google-site-verification: googlefe22bfd737719451.html


See our Charter and Vision (HERE). With your help, encouragement and input, we will bring many projects to fruition and together with you and others, we will make a positive difference in Education, Science, Public Policy and the Media. Our aim is to reverse the trend into a new Authoritarian Dark Age by establishing the Age of Enlightenment 2.0.

We have only recently become a registered Charitable Institution to support the work of Lord Monckton in better educating the public on matters of great importance to our democratic traditions, science based civilisation and civil way of life.

Another me-too climate statement by a non-climate body

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Several concerned senior members of the medical profession in Australia have contacted the Lord Monckton Foundation to express their disappointment at an opinion survey on climate change circulated by the Association’s President, who proposes to promulgate what would be yet another me-too “Position Statement on Climate Change”.

Though, as one doctor has pointed out, it is welcome that before the Association commits itself to any position statement it is first consulting its members [which is more than can be said for most scientific societies that have issued “me-too” statements on climate change], members are dismayed that they are being consulted on a subject that is wholly beyond the scientific competence or remit of the medical profession.

An eminent specialist at a tertiary training institution put it thus: “I have no expert knowledge in the sciences associated with climate, meteorology etc. I very much doubt if many members of the AMA have the relevant knowledge to come out in support or protest of any particular climate stance … any noise generated by the AMA carries no more weight than any other trade grouping.”


See the response to each of the survey questions if each member of the AMA was to cite the scientific literature HERE






Thanks to Michael Darby for bringing this to the Foundation's attention. 

"Australians of goodwill deeply appreciate (Lord Monckton's) resolute defence of civilisation!

Here are the two most recent Grant Goldman Editorials which may be helpful.

These go to air around 7.10am each weekday over 2SM Sydney and the Super Radio Network.

Grant's program is 5am to 9am.  The website is HERE 



Religious Leaders on Climate Change                                        Thursday 28 May 2015

In July 1937 when the Marco Polo Bridge incident launched Japan’s aggression against China, that was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against Japan.  In March 1939 the German occupation of Czechoslovakia was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the Nazis.  In November 1956 Soviet troops overrunning Hungary was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the USSR.  In October 2013 the massacre of Syriac Orthodox Christians and destruction of 14 churches in Sadad in Syria was not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the Jihadis responsible. 

The likelihood that there are more slaves in the world today than at any previous time in human history is not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action against the slave trade.  Three terrible genocides were perpetrated in the twentieth century.  By the Turks against Armenian, Assyrian and Greek Christians in 1915, by the Soviets against the Ukrainians in 1932-1933, and of course by the Nazis against the Jews from 1939 to 1945.  None of these horrible events prompted Australian religious leaders to act with one voice.  Why am I telling you all this?
So what is important enough for Australian religious leaders purporting to represent Anglicans, Catholics, Hindus, Buddhists and Jews, to get together and write to the Government and the Opposition demanding action?   Well, a person named Thea Ormerod representing the numerically insignificant outfit called Australian Religious Response to Climate Change drafted a letter for them all to sign, calling for a 40% cut in the level of carbon dioxide emissions compared with 1990 levels by the year 2025, and an 80% cut by 2030.  We are talking here about the comprehensive economic destruction of Australia with mass unemployment, grinding poverty, widespread hunger and disease, shocking child mortality and truncated lifespans for everybody who is not amongst the elite.

Thea Ormerod is likely related to Neil Ormerod, who is Professor of Theology at the Australian Catholic University.  Oh yes, this is the educational institution which a month ago awarded two scholarships, each for full tuition fees for four years, to honour executed drug smugglers Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran.  This leads me to observe that the worthy goal of getting Australia to lead a worldwide campaign to abolish capital punishment is not important enough for Australian religious leaders to write to the government demanding strong action.   But strong action against carbon dioxide is what they want.
The Church of England otherwise known these days as Anglicans has been pushing the anti-energy barrow for some time. They actually ran a Global Divestment Day on the fourteenth of February this year.  It attracted little attention because St Valentine’s Day is the day when most people are busy chatting each other up and eating chocolate.   I’ll have more to say about the Church of England in coming days.

But in the meantime, I’d like you to tell me and the listeners to our thirty-six radio stations what issues do you want your Church to concentrate on.  World peace? Ending poverty?  Defeating disease?  Combatting Crime?  Protecting minorities? Saving children from sexual abuse?  Helping the homeless?  Maybe, just maybe, even campaigning against sin?  What about preaching forgiveness?   That is what churches used to do.  Or do you want your church to act like basically a subsidiary of the Greens?

It’s your Church, and it’s your money that pays the bills.  If the Churches do forget that, then people will get baptised, married and buried online.  It’s cheaper.


The Church of England and Divestment                                    Friday 29 May 2015

As we discussed yesterday the Church of England is part of a push to reduce Australia’s carbon dioxide emissions compared with 1990 levels by the draconian figure of 80% in the next fifteen years, which would make Australia unable to feed, house and clothe Australians.  In Britain, North America and Australia the Church of England has declared war on coal, through a combination of divestment programs and propaganda from the pulpit.

Time for some facts about coal.   The gerontologist and evolutionary biologist Caleb Finch tells us that since the early 1800s life expectancy in Europe has doubled.  The single greatest factor in the longevity revolution has been coal. Beginning in the eighteenth century and accelerating into the nineteenth century, coal made possible stunning increases in productivity.  Coal saved from destruction the forests of Britain which by the mid eighteenth century were rapidly disappearing. Coal dramatically reduced pollution caused by cooking and heating with wood and animal dung.  Coal permitted large scale smelting of metals. Coal made possible modern medical science and modern agriculture. Coal opened the way to commerce and freedom of movement on a scale never before imagined. 

