John P Abraham has taken the time to go through one of Christopher Monckton’s talks and check whether the references that Monckton cites say what Monckton claims they do. Of course, as anyone who has checked Monckton’s work can discover, they don’t. But Abrahams has gone the extra mile and checked with the authors of the papers as well and again and again gotten replies from the scientists saying “Monckton is wrong”. The presentation is 84 minutes long and is devastating. Even at that length only some of Monckton’s errors are covered. It’s based on a Monckton talk from last year, before he came up with his misrepresentations of Pinker and Snowball Earth, so they’re not included.
Peter Hartmann has compiled a list of all the papers Abraham has cited.
Hat tip: too many people to list.
If you want to see a perfect example of the way Monckton operates, see this example from his self-serving report of an SPPI-sponsored debate:
He glared at the opposition again and demanded whether, since they had declared themselves to be so worried about “global warming”, they would care to tell him – to two places of decimals and one standard deviation – the UN’s central estimate of the “global warming” that might result from a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentration. The opposition were unable to reply. Lord Monckton told them the answer was 3.26 plus or minus 0.69 Kelvin or Celsius degrees. An Hon. Member interrupted: “And your reference is?” Lord Monckton replied: “IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2.” [cheers].
Monckton impresses the rubes with by reeling off facts and figures with great authority and conviction. Monckton is wrong, of course, but who is going to have the IPCC report handy to contradict him in a debate? Box 10.2 concludes:
we conclude that the global mean equilibrium warming for doubling CO2, or ‘equilibrium climate sensitivity’, is likely to lie in the range 2Â°C to 4.5Â°C, with a most likely value of about 3Â°C. Equilibrium climate sensitivity is very likely larger than 1.5Â°C.
Monckton’s numbers do come from box 10.2, but are the mean and standard deviation of the sensitivity for 18 different climate models, which is not the same thing at all.