1 of 2
1
Exposing a fraud! - Professor Abraham examines Lord Monckton’s claims - “Abraham vs. Monckton”
Posted: 08 June 2010 10:23 AM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09

In my dreams I undertake such a thorough examination of Monckton, Lindzen, Carter and others. Fortunately, we have a genuinely smart guy, who has actually taken the time to do the work to produce an excellent ten part (total time ±90min) series examining the many claims made by the Lord Monckton’s Dog’n Pony Show.

It turns out the Lord’s work is based on a string of lies and misrepresentations of the work of others ~ according to the very scientist’s who’s work Monckton misrepresents.
Thoroughly documented and ready for your closer examination.

click Abraham vs. Monckton
On YouTube in ten parts
Actually, I just discovered a much better version on Abraham’s university webpage, it includes a side tab with time-signature, outline & details on every slide presented.
A thorough refutation of Lord Christopher Monckton -climate warming denialist.

John P Abraham’s background:
Education:
Ph.D. 2002, Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota
M.S. 1999, Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota
B.S. 1997, Mechanical Engineering, University of Minnesota

Career:
John’s primary focus is the education of undergraduates in mechanical engineering courses with a goal of preparing them for substantial careers in heat transfer, fluid mechanics, and computational methods. John’s career to date has involved incorporating experimental work in heat transfer and fluid mechanics with computational studies. He has worked on a wide variety of both academic and industrial projects. Included here are positions with the Department of Energy at Los Alamos National Laboratory and as a researcher on a National Science Foundation grant. John’s industrial activities have involved experimental and computational work for companies such as Donaldson Co., Augustine Medical, Remmele Engineering, Urologix, and Caterpillar.

His current interests include microscale heat transfer, finite element/finite volume computational methods, experimental investigations of porous media, and experimental/computational studies of three-dimensional vented enclosures. John continues to strive to introduce undergraduates to high quality academic/industrial research jobs.

Lord Monckton’s scientific qualifications:
Degrees in Classics and Journalism
He has not written a single, peer-reviewed science paper on any topic.
But, man can he talk.

[ Edited: 23 June 2010 08:00 PM by citizenschallenge ]
 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 08 June 2010 08:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11

Why does anyone listen (to Lord Monckton)?

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 June 2010 12:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09

that’s a good question,
the guy is such an obvious con job - but, the yucks seem to love the guy.

go figure

 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 June 2010 04:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  258
Joined  2010-02-28

This has been proven to be huge, Monckton is livid.

See George Monbiot articles on the issue.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/08/monckton-gift-climate-denial

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/03/monckton-climate-change

The longer this goes on, the better it will be for all those who take science seriously. Lord Monckton is digging his hole ever deeper, and dragging down into it everyone stupid enough to follow him. Those of us who do battle with climate change deniers can’t inflict one tenth as much damage to their cause that Monckton wreaks every time he opens his mouth.

This has been fascinating to watch. If you’ve not seen the presentation, do so.

 Signature 

http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 June 2010 09:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09
Mike from Oz - 09 June 2010 04:06 AM

This has been proven to be huge, Monckton is livid.

See George Monbiot articles on the issue.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/08/monckton-gift-climate-denial

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2010/jun/03/monckton-climate-change

The longer this goes on, the better it will be for all those who take science seriously. Lord Monckton is digging his hole ever deeper, and dragging down into it everyone stupid enough to follow him. Those of us who do battle with climate change deniers can’t inflict one tenth as much damage to their cause that Monckton wreaks every time he opens his mouth.

This has been fascinating to watch. If you’ve not seen the presentation, please do.

Yea, lets all do our little part to help make it go truly viral, it’s about the time the lying slanderous creep gets smacked down!

[ Edited: 11 June 2010 06:37 PM by citizenschallenge ]
 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 June 2010 09:58 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09

What the UK’s Daily Telegraph doesn’t want you to read:

When Professor Abraham published his destruction of Monckton’s claims, the Telegraph had a brief moment of sanity, allowing its blogger Tom Chivers to post a celebration of “one of the most magisterial scientific take-downs on record.”
{See:  http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/ }

No sooner was the post up than it was down again. Monckton phoned the author to express his disappointment regarding Chivers’ “popinjay” and “jester” comments. Chivers reported in an update to the blog that he had refused to take it down pending a conversation with his editor. But shortly afterwards the blog was removed from the Telegraph website without explanation.

Fortunately Chivers’s post had already been reproduced elsewhere.
You can find it here:
http://www.climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2010/06/telegraph-steps-outside-its-alternate.html
Titled “Viscount Monckton is an embarrassment to global warming sceptics everywhere”
by Tom Chivers Last updated: June 4th, 2010

Thank you George Monbiot for the heads up.

[ Edited: 09 June 2010 10:47 AM by citizenschallenge ]
 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 02:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3028
Joined  2010-04-26

Who’s Lord Monckton?

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 03:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7684
Joined  2008-04-11
Dead Monky - 11 June 2010 02:28 PM

Who’s Lord Monckton?

Google him! He is a self proclaimed (no credentials)bombastic, climate ‘expert’ /denialist. He is apparently quite charismatically convincing to the unscientific public.

 Signature 

Church; where sheep congregate to worship a zombie on a stick that turns into a cracker on Sundays…

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 04:51 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3028
Joined  2010-04-26

Well, from what I’ve found, he looks like an ass.

 Signature 

“In the end nature is horrific and teaches us nothing.” -Mutual of Omicron

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 04:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09
Dead Monky - 11 June 2010 02:28 PM

Who’s Lord Monckton?

DM you’ll enjoy these YouTube videos by Greenman3610
Greenman does have a little fun with the subject, but still presents serious information.

Debunking Lord Monckton Part 1
Debunking Lord Monckton Part 2

 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 05:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  152
Joined  2010-05-27

I don’t think he is a con,  these people believe themselves and construct their own validations amongst themselves.  To them it is not meaningful to email the author and ask “What do you think?”  just to get the answer. There is almost to much emphasis on ones own intellect in todays society.  Most meteorologist disagree with the man made climate change.  We shouldn’t look at that and say that is evidence!  We should examine that to figure out what is going wrong.  What is it in our society that makes it so reasonably intelligent people tangentially aware of the issues can be put at odds with the minds that can do the most difficult work in the field?  I think this is more than politics,  I think it cuts deep.  It cuts at the hidden cost of emphasizing personal examination of all issues, and a devaluing of intellectual authority. 

In the end, the solution is not to stop the Monckstons of the world from having their public forum.  That is the wrong tact.  Monkston has inadvertently contributed quite positively to the public debate on this by writing his ideas down enough to put them in slides, by putting his idea on a stage, and finally giving someone a target to show how they are wrong.

I think the danger of a private peer review system that is spreading and only getting strengthened every decade is that nobody gets to see why some ideas never end up in publication.  It looks like a censoring, when really it is that they won’t stand up to serious scrutiny long enough to get publication.  Public perception, as it has here, can easily turn against journals in that case.

In general in all science, I recommend good faith.  Almost always when you think of a problem with the analysis in a talk, and the presenter later answers that question in person, they know right where to point you in the literature to show you that it wasn’t a problem, or they dealt with it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 June 2010 05:28 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09
qutsemnie - 11 June 2010 05:01 PM

In general, in all science, I recommend good faith. 

And that is exactly what is lacking from the presentations of the likes of Monckton, Lindzen and others.  And yes I know Lindzen has done work that most definitely belongs within the science discussion - that’s not the problem.
The problem is their presentations are filled with proven lies shamelessly and endlessly repeated, masses of misdirection meant to confuse rather than understand, and way too much ad hominem.

Show me a presentation that you feel highlights their integrity in teaching climate understanding, I’d love to watch it.

 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 June 2010 07:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09

For what it’s worth, I have finished a little project tentatively titled:

A Citizen’s Unauthorized Notes… science on trial.


An exploration of the recent presentation:
“A Scientist Replies to Christopher Monckton”
Abraham v. Monckton

From my introduction: “... I was so impressed with Professor Abraham’s presentation that I’ve decided to create an index, with notes relating to every slide, and weblinks to nearly every publication cited - a study guide so to speak.”

