Monckton claims UCSD told Oreskes to apologize

Last year Christopher Monckton was threatening legal action if Naomi Oreskes did not apologize to Schulte:

By making the allegations his own and endorsing them with such lamentably unscientific enthusiasm, however, he has exposed himself to the legal action which may well follow if Oreskes does not come forward quickly with an unreserved apology to Schulte.

Now he's claiming that UCSD asked Oreskes to apologize:

Dr. Oreskes thrice publicly accused Mr. Schulte of having misrepresented her when he had not in fact done so, and when she had not read any draft of the paper she said had misrepresented her. This misconduct is severe. Her university has now invited her to apologize, and the matter of her continuing and inexplicable failure so to do is now on Governor Schwarzenneger's desk, for he is a Regent of her university ex officio.

I don't think that UCSD invited her to apologize -- they have promoted her:

Science historian Naomi Oreskes, whose work has played a critical role in establishing that there is a clear consensus about global warming among scientists, has been appointed to serve as provost of the University of California, San Diego's Sixth College. Her appointment becomes effective July 1, 2008.

Monckton has a history of fabrication. For example, he falsely claimed to be a member of the House of Lords and to have won £50,000 damages from the Guardian.

Hat tip: John Mashey.

Update: Oreskes has confirmed that UCSD did not invite her to apologize. Maybe the House of Lords should invite Monckton to apologize to Oreskes. Oh wait, he's not a member. Never mind.

Tags

More like this

I like the now-standard proviso in the Monckton piece:

"It is now becoming clear that the effect of greenhouse-gas enrichment on the atmosphere is very small, harmless, and likely to be beneficial.

It wont have any effect. But it might improve our lives!

I saw Dr. Oreskes present a lecture at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography a few months ago. The lecture was entitled, "The American Denial of Global Warming". Oreskes was in top form, and was giving no quarter to the denier crowd.

UCSD has made that lecture available on-line at: http://www.ucsd.tv/search-details.asp?showID=13459

The lecture is an hour long, and is well worth the time spent watching it.

San Diego will host the Winter Olympics before Monckton gets any sort of apology from either UCSD or Dr. Oreskes.

By caerbannog (not verified) on 27 Jul 2008 #permalink

What? Monckton hasn't yet threatened to sue the APS or anyone in it? Damn.

This Level XI Junior Goracle must admit that he is very very surprised. He thinks he should probably demote himself to a Level X Junior Goracle.

Monckton has a history of fabrication.

And there was I thinking you were going to refer to his claim to have won the Nobel Prize.

By Ezzthetic (not verified) on 28 Jul 2008 #permalink

Arrrgh. Must use backticks as "literals" before underscores.
And around code strings.

``

By Hank Roberts (not verified) on 28 Jul 2008 #permalink

One must wonder if Monckton's contined actions on Mr Schulte's behalf have the blessing of the latter [i.e., like the way TV political ads now need trailers from the candidate saying "I approve this ad".

Has anyone seen *any* comments from Mr Schulte of late?

By John Mashey (not verified) on 28 Jul 2008 #permalink

lyndon larouche is actually his pornstar name.

It's becoming increasingly clear that the AGW side has nothing to do but rip those that stand up to this nonesense. Seriously, the proof is in the pudding here. The 'science' tells us that humans have little to no impact on climate. If we are to follow the scientific method, we see that the hypothesis of CO2 levels NOT controlling (or even having a noticable impact on) global temps. If its so obvious that this is happening than it would/should be equally obvious why its not happening now. By claiming that natural events are delaying the effects of AGW is disengeous and harmful. Please give me an explanation as to why its not warming and perhaps experience 20-30 years of cooling. A negative PDO almost assures us of that. And guess what, in 20 or so years the PDO will go back to its warm phase and the globe will experience another period of warm years.
Monsoon
*

By monsoonevans (not verified) on 28 Jul 2008 #permalink

From the link in Ezzthetic's post (#6):

As a contributor to the IPCC's 2007 report, I share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.
Lord High Chief Megalomaniac Monckton.

Ya gotta admire his chutzpah, if nothing else. The more I learn of Monckton, the more I suspect he is only 3 twitches away from being certifiable.

And monsoonevans is satire, right? Bit of advice for you, dude, satire works best when it is subtle.

Oh, I think monsoonevans is 100% accurate:

The 'science' tells us that humans have little to no impact on climate.

Because the 'science' - psuedoscience without the quotes - does tell us exactly that.

While real science tells us the opposite.

Thanks for making that clear, monsoonevans!

Just a little reminder to monsoonevans that I will forever associate his name with lying about the IPCC reducing its forecast of total sea level rise from one report to the next when it did no such thing. I'm not really interested in what he has to say anymore. He's just a pathetic liar.

By Chris O'Neill (not verified) on 28 Jul 2008 #permalink

Oreskes has confirmed that UCSD did not invite her to apologize. Maybe the House of Lords should invite Monckton to apologize to Oreskes. Oh wait, he's not a member. Never mind.

To the Fourth and Final Discount Monk of Peter Benchley Sir Tiffany, I offer my full, humble, and general apologies, seeing as how the man really, really appears to need them badly.

Davies' Law: "Fibber's forecasts are worthless." That is, "If you have doubts about the integrity of a forecaster, you can't use their forecasts at all". See .

By Nick Barnes (not verified) on 31 Jul 2008 #permalink