Monckton names names on Climategate
(December 7, 2009 – Copenhagen, Denmark) Lord Christopher Monckton appears today in a powerful new video by CFACT in which he exposes the deceptions involved in Climategate, scientist by scientist. These scientists received more than $21 million in public funding, yet used deception to ensure that real world data did not interfere with the selling of global warming.
Share with your warmist friends and enjoy the contortions (either way) that follow.
The UN has confirmed what we have all feared. There are aliens among us, and they desire to eradicate human beings (i.e., Homo sapiens).
UN Sponsored Poster Campaign Depicts Humans As Evil Monsters
Is this for real? I was just joking in previous references to “The Twilight Zone.”
They keep defending their lapses in judgment to accidental disclosures or errant followers, but their true nature continues to be revealed.
Now it all makes sense. All right liberals/progressives. Will you side with the aliens or your own species? It’s time to choose and proclaim your allegiance. You are either with us or against us. There is no middle ground.
Is anyone else experiencing irreconcilable reality? Have I watched/read one too many science fiction stories?
It may just be emotional extortion, but I would surmise they are also insane. Then again, we may have discovered the regressives’ “missing link” (short of a chain).
Why, oh why, can’t *we* have these kinds of people working in our Congerss?
Oh, wait, we’ve been dumbed down. By the “Progressives”, no less!
Igor
Clarification:
I’m talking about Lord Moncton, NOT the enviroweenies…
Igor
Off-topic, but the aliens’ agenda must be revealed.
The Cost of Dying: Patients’ Last Two Months of Life Cost Medicare $50 Billion Last Year; Is There a Better Way?
Social compact for me and not thee.
Palin was right about the “death panels”.
The regressives are making their case for valuation of human life.
Whether the left-wing lunatics want to admit it or not, it is about risk management. However, they will not understand the process until the agenda is in place. Then the reality they deny will be revealed and imposed on their closed-minds.
I am still amazed how adamant the regressives are in advocating for involuntary exploitation. They continue to deny the voices of the very young, and now they would deny the voices of the very old. This must be an example of their new-age principle of relative worth, or, more rightly, selective worth.
Personally, I think we should keep the old people, and rid ourselves of the troublesome parasites, liberals and progressives (a.k.a., regressives). On the other hand, we can dispose of their lawyers, and with the savings, keep both the old people and regressives. Problem solved, moral dilemma averted, everyone is happy and alive.
@n.n – Thanks for the links. The UN posters just show that these folks are certifiably insane! The “Cost of Dying” just shows Sarah Palin as vindicated, again.
Monckton is da bomb! I recently discovered his SPPI website: sppiblog.org. He writes with logic, authority, and humor.
PB-in-AL:
Certainly. I attempt to remain on-topic, but there are times when my patience is exceeded, and I must expose, or overexpose, their agendas.
Not overly dramatic? I would prefer to avoid employing their tactics, but they keep pushing, and I am not one to submit. They do a very good job revealing their true nature on their own. However, from time to time, I like to assist them in carrying their burden.
He writes with logic, authority, and humor.
He’s well spoken and a rhetorical master, too. A very good representative of Homo sapiens.
You don’t need to be a professional scientist to analyze the evidence and arguments on their merit. Let the scientists formulate their hypothesis, collect evidence, and remain open to criticism. If there is contradictory evidence then they should return to the drawing board. If there are contradictory arguments, then they should refute them. This would be science that people can believe in.
There is circumstantial evidence that supports and contradicts their hypothesis. They advocate for the evidence which supports, while dismissing the evidence which contradicts as anomalous. These are not scientists, but zealots with a stake to claim and defend. It is also concerning that many of them have conflicts of interest. It is in their best interest to perpetuate this agenda. It is worrisome that they would resort to employment of a “consensus”, to quell dissent, and avoid debate. This strategy is backfiring, and their immature use of name-calling, continues to sabotage their already weak position.
Pingback: Monckton Names Names | NewsReal Blog
A man by the name of Winston Churchill did a lot of sane and good writing during the 30′s, too.
Ridiculed by many for it, he also turned out to be absolutely correct in his prognostications and was elected Prime Minister in order to lead the British out of their own idiotic follies.
It may just be that Winnie was not The Last Lion after all.
Let us pray.
Monckton does much good for the intelligent discussion of what is called “Global Warming” – but he erodes his credibility when he posits religion as that which relies on “blind faith”. True religion – Biblical Christianity – is a Truth based religion in which no man’s words are to be taken at face value, but everything be examined in light of the Word of God. Much like his reasoned description of scientific research.
He should stick to that which he understands.