> Home > Blog > CO2 Scam Blog > • Oxford students agree with UKIP on climate change
>  Blog
• Oxford students agree with UKIP on climate change
Date 26/05/2010 17:09  Author webmaster  Hits 1021  Language Global
Tomorrow's top decision makers have decided that UKIP's stance on so-called 'man-made climate change' is right.

The world's most famous debating society, at Oxford University, heard from a range of noted climate experts, but were swayed by the UK Independence Party's eco spokesman Lord Monckton.

Monckton argued that the actual warming effect of CO2 was only a tiny fraction of what had previously been predicted by scientists.

He showed that even if all the world's industry was shut down for the next 40 years, global temperatures would only decrease by 1 degree.

The arguments centred around whether economic growth should be a higher priority than combating climate change, and after hearing from Monckton, the world's top students agreed that global warming is not a threat.

At times the exchange became heated, as Monckton repeatedly challenged Labour Peer and trade unionist Lord Whitty (who believes in climate change) state where his figures had come from.

Lord Whitty was unable to explain where his ‘evidence' had come from and sat down simply saying ‘everyone knows its true'.

When the eco-warriors tried to return fire by asking where Monckton had got his evidence from, he drew cheers from the audience, stating: "IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2"

Monckton won the vote by 135 votes to 110.

Lord Monckton said: "The worlds brightest students are finally getting fed up with all the groundless extremist propaganda getting rammed down their throats by people who seem to think they are stupid.

"For years, those set to profit from the ever increasing number of ‘eco policies' have pulled the wool over the public and governments' eyes, but as soon as you pit them against the academic elite, all their arguments unravel."

The result is a major boost for UKIP, whose climate policy has previously been attacked by the ‘green band-wagon'.

26 of Britain's Prime Ministers were educated at Oxford, including David Cameron, Tony Blair, Thatcher and Wilson.

It now seems likely that the country's future rulers agree with UKIP's long held views.

News of the result comes at a time when EU bureaucrats are set to force member countries to stump up an extra £30billion towards reducing emissions by 30% come 2020.
Huw Peach
%u2018But when the eco-warriors tried to return fire by asking where Lord Monckton%u2019s evidence came from he drew cheers from the audience, stating: %u201CIPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2%u201D

Here it is:

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-2-1-3.html#table-10-2

Could some kind person from UKIP explain to passing readers why this information should get cheers?

I am not a scientist, and it would be great if an expert in UKIP climate policy could put it in layman terms, so I can understand the science underpinning your policies.

I will then check your references and come back to you.

Recently John Abraham, an associate professor in the School of Engineering at the University of St Thomas in Minnesota, did what Lord Whitty had not briefed himself sufficiently to do during this debate.

Abraham didn't just ask where Lord Monckton%u2019s evidence came from. He tracked it down, read it and contacted the authors.

John Abraham followed up the scientific references that Lord Monckton used during a speech at Minnesota Free Market Institute in St Paul in October 2009.

Monckton%u2019s speech is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOXmJ4jd-8

Abraham%u2019s analysis of those references is here:

http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/

Monckton%u2019s reputation for rigour does not come out well from this detailed research, which Abraham took months to do.

In fact it was clear, when Abraham looked up Monckton%u2019s references, re-reading the papers that Monckton cited and contacting the authors of the papers by e-mail, that Monckton had frequently

a) failed to attribute his information and to give references

b) mis-interpreted the information in the papers

c) mis-represented the information in the papers

The authors, whom Abraham contacted, said Monckton was wrong.

Would it be possible for a UKIP supporter to explain the "IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2" reference in this article to the layman.

All I know from this article is that it got a big cheer, and I am keen to understand why.
17
Jun
Monckton of Brenchley
Readers will find a commprehensive refutation of Professor Abraham's lies and deceits at www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org. Enjoy! - Monckton of Brenchley
13
Jul
Debunking Professor Abraham
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/reprint/response_to_john_abraham.html
14
Jul
Huw Peach
When I first posted here, I was unaware that Lord Monckton might actually join the discussion.

Could Lord Monckton possibly explain his "IPCC, 2007, chapter 10, box 10.2" argument for the benefit of the layman, who might want to follow it up in a little more depth?

And could he also explain why he is calling on John Abraham's university to remove Abraham's excellent presentation from its website:

http://www.stthomas.edu/engineering/jpabraham/

I was under the impression that UKIP was a libertarian party.

What is libertarian about that?
15
Jul
MAIN SITE: UKIP.ORG
www.ukip.org
NEWS & ANALYSIS





Batten's Brussels Newsletter
January 2012
November 2011
How Do UK MEPs Vote?
Conference Video
www.ukip.org