2011-09-20 09:16:22Monckton Bunkum
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

I’m new to this site but guess this is the place for my issue.

Two days ago I posted to WUWT about an article from Monckton attacking Paul Nurse“Stamp out anti-science in UK science”

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/17/monckton-on-paul-nurses-anti-science/

Someone had previously posted Monckton Bunkum videos so I added a transcript I had done from video where Potholer 54 (Peter Hadfield) condensed all his bunkums into dot points.

This is a reply from Monckton in which he attacked me (The other Brian) as a troll (includes transcript). Note I said to view videos for full details.

 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/18/monckton-answers-a-troll/
Monckton answers all points made by Hadfield, something he has refused to do up to now. Answers are usual rubbish and dodging and note the troll comments from Monckton fans.

 Question -  Is it worth ScS pursuing this or does anyone know how to contact Hadfield to find out if he’s aware of what’s going on so he can respond?

The thing that I have taken issue with is Monckton said in post that WUWT moderator must block material like this.
When he was in Australia Monckton never stopped saying he was been denied “free speech”.
I have contacted mainstream media and they agreed it is a human interest story and are working on doing an article – pobably in tommorrow’s paper.

Comments appreciated.



2011-09-20 09:54:15
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

It's a pretty typical Monckton Gish Gallop.  We've covered a lot of his claims in the Monckton Myths series already.  It's pretty shabby how he repeatedly refers to you as a "troll", but personal attacks are typical of Monckton.

John Cook might have contact info for Hadfield, I'm not sure.

2011-09-20 10:05:21
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

dana - I've got broad shoulders but it's a bit rich Monckton attacking Paul Nurse for anti-science. Should ScS come to his defence?

2011-09-20 10:28:18
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

It might be worth a response, Brian.  The problem is that Gish Gallops like this take a lot of time and effort to respond to (as I can say from personal experience, since I'm always the one doing the responding!).  And right now we're quite busy dealing with Pielke.

But if I have time, I might see what I can come up with in terms of a response, because we certainly agree with Nurse, and Monckton's article is a blood-boiler.

2011-09-20 18:54:10
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.104.94

Brian,

It's a gallant thought, but:

- Paul Nurse is a Nobel Laureate who happens to be the President of the Royal Society of London, surely one of the very most prestigious scientific institutions in the history of the world.

- Monckton is a Viscount who has been publicly rebuked for calling himself a member of Parliament - by the Parliament.

It's a case of fishing boat attacking battle cruiser.

2011-09-20 19:12:01
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.93.227.224

"since I'm always the one doing the responding!"

Quit the whining, you skinjob cylon, or we'll get a replacement out of the vat!  

2011-09-20 19:29:55Skinjob hey?
Glenn Tamblyn

glenn@thefoodgallery.com...
124.183.165.65

A Skinjob. So which one? The XO with the eye patch? Xena? Grace Park who really shouldn't do yoga with so little on - be still my beating heart (or move on to crap roles in Hawaii 5/0). Tortured maintenance chiefs. Or maybe Dean Stockwell who really wanted to be the admiral. Or maybe an invisible friend like Tricia Helfer

Hey, fighting to prevent Global Warming is starting to sound like fun.

2011-09-21 01:09:06
logicman

logicman_alf@yahoo.co...
86.177.54.84

In one of my articles on anti-science propaganda you can see some typical Monckton propaganda.  He is a 3rd generation professional propagandist.

http://www.science20.com/chatter_box/climate_insiders_their_goal_doubt

In this comment I linked to a pure ad hominem in which Monckton mocked Stephen Chu over his name in a very childish manner.

 

Unfortunately, the 3rd viscount has failed to understand the true purpose of propaganda.  I imagine the 1st Viscount Monckton spinning in his grave every time the 3rd viscount opens his mouth:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/ussr/6700.shtml

The Director General of the Ministry of Information speaks on its wartime role.

"Let us start with first things first: the principle which guides us about news is to tell the truth and nothing but the truth ..."

The D.G. of the M.I. was engaged many times in arguments against the various propaganda departments which wanted the BBC to broadcast patent untruths.  He knew full well that the true facts will always emerge and wanted that truth to emerge to the credit of the BBC.

2011-09-21 01:21:28
nealjking

nealjking@gmail...
91.33.104.94

logicman,

Monckton's assault on Chu is pretty weak stuff.

It manages to avoid mentioning that Chu is a pretty good atomic physicist (Nobel Prize 1997).

(Also my TA in freshman physics.)

2011-09-21 01:32:53
Rob Honeycutt

robhon@mac...
98.207.62.223

Monckton is such damaged goods at this point I'm really surprized that anyone is still backing him up, even Watts.

We have so much material on Moncky already.  Plus Peter Hadfield's material, and Peter Sinclair's material, and John Abraham's material.  I think Brian already did a good job getting the point across over at WUWT.  They never listen and attack like a pack of hyenas over there.

Probably better to say your piece and walk away.

2011-09-21 01:47:35
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
64.129.227.4

One benefit of a response is to point out that Watts is still giving Monckton a forum, to rail against the President of the Royal Society no less.  Then on top of that, show how utterly stupid his arguments are.  Basically undermine WUWT by emphasizing the association with Monckton.

