Cancel Lord Monckton's University Lecture, Say Academics [Notre Dame, Australia]

The Guardian (UK) ^ | 6/27/11 | Leo Hickman

[marshmallow]

In an open letter to the University of Notre Dame, signatories say the climate sceptic stands for 'ignorance and superstition'

Academics in Australia are calling for the University of Notre Dame in Fremantle to cancel a lecture due to be given by the prominent climate sceptic Lord Monckton on Thursday.

In a letter seen by the Guardian, which is currently being circulated among academics, the undersigned say that Monckton "stands for the kind of ignorance and superstition that universities have a duty to counter" and "Notre Dame has a responsibility to avoid promoting discredited views on an issue of public risk". Signatories already supporting the open letter include professors and lecturers across Australia, but also academics in the UK and US.

The letter, which is addressed "from the Australian academic community" to Notre Dame, a Catholic university in Western Australia, was originally drafted by Natalie Latter, a political science postgraduate student at the University of Western Australia. The letter says Monckton's lecture is particularly unwelcome in light of recent death threats made against Australian climate scientists.

"Lord Monckton propounds widely discredited fictions about climate change and misrepresents the research of countless scientists," says the letter. "With zero peer-reviewed publications, he has declared that the scientific enterprise is invalid and that climate science is fraudulent … Over the last month there has been a great deal of coverage in the Australian media of the death threats and abusive emails that have targeted Australian scientists working on climate change. These threats are fuelled by misinformation spread by figures like Lord Monckton and the distorted coverage that they receive in the Australian media. As academics, we expect our universities to support us against this kind of abuse. We expect our universities to foster academic standards of conduct and argument."

The letter........

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

:: ignorance and superstition ::

It wasn’t that long ago that only the ignorant and superstitious could be taken advantage of by folks claiming to be able to control the weather.

[TigersEye]

Superstition is believing that a theory is proved even though the prime criterion of the theory itself has failed to be established with any corroborating data.

Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide - Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts? By Timothy Ball

No Smoking Hot Spot (The Australian)

The missing hotspot (JoNova)

Those two articles take Greenhouse Theory at face value and by the criterion set up in the theory itself finds no evidence of warming on the basis of greenhouse effect.

The Hidden Flaw in Greenhouse Theory

Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics

Harvard astrophysicist dismisses AGW theory, challenges peers to 'take back climate science'

It Is Impossible For A 100 ppm Increase In Atmospheric CO2 Concentration To Cause Global Warming

Simple Chemistry and the Real Greenhouse Effect.

Those five articles each show that Greenhouse Theory has no basis in reality due to a direct conflict with the known laws of physics. No wonder the smoking gun "hotspot" can't be found.

Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud

That article kills any thought of planetary warming from any cause. Think about it. If there is absolutely no sign of rising sea levels how could the planet be warming? The rise in sea level in the last 100 years is almost exactly the same as the average over the last 40,000 years caused by the inter-glacial period we are in.

If there ain't no Hot Spot you ain't got squat!

[massgopguy]

“a political science postgraduate student”. What restaurant does she work at?

[TigersEye]

She wanted to work at Hooters but she has a problem with the dress code.

[TheDon]

The letter, which is addressed "from the Australian academic community" to Notre Dame, a Catholic university in Western Australia, was originally drafted by Natalie Latter, a political science postgraduate student at the University of Western Australia.

Not much of an academic....so much to do about nothing.

[Blueflag]

Agreed.

I would LOVE to see the Algore try to debate him.

Oh, wait ...

(still waiting)

[steelyourfaith]

Remember, these acadumbics actually have the audacity to expect payment for "teaching".

 

Legions of Anthropogenic Global Warming Skeptics

• Global Warming Petition Project, also known as the Oregon Project, has been signed to date by 31,487 American scientists, including 9,029 with PhDs, and nearly 4,000 with specific training in atmospheric, earth, and environmental sciences. All signers have the necessary training in physics, chemistry, and mathematics to understand and evaluate the scientific data relevant to the human-caused global warming hypothesis and to the effects of human activities upon environmental quality. Signatories reject the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis based on human release of CO₂, methane or other greenhouse gases..
• Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming signed by 47 scientists against the highly uncertain scientific theories being used to support global environmental regulations in anticipation of the Earth Summit (Brazil 1992). FEBRUARY 27, 1992
• THE LEIPZIG DECLARATION ON GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE originally a prebuttal to the 1997 Kyoto Climate Treaty Conference. It has 105 signatories. (1995, 1997, revised 2005)
• The CATO Institute Climate Change Ad signed by 115 scientists, mostly PhDs. Ad in pdf form. March 30, 2009
• 141 Scientists Sign Letter Sent to UN Secretary-General Questioning Global Warming stating that the science behind anthropogenic global warming is anything but "settled". December 8, 2009
• U. S. Senate Minority Report: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claim Over 700 dissenting scientists to date  from around the globe challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. Initially released December 2007. UPDATE: 1000 signatories as of 8 Dec 10.
• Manhattan Declaration on Climate Change approximately 1000 endorsers of the International Climate Science Coalition, March 2-4, 2008.
• Memorandum submitted by the Institute of Physics The Institute of Physics, with a worldwide membership of over 36,000, has submitted a memorandum to the U.K. Parliament in which they excoriate the CRU as an affront to the integrity of science, as well as decry the corrupt peer review process in climatology that has evolved to support the anthropogenic global warming fraud. February 2010
• More than 60 German Scientists Dissent Over Global Warming Claims in an open letter to German Chancellor. The more than 60 signers of the letter include several United Nations IPCC scientists. The scientists declared that global warming has become a “pseudo religion” and they noted that rising CO2 has “had no measurable effect” on temperatures. The German scientists, also wrote that the “UN IPCC has lost its scientific credibility." August 9, 2009

