djarm67 | Global Climate Change - Debunking Lord Monckton 2 @djarm67 | Uploaded February 2011 | Updated October 2024, 15 hours ago.
I would suggest that the goal of the vast majority of these prominent climate change skeptics is to create doubt regarding the recommendations of the scientific consensus in relation to the impact of our carbon emissions on global climate change. This doubt, once entrenched in the public opinion would provide a brake on real progress towards legislation to restrict carbon emissions. The obvious benefactors of a lack of progress would be industries who would be forced to lose billions in profits by having to change their business processes and models to comply with stricter regulations. Do you think that it is likely that these anti-climate change advocates are being bankrolled by these industries? You decide?
This video is a mirror of potholer54 addressing the claims of Lord Christopher Monckton
youtube.com/watch?v=PTY3FnsFZ7Q
SOURCES:
2" Interview on Australian TV program 'Sunrise' 2009
1'02" McNeil publishing history: http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~bmcneil/publications.html
4'19" Royer
4'29" "The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth's temperature to radiation changes"
R. Knutti and G. Heger
Nature Geoscience 2008
5'59" Rebuttals to Lindzen
"Relationships between tropical sea surface temperature and top-of-atmosphere radiation"
K. Trenberth, J. Fasullo, C. O'Dell T. Wong
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2010
"Constraining climate sensitivity with linear fits to outgoing radiation"
Daniel M. Murphy, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS 2010
"Revisiting the determination of climate sensitivity from relationships between surface temperature and radiative fluxes"
E. Chung, B. Soden, B. Sohn
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2010
"The Impact of Global Warming on Marine Boundary Layer Clouds over the Eastern Pacific—A Regional Model Study"
A. Lauer et al
Journal of Climate, 2010
6'15" Monckton-Lambert debate: youtube.com/watch?v=nB5N8EtNCzA
6'34" "Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered," Forum on Physics and Society, July 2008
6'53" Calculation rebuuttals at:
duoquartuncia.blogspot.com/2008/07/aps-and-global-warming-what-were-they.html
realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/07/once-more-unto-the-bray
scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/moncktons_triple_counting.php
altenergyaction.org/Monckton.html#sec7
7'40" "Taking Greenhouse Warming Seriously"
R. Lindzen, Energy and Environment, Dec 2007
8'14" "Chuck it again, Schmidt"
Christopher Monckton, July 2008
scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/monckton/chuck_it_again_schmidt.pdf
9'16" Speech sponsored by Minnesota Free Market Institute St. Paul, October 2009
10'04" Monckton notes, FCPP website
fcpp.org/pdf/MoncktonwNotesOct809.pdf
11'58" Speech in Melbourne, February 2009
12'28" Interview on Australian TV program 'Sunrise' 2009
13'06" Monckton-Lambert debate: youtube.com/watch?v=nB5N8EtNCzA
13'53" Monckton testimony to US House Energy Independence & Global Warming Committee
6 May 2010
I would suggest that the goal of the vast majority of these prominent climate change skeptics is to create doubt regarding the recommendations of the scientific consensus in relation to the impact of our carbon emissions on global climate change. This doubt, once entrenched in the public opinion would provide a brake on real progress towards legislation to restrict carbon emissions. The obvious benefactors of a lack of progress would be industries who would be forced to lose billions in profits by having to change their business processes and models to comply with stricter regulations. Do you think that it is likely that these anti-climate change advocates are being bankrolled by these industries? You decide?
This video is a mirror of potholer54 addressing the claims of Lord Christopher Monckton
youtube.com/watch?v=PTY3FnsFZ7Q
SOURCES:
2" Interview on Australian TV program 'Sunrise' 2009
1'02" McNeil publishing history: http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~bmcneil/publications.html
4'19" Royer
4'29" "The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth's temperature to radiation changes"
R. Knutti and G. Heger
Nature Geoscience 2008
5'59" Rebuttals to Lindzen
"Relationships between tropical sea surface temperature and top-of-atmosphere radiation"
K. Trenberth, J. Fasullo, C. O'Dell T. Wong
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2010
"Constraining climate sensitivity with linear fits to outgoing radiation"
Daniel M. Murphy, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS 2010
"Revisiting the determination of climate sensitivity from relationships between surface temperature and radiative fluxes"
E. Chung, B. Soden, B. Sohn
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2010
"The Impact of Global Warming on Marine Boundary Layer Clouds over the Eastern Pacific—A Regional Model Study"
A. Lauer et al
Journal of Climate, 2010
6'15" Monckton-Lambert debate: youtube.com/watch?v=nB5N8EtNCzA
6'34" "Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered," Forum on Physics and Society, July 2008
6'53" Calculation rebuuttals at:
duoquartuncia.blogspot.com/2008/07/aps-and-global-warming-what-were-they.html
realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/07/once-more-unto-the-bray
scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/moncktons_triple_counting.php
altenergyaction.org/Monckton.html#sec7
7'40" "Taking Greenhouse Warming Seriously"
R. Lindzen, Energy and Environment, Dec 2007
8'14" "Chuck it again, Schmidt"
Christopher Monckton, July 2008
scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/monckton/chuck_it_again_schmidt.pdf
9'16" Speech sponsored by Minnesota Free Market Institute St. Paul, October 2009
10'04" Monckton notes, FCPP website
fcpp.org/pdf/MoncktonwNotesOct809.pdf
11'58" Speech in Melbourne, February 2009
12'28" Interview on Australian TV program 'Sunrise' 2009
13'06" Monckton-Lambert debate: youtube.com/watch?v=nB5N8EtNCzA
13'53" Monckton testimony to US House Energy Independence & Global Warming Committee
6 May 2010