I might try to put together something relatively quick - maybe not cover all the myths Monckton throws in there, but a select few, just to make the point.

2011-09-21 02:40:57
logicman

logicman_alf@yahoo.co...
86.177.54.84

When Monckton used a swastika in a presentation, Watts merely wrote that he was 'dismayed' - and he continues to publish Monckton's frothing-at-the-mouth BS.

The comments show that the WUWT readers are ready to forgive Monckton this 'minor slip' because his presentations are so wonderfully factual.

Caution!  Strong stomach needed:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/06/22/note-to-lord-monckton-this-isnt-helping/

 

Re: 'Monckton answers a troll' - he keeps using the word 'troll', even while complaining of ad hominem attacks on himself! 

"I seem to get more than my fair share of ad-hominem attacks from trolls."

 

So, over at WUWT:

As a matter of site policy:

"Trolls, flame-bait, personal attacks, thread-jacking, name-calling such as “denialist,” “denier,” and other detritus that add nothing to further the discussion may get deleted;"

but

a list of Monckton's errors is an ad hominem attack;

a person who points out errors of fact is a troll;

Monckton may call someone a troll in an article and its header.

and

"I have worked with Anthony and he is devoted to the highest level of scientific robustness" - Pielke Sr.

Yes, Dr. Pielke, and baby food is made out of real babies.

2011-09-21 09:20:38
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

I agree, Monckton is now terminally delusional – but still dangerous if not kept in check.   

“One understands the trolls’ increasing desperation as their scientific and economic case collapses: but lying about those of us who have long seen through the nonsense is not going to help them now. The science is in, the truth is out, the game is up, and the scare is over”.

But Hadfield repeatly asked Monckton to reply to Monckton Bunkum and now he has with drivel. Hadfield said he was sick of debunking Monckton but I thought he might be interested in rely because he put so much effort into videos.

Rob – I have no intention of replying to baiting – never have and never will. Gorilla tactics are the only thing that works when in the enemy camp.

2011-09-21 16:57:57
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146
There has been a blistering attack on Monckton at WUWT by Drew and comment about the moderator. It was not posted at first so Drew sent another short comment and this was the accuse from Watts.
REPLY: It was in the spam folder, recovered. – Anthony
 
Go to  http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/18/monckton-answers-a-troll/
if you want to read it.  
 
 
Drew says:
2011-09-22 11:30:53
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Post drafted.  I think it turned out pretty well.  See Monckton, the Anti-Nurse

2011-09-22 12:53:31
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

Great you found the time to do this dana. Looks very comprehensive to me.

Maybe it could include Australian governemnt’s push for a global agreement on emissions by 2015. Abbott supports this (shock - I thought he opposed everything)

Articles from the “Murdoch” press

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/australia-wants-un-climate-treaty-by-2015/story-e6frf7jx-1226142775730

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/canberra-eyes-carbon-pact-for-all-nations-at-un-climate-talks/story-e6frg6xf-1226142196131

 

2011-09-22 13:51:16
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Well, the only reason I talked about China's cap and trade was that Monckton specifically said China isn't concerned about climate change.  I don't think talking about Australia's plan would fit in here.

2011-09-27 14:05:47
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

I'm staying out of the SkS Monckton, the anti-Nurse post. Don't think it would be wise to join in but I'd love to.

2011-09-27 14:18:03
dana1981
Dana Nuccitelli
dana1981@yahoo...
69.230.106.125

Feel free Brian, I don't have a problem with you commenting on the post.

2011-09-27 14:47:49
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

Trouble is Dana I would only log in as "The other Brian" and tell some home truths - that would possibly link me directly with SkS and Watts may do one of his "blow things out of all proportion" things again?

Never give a sucker an even break, as they say. 

2011-09-27 19:11:44Comments please
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

This is what I have written for “Monckton, the anti-Nurse” post but as written I would need someone else to post it – any takers or comments? Thought the last sentence would put the pressure back on Watts.

Monckton is the last person to be levelling the accusation of “troll” at anyone because trolling is his modus operandi (I love using Monckton Latin speak).

 He finds an ideal home at WUWT because it uses the word every time anyone dares to challenge climate skeptic orthodoxy. They immediately get the troll label pinned on them, either by Watts or his willing outriders.

 But I was interested to find out if, in this case,the troll accusation was justified, so I watch the Monckton Bunkum videos again and there in video #5 were the very same words posted by The other Brian. He had just transcribed, almost verbatim, (more moncky speak) the words used by Peter Hadfield in his forensic analysis of Monckton’s”make it up as you go along” science.

 Don’t believe me, then watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRCyctTvuCo  - skip to 8 minute 25 seconds and there are the words supplied by The other Brian.

 Hardly trolling; but Monckton let fly with his well-worn brand of trolling.

 “The science is in, the truth is out, the game is up, and the scare is over. Get used to it, get real, get a job, and get a life”.

 Need I say more!

 PS I suppose an apology from WUWT would be out of the question?

 

       

2011-09-28 10:07:11
Brian Purdue

bnpurdue@bigpond.net...
121.218.161.146

Have just posted my comment on "Monckton, the anti-nurse. Toned it down a bit and don't mind my real name going on.