 

[Lancey Howard]

"What you do, if you are a serious scientist operating according to the established method, is attempt to falsify your hypothesis. Test it to destruction; carry out serious attacks on its weakest points to see if they hold up. If they do... then you have a theory that can be published, and tested, and verified by other scientists. If you don't, you throw it out."

Global Warming Fraud and the Future of Science - J. R. Dunn

The "scientists" who perpetrated the global warming fraud approached their science in exactly the opposite manner as the approach described above. They formulated a theory based on political ideology (as well as the path of least resistance to "grant" money) and then did whatever they had to do with their data to "prove" it.

What the world has now seen with the expose of the "global warming" scam puts a new spin on the old saying: "Figures can lie and liars can figure." The discipline of science has taken a massive hit over the past two years and it could take many more years for science - - and scientists - - to regain credibility with the public. A lot of that burden must fall on honest scientists, and the first and most important thing they must do is scream for the heads of Michael Mann, Phil Jones, and the rest of the fraudsters. I guess we'll see if they have the integrity to do it... No, I am not holding my breath.
______________________________________________________

Clearly, we need to do something about "climate change", and fast! Here are some solutions proposed back in 1975 during the original "climate change" scam, the one known as "global cooling".

Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

From: Newsweek: The Cooling World (April 28, 1975)

Meet the new corrupt alarmists, same as the old corrupt alarmists.

[AmericanVictory]

Global warming is a political science, doncha know?

[EDINVA]

I’d love to see a live debate between Lord Monckton and Natalie Latter who took it upon herself to represent the academic community of Australia and pull in some signatures to her petition. Petitions are so last millennium.

Let him go to Notre Dame, let her come and debate him toe to toe. That would be a wonderful example of academic freedom.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

“...stands for the kind of ignorance and superstition that universities have a duty to counter... And he’s a heretic, and probably a witch, in leeeague with the devil!”

“We all support academic freedom and the freedom to express our ideas and beliefs... Which are the only correct ones, and nobody is allowed to say otherwise. This means OUR ideas and beliefs. NOT anyone else’s.”

[TigersEye]

The "scientists" who perpetrated the global warming fraud approached their science in exactly the opposite manner as the approach described above.

Yes they did. The strongest most easily provable point is the "Hot Spot" in the upper atmosphere and the data shows a big fat 0. Either there is no greenhouse warming going on or they don't have the slightest idea how it would actually manifest and therefore have no idea where to look for evidence of it. Occam's Razor picks choice #1. Many other measurements of the global temperature back that up.

[Morpheus2009]

Lord Monckton acknowledges the various problems associated with life in today’s world, but simply doesn’t like to make the “blanket assumption” of climate change. I wonder who is so dogmatic in this situation?

[Morpheus2009]

Lord Monckton acknowledges the various problems associated with life in today’s world, but simply doesn’t like to make the “blanket assumption” of climate change. I wonder who is so dogmatic in this situation?

[Emperor Palpatine]

To Hades with academics!

Those who CAN, do.

Those who CAN’T teach.

[GladesGuru]

Care to explain that?

Happily.

I posted:
The Academented are loose again, and baying at the moon.

“academented” is derived from “academic” and “demented”, and was used in the sense of an erudite sounding, data rich word salad wherein the individual words/constructs may or may not be valid but are not linked together in any rational manner.

“are loose again” is a reference to the once common practice of collecting/housing the perpetually bewildered in facilities dedicated to housing said individuals.

When the obviously reality free population suddenly rises in places adjacent to psychiatric facilities, it is common for such escapes to be referred to as “the (insert group of your choice)___________ are loose again”.

“Who left the door to the Rubber Room open, again?” is a transparent reference to a failure of locked ward policies and procedures, with consequential escape of locked ward patients.

IMHO, when the faculty does not support freedom of speech and inquiry, tenure should be carefully, and it is time for the Board of Trustees and the major donors to insist on behavior more appropriate to faculty in an American institute of higher learning.

Aping (pun intended) the behavior of faculty of Patrice Lamumba U is not acceptable.

[Oceander]

You’re correct, of course! I extend my abject apologies to all and sundry for my temerity in questioning global justice.

;^)