Tim Lambert (deltoidblog AT gmail.com) is a computer scientist at the University of New South Wales.
Gareth Renowden notices that Monckton has corrected the misattribution on his graph. Unfortunately, Monckton has preserved the number of errors in his graph by replacing that error with another one. (And yes this graph appeared in his presentation to the Heartland conference.
I also see that Monckton has now written an 18 page document on the commie plot against him.
The villain in Monckton's fantasy is Lawrence Krauss. I imagine that Monckton thinks Krauss looks like the picture on the right. Some highlights:
First, [Krauss] approached The Guardian, which reliably supports every Leftist cause, however half-baked, and is particularly unquestioning in its lickspittle endorsement of the most extreme version of the "global warming" notion. Yet even The Guardian would not touch the story. The paper was not anxious to tangle with me again, for it had been compelled to publish a humiliating and very strongly-worded correction by me after one of its correspondents, a zoologist of no particular eminence, had erroneously and scathingly criticized me for misunderstanding the fundamental equation of radiative transfer ... Next, Krauss tried The Independent, another Left-leaning true-believer in the new religion, and notorious for the series of very silly stories about the imagined future effects of "global warming" that it has been running on its front page. ... Krauss, by now frantic, was more successful with New Scientist, once a good journal of science for the layman, but now a mere craven, Lysenkoist-Marxist toady to whatever the current scientific party line happens to be.
Of course, "compelled to publish" just means The Guardian's normal right of reply. And far from being afraid of Monckton, The Guardian has just published this. And, of course, Monckton's gives us no reason to believe his story about Krauss contacting The Guardian and The Independent.
Politics
Comments
Uh-oh, nobody mention to Monckton that Krauss and I have personally met and conspired on
the Lysenkoist-Marxist takeover of sciencescience activism :)Posted by: Arthur Smith | March 12, 2009 2:45 PM
wow... I hadn't read the details and had no idea the delusions were so extreme. Needless to say I didn't contact anyone at the guardian or independent.. I write a biweekly column for the new scientist and wrote about the episode there.
lawrence krauss
Posted by: lawrence krauss | March 12, 2009 2:58 PM
Any chance we could collect enough donations to get Moncton a ticket to the Maldives? One way of course...
Posted by: MikeMa | March 12, 2009 3:05 PM
Mr Monckton? Joe McCarthy called, and he says...Good Job! These guys are going to eliminate the need fo comedians. How can you parody that?
Posted by: Badger3k | March 12, 2009 3:24 PM
Monbiot is a zoologist? Monckton forgot to add that he was still wrong; whilst I don't expect Monbiot to get some tricky physics right, and oddly enough he did admit that he had gotten it wrong, Monckton continues to lie by claiming that he has it right... Moncktons whole way of writing appears designed to make you want to punch his lights out.
(Stand by for misquoting 3,..2...1..)
Posted by: guthrie | March 12, 2009 3:40 PM
OK, so thats another question for Monckton, assuming he ever shows up anywhere again- where did he get the idea Krauss approached the Guardian?
Posted by: guthrie | March 12, 2009 3:42 PM
In his mind the world revolves around Monckton, doesn't it? And when people point out when he's talking nonsense, it's all part of some great plot against him.
As Krauss is a regular contributor to NS, I'd expect the article to appear there. I suspect Monckton found the idea that Krauss tried newspapers first in the same place that he pulls his other "facts" from.
Posted by: Barry | March 12, 2009 4:22 PM
There's nothing like a little 19th century prose from the quill of the dashing Monckton to give one a hearty chortle. His tales of derring-do adventures and heroic vanquishment of assorted fiendish foes that stalk him day and night are simply riveting, what!
Next month, I hear, he begins a journey to the very centre of the earth!
Monckton ho!
Posted by: DavidCOG | March 12, 2009 4:23 PM
Well,Monbiot's playing cards are rather stupid and may reflect his 'eminence', especially as he pinched the idea from none other than George Bush and Iraq. Sure sign George M is on a downward slope.
Posted by: Dave A | March 12, 2009 6:57 PM
If Mr Monckton genuinely believes that Saperstein's review is a peer review then he is a greater fool than I believed him to be. He is either being 'mendacious' or has never seen a genuine peer review.
Posted by: rjt | March 12, 2009 7:19 PM
Not only did the potty peer show his now infamous slide during his "keynote" on the final afternoon, but it came early on, as he announced:
If only he would...
Posted by: Gareth | March 12, 2009 7:20 PM
You mean Monckton can decode runic cryptograms from Iceland? (I say: Eternity!)
The Law of Conservation of Climate Inactivist Errors.
Posted by: bi -- IJI | March 12, 2009 10:51 PM
A Google News search for '"Heartland Institute" climate' yields 152 hits in the last week. A search for 'Copenhagen climate' yields 5241 hits. Clearly the communist plot has extended right through the media now.
