming doesn't even exist?

According to CEI (Competitive Enterprise Institute, lobby-for-hire for Big Oil), the majority of scientists who study climate change are all lying.

What do climate scientists have to gain from lying about man-made global warming?

I do actually agree with you about the futility of change though. I think we are too far gone to actually make positive change to climate itself but we can prepare for the inevitable consequences.

Nehaxak

Nehaxak wrote: »

I'm all for re-use and recycle but me arse am I going to swallow filthy lies by a bunch of tree hugging hippies.

I've already asked you to tone your argument down a notch, Nehaxak. I won't ask you again.

Nehaxak

<mod snip>blah blah blah</mod snip>

6th

Take a months ban for that outburst.

DangerMouse27

Good points aurelius..personally i dont think those big companies are effected,even slightly.Whatever technology is coming around the corner,you can be sure that the petro-dollar will be well invested in that particular product.They have the money to be relevant in green or oil money.
I think we could change the climate after a few hundred years of constant pollution.But have changed it as quickly as we are proposed to have done? nah.

I think its good if the view is that it is our fault and we can change it all around,it gives us hope.
I prefer that we are helping our environment..ie species of animals,plants etc rather than deluding ourselves of climate change.

aurelius79

DangerMouse27 wrote: »

Good points aurelius..personally i dont think those big companies are effected,even slightly.Whatever technology is coming around the corner,you can be sure that the petro-dollar will be well invested in that particular product.They have the money to be relevant in green or oil money.
I think we could change the climate after a few hundred years of constant pollution.But have changed it as quickly as we are proposed to have done? nah.

I think its good if the view is that it is our fault and we can change it all around,it gives us hope.
I prefer that we are helping our environment..ie species of animals,plants etc rather than deluding ourselves of climate change.

Absolutely, Big Oil has billions to invest in green energy but there's only one problem. Once you recover the costs of manufacture and installation of say, a wind turbine, you have no real right to continue charging for the energy produced. Of course there will always be maintenance costs for the turbine and lines but that is nothing when compared to the massive costs and profits of oil production, distribution, and sales. We can't rely on government or Big Oil to make this change, they have too much to lose. We need to do this ourselves.

I know there is a policy against advertising on the forums but I'm gonna risk it anyway.

http://www.airtricity.com/ireland/index.xml

Have a look and make your own decision.

indough

aurelius79 wrote: »

Once you recover the costs of manufacture and installation of say, a wind turbine, you have no real right to continue charging for the energy produced

what? of course you do, if you pay for and build it then you should own it and any energy it produces, and should be entitled to sell it for whatever price you want

Flamed Diving

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXesBhYwdRo

Are climatologists censoring scientific journals and silencing alternative hypotheses on climate change?

aurelius79

indough wrote: »

what? of course you do, if you pay for and build it then you should own it and any energy it produces, and should be entitled to sell it for whatever price you want

My point is that you have none of the costs of providing that energy as you would with oil or gas. With oil or gas, you have massive initial costs before you can even begin selling it to power suppliers. Exploration and surveys, raw materials, manufacture and installation of rigs and refineries, transportation of crude, refinement, distribution of finished product, salaries of employees, etc. All these costs are obviously passed on to the consumer.

When you compare all that to the costs associated with renewable energy, you can't justify charging the same price as oil and gas for the same amount of electricity. Of course you could charge for the cost of initial expansion but as you near 100% integration into the grid, many of those costs will fall away.

aurelius79

Flamed Diving wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXesBhYwdRo

Are climatologists censoring scientific journals and silencing alternative hypotheses on climate change?

I think the video you linked pretty much answers your question. No, original scientific research which provides an alternative theory to climate change is not censored or ignored and there is no evidence to believe the contrary.

Research which contains large numbers of obvious errors and misinterpretation of original research is ignored for fairly obvious reasons. This is clearly explained in the video.

If I wrote a paper proposing that little green men are the main cause of climate change, you can expect me to be largely ignored by the wider scientific community.

Flamed Diving

It really wasn't my question. Just giving the video a teaser question for people to read before clicking.

Flamed Diving

For yucks: