Lord Monckton vs Richard Denniss at National Press Club

By Eco Guy 10:25pm 19th July 2011
A very interesting discussion between Lord Monckton and Richard Denniss showing the divide in logical reasoning between the well informed skeptics and the vague warmists. Worth watching.

Lord Monckton demonstrates his depth of knowledge on the subject; he may not be a climate scientist, but he is well educated and able to make well formed deductions on the published works to provide a continuous flow of statements that disprove Richard's point of view. Richard Dennis's responses seem very vague and 'fact free' in response.

Further, I really hope the press do take heed of his wish to do more balanced reporting - they have a duty to look at both sides of an issue and find the truth of the matter at hand. Plus I hope nobody thinks we need a Carbon Tax after watching this video, it would be an act of economic lunacy.

Also I hope this video dismisses once and for all the 'attacks on the man' made to Lord Monckton - he shows a degree of integrity the audience could do well to follow!

Related Content Tags: climate change, global warming, environment

0 star(0.00 out of 5) from 0 ratings. Rate Now!
Stars: 0 1 2 3 4 5 

Follow us on Facebook, click here!

Comments left

  • Leigh Harwood said:

    Quite frankly, Lord Monckton made Richard Denniss look like an absolute idiot on every level throughout this debate. All I heard from Richard Denniss is that everybody worth a name agrees on the issue and therefore no one should question it and also to trust the authorities because they all agree with each other as well.

    What on earth am I supposed to learn from this drivel?

    At least Lord Monckton could defend and argue his own corner. Granted, this does not make him necessarily right, but at the very least he can cite his references and clarify his points with sincerity.

    Richard Denniss, on the other hand, was almost robotic. His entire argument was based on authority and consensus, both of which the scientific method rejects. You don't invoke CONSENSUS if you have proof! You only invoke consensus if you anticipate a challenge. The only reason you anticipate a challenge is because sufficient doubt exists in you're own argument to invoke consensus to begin with.

    ON Sat, 29 Oct 11, 5:38pm probably from United Kingdom  Reply to this comment

Add Coment

Got a question or comment about this?

Find what you were looking for?.. Not quite what you expected?.. Got a question to ask people?
Share your thoughts and use the form below to post a public comment right on this page.

Simple HTML is supported i.e <b> <i> etc. Excessive inline URL's, spam, ANY ads or swearing is blocked/removed quickly. youtube URL's get embedded.

Posting Terms & Conditions