A search for 'Monckton climate' yields a massive 17 hits, some of which are not very sympathetic.
Posted by: Dr Dave | March 13, 2009 2:28 AM
Awww,d'ya think so,Dave A? Pinched the idea from George Bush? And thought he'd get away with it!...
Posted by: Nick | March 13, 2009 3:24 AM
The playing cards used after Saddam's downfall were not a GWB idea. They were
And
Source: Wikipedia
Posted by: P. Lewis | March 13, 2009 5:03 AM
People do card decks for all sorts of things, and this topic offers some interesting new possibilities.
1) For example, I'm only in one deck as 10 of Hearts.
But, maybe Monckton has his own deck of Really Bad People, in which it would be an honor to appear. I'm sure Tim Lambert and Lawrence Krauss would be there.
2) But on the other side, maybe there should be a deck of denier's cards. Heartland has a good list of "experts" to start.
Posted by: John Mashey | March 13, 2009 1:00 PM
Taking his cue from W. Dembski is he? That figures.
There must be a "How to Deny Anything and Everything in 10 Easy Steps" handbook out there somewhere, sitting right next to the "How to Make Your Paper Sound All Sciency With Just a Few Nonsense Words" handbook.
Posted by: b_sharp | March 13, 2009 3:11 PM
P Lewis,
Thanks for that, but as far as the left/environmentalists here in Britain are concerned everything bad about the US (and to them that means almost everything about the US) emanated from George Bush.
They have a very limited world view!
Posted by: Dave Andrews | March 13, 2009 7:43 PM
Dave A the inactivist: The playing cards idea came from Bush!
Us: No.
Dave A: I blame my factoid on the eco-leftists! Haha!
Us: Idiot.
Posted by: bi -- IJI | March 13, 2009 10:55 PM
Hard to believe, isn't it? Lord Munchkin is a known liar and coward. He claimed that 'The Guardian' paid him damages because of something that Monbiot wrote. He even tried to insert this fiction into his Wikipedia entry but it was spotted and removed. He failed to reply to questions about this.
He's threatened to sue people for defamation but when challenged has mysteriously backed down or slunk off every time.
Munchkin, please sue me. I'd love to see your lying spineless carcass in court!
Posted by: TrueSceptic | March 13, 2009 11:01 PM
Column yet to appear? Found some older mentions of M.
Posted by: Hank Roberts | March 14, 2009 6:17 PM
bi--IJI,
And we are supposed to take seriously someone whose blogs have a background of scantily clad women?
Grow up!
Posted by: Dave A | March 14, 2009 7:40 PM
I think mr. krauss only tells all these awful lies supporting al gore and so on to get back at lubos motl for some imagined slight. i watched the big bang theory on tv and they had a girl just like him only a girl.
before i heard of mr krauss i thought of lord monckton as the smartest man in the world but after that i felt his credibility was weak so and i blame mr krauss also.
i think this is a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Posted by: Marion Delgado | March 14, 2009 8:25 PM
Scantily clad women? Oh dear... But I'll bet a certain web site is getting a surge of traffic. Way to go Dave....um, did you bother reading anything?
Posted by: TomG | March 14, 2009 11:04 PM
Dave A = still an idiot.
Also, remind me to put up more pictures of scantily clad women in the future.
Posted by: bi -- IJI | March 15, 2009 12:07 AM
Maybe he's objecting to the "clad" part, not the "scanitly". Testing this notion might increase your blog traffic ...
Posted by: dhogaza | March 15, 2009 12:46 PM
Didn't most US citizens think that everything bad about the US emanated from George [W] Bush?
Posted by: P. Lewis | March 15, 2009 8:31 PM
" remind me to put up more pictures of scantily clad women in the future.
How juvenile. Grow up
Posted by: Dave A | March 16, 2009 5:56 PM
"And we are supposed to take seriously someone whose blogs have a background of scantily clad women?"
Why yes - satire is serious stuff. Adults will recognize that.
The tongue-in-cheek International Journal of Inactivism deserves and gets more respect that you do, DaveA. I suspect that is why you have a problem.
Posted by: Lee | March 16, 2009 11:12 PM
Lee,
It may well get more respect than you do Lee also. But who really cares? It isn't satirical to be juvenile, just juvenile.
That's why you both need to Grow up
Posted by: Dave A | March 17, 2009 6:02 PM
Sorry, Dave A, you are still an idiot.
Posted by: bi -- IJI | March 18, 2009 7:40 AM
sounds like Dave A perhaps has a long and deep personal issue with scantly clad woman. I wouldn let it drop or he might completely flip out.
Posted by: bob | March 18, 2009 7:24 PM