If anyone is interested send me a private message with your email since the document weights in at 17 pages, 7500+ words and a hundred links so it must be sent as an attached doc.

cheers
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ps.  I just got through posting it on my website:
http://citizenschallenge.blogspot.com/

[ Edited: 22 June 2010 11:42 PM by citizenschallenge ]
 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 June 2010 12:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1783
Joined  2008-08-09

For what its worth here’s an index for “Abraham v Monckton
~ A Citizen’s Unauthorized Notes… Science on Trial.”
(excuse the sloppy formatting - it’s tough getting a straight line in this window)


Slide #1-2     Introduction
Slide #3       Who is Professor John Abraham
Slide #4-5     Who is Lord Christopher Monckton
Slide #6       CM slide #3: “Unless we announce disasters, no one will listen.”
Slide #7-9     JA looks at authenticity of that quote
Slide #10-14   Sea level rise? ~ examined
Slide #15-18   Polar bears threatened? ~ examined
Slide #19-22   Sea ice extent in the Beaufort Sea?
Slide #23-26   Polar bears threatened? ~ examined
Slide #27-38   Medieval Warm Period (MWP) ~ examined
Slide #39-40   CM’s “2500 IPCC scientists lied” claim ~ examined
Slide #41       Do “Climate Sensitivity” claims really rest on just 4 IPCC reports?
Slide #41-44   Sampling 19 out of 100s of studies “Climate Sensitivity”
Slide #45       Science Policy Institute.org’s graphs ~ examined
Slide #46       NASA data graph: Global Land Ocean Temperature Index
Slide #47       CM slide #32: “IPCC head Pachauri is a railroad engineer”
Slide #48       CM slide #37: “NOAA - it ain’t cooling - lie” ~ examined
Slide #49       CM slide #38: “The lie nailed” claims all data was shifted”
Slide #50       JA: “Are the predictions wrong?  or is it CM’s graphs?
Slide #51       NOAA’s “Temperature Anomalies” graph
Slide #52-53   Comparing graphs
Slide #54       CM: “The consensus lie: ‘Global warming will be catastrophic’
Slide #55-58   Examining that claim
Slide #59-61   CM claims “No sea level rise in the Maldives” ~ examined
Slide #62-66   CM claims “Temperature always changes first, CO2 follows.”
Slide #67-69   CM claims “Ocean acidification is absolute rubbish” ~ examined
Slide #70       CM: “Arctic Sea-Ice Extent Is Just Fine: steady for a decade”
Slide #71-75   Examines the question is melting ice related to AGW
Slide #76       CM slide #57: “Greenland ice sheet is just fine” citing Johannessen
Slide #77-79   Examining Johannessen work and exchanges emails
Slide #80       Reviews four studies regarding Ice Mass Changes
Slide #81       CM claims “Himalayan glaciers are not losing ice mass”
Slide #82-84   Reviews three studies regarding Himalayan glacier melt
Slide #85-86   CM’s claim that “CO2 is only a trace gas” ~ examined
Slide #87       CM slide #72 “The oceans are cooling”
Slide #88       Regarding ARGO an institution or an instrument?
Slide #89-92   CM slide #73 graph “...sea level has not risen for four years”
Slide #93       CM slide #67 “Grand Minimum to Grand Maximum”
Slide #94-108   Solar forcing examined, includes an review of 12 studies
Slide #109-115   Willie Soon and examining funding patterns
Slide #116-124   JA considers the “Sins of Attribution.”
Slide #125       JA asks: “So who can we trust? ~  list of 10 sources
Slide #126       JA considers: How is a general audience able to discriminate?”

 Signature 

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus is not formed by scientists !
The Anthropogenic Global Warming Consensus IS formed by the data being gathered !

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 March 2011 01:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4805
Joined  2007-10-05
granger - 22 March 2011 11:04 AM

I think it is important to have a healthy debate on this issue, considering every angle, whether or not it is popular, or widely accepted. Throughout history, popular consensus has often been wrong. Remember when the earth used to be flat? Or when we used to cure disease by draining ones blood? Often it is the lunatics who are proven to be the sane ones after all. It is critical that we all look at this issue with an open mind, since not a single one of us knows what the real truth is. All we have is speculation, regardless of what side of the issue we stand on.

Follow the links and read about the lies and misrepresentation Monckton uses. This is not healthy debate, it is a deliberate misinformation campaign led by a proven liar with no scientific credentials.

 Signature 

“In the beginning, God created the universe. This has made many people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.”
Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 March 2011 10:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

I think it is important to have a healthy debate on this issue, considering every angle, whether or not it is popular, or widely accepted.

However, a need for a debate also carries with it the obligation to make one’s arguements and points based on verifiable facts, not misrepresentation.

That’s the problem in this instance: Facts appear to be taking it in the shorts while misdirection takes pride of place.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
   
1 of 2
1