Thanks to coal, for the very first time ordinary workers who were not members of the aristocracy nor of the clergy had leisure time.  Life was still tough, but thanks to coal life rapidly improved.  Instead of being permanently enslaved to tasks like collecting wood to heat and to cook, women had the opportunity to learn to read and become educated or musical or artistic or political or charitable as they wished.

Coal made possible the growth of democratic institutions and, vitally important, the abolition of slavery.   Nineteenth century Britain saw the flowering of culture with bands, orchestras, choirs, drama societies, literary societies, trade unions, and, of course, the flowering of the Church of England.  I’ll mention some of the great hymnists of the late eighteenth century and the nineteenth century.  In chronological order:

John Wesley (1703-1791)
Edward Perronet (1726-1792)
William Cowper 1731-1800
John Newton (1725-1807),
Reginald Heiber (1783-1826
Joseph M. Scriven (1819-1886)
Matthew Bridges (1800-1894)
Carl Gustav Boberg (1859-1940)

Thanks to coal, hymn books could be printed cheaply and thanks to coal there were trees left in the land to make the paper.

In Britain by 1860 around 400,000 coal industry workers were each producing around 175 tonnes of coal in a year for an annual total of seventy million tonnes of coal.  In 1913 around 1,100,000 coal industry workers were each producing around 264 tonnes of coal in a year for a total of 290 million tonnes.   This great increase in coal production coincided with wonderful progress in every aspect of society.  People lived longer, ate better and their purchasing power increased year by year.

As the twentieth century dawned, coal was already popularising the wonderful blessing of electricity.  The former major disadvantage of coal-fired power – sulphur dioxide emissions – was overcome with fluidised bed combustion using limestone, and coal has continued as the world mainstay of electrical power.

Tragically, 1.3 billion people – eighteen percent of the world’s population – have no access to electricity and so are deprived of all the wonderful things we take for granted.  Expansion of coal production is vital as part of the energy mix necessary to offer the poor and disadvantaged of the world an escape route from poverty, misery and short life spans.
By declaring war on coal, people who purport to represent the Church of England are committing a terrible crime against the world’s poorest people. 

My suggestion to the people purporting to lead the Church of England is re-read the Parable of the Talents.  It’s still there in Matthew Chapter 25, verses 14 to 30.


Climate of Freedom: Press Release

Source:  Indiegogo –

Climate of Freedom – Be a part of the only change that truly needs to happen.

Climate change has been one of the most controversial topics over the last two decades.  Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth told us that we were destroying our world with catastrophic manmade climate change.  The documentary set records and won awards, including a Nobel Prize for Gore.  Since the film’s production, Gore has continued his mantra of doom. 

Yet, in spite of all the noise, there still hasn’t been any global warming.  Could there be an ulterior motive for the incessant cries that the world as we know it will quite literally burn up?  What if someone were to embark upon a Pilgrimage of Truth Against the Profiteers of Doom?

Climate of Freedom is an upcoming feature length documentary film set for theatrical release in September 2015.  Starring world renowned Climate Change expert Lord Christopher Monckton, the film sheds light on the intentions of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and shows how they plan to use false science and fear mongering to create a de facto world government.  Lord Monckton will combine interviews with top scientific experts, with humor, facts, and a bit of fun to show the truth about Global Warming and the UN’s desire to subjugate the West to its tyranny.

Go HERE for full Press Release

Global Temperature Update

Global Warming has stopped?

Global temperature update: the Pause is now 18 years 3 months

In response to a reader from Ireland, Lord Monckton prepared the following article which addressed questions on the response of the Pope and the Church to the Catastrophic Climate Change meme and what can be done about this response. Excerpts from this article appear below. For the full article including RSS Global Temperature Chart, see HERE. And for the paper referred to, published in in the first edition of the relaunched Science Bulletin, see HERE.

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The RSS global satellite dataset shows no global warming for 18 years 3 months. The actual warming since the United Nations’ climate panel first reported in 1990, compared to the average of all five major global temperature datasets, was half what it had predicted in that year with what it called “substantial confidence.”

Even the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s upper-ocean heat content chart, when converted back to the ocean temperature change from which NOAA calculated it, shows ocean warming over the past decade at a rate equivalent to just 0.5 C/century. Not exactly a climate crisis.

Global sea-ice extent reached a satellite-era maximum late in 2014 – not that most mainstream news media reported that fact. Land area under drought has declined for 30 years. Patterns of flooding, of tropical cyclones and of extra-tropical storminess show little change. Sea level is barely rising: indeed, the GRACE gravitational-recovery satellites, the most precise method of measurement, actually showed sea level falling from 2003-2009.

The new, simple climate model – which a physics undergrad can run on nothing more complex than a pocket calculator – has taken the world of climate science by storm. Of the seven major science papers in the first edition of the relaunched Science Bulletin, the paper has received 3500 downloads from the journal’s website – an unusually high number for a scientific paper.

Comments about the paper are appearing all over the internet. A copy is to be sent to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, where an encyclical on climate change is being prepared on behalf of the Pope.

Lord Monckton, a Knight of Malta, a former Editor of the UK Catholic newspaper The Universe, and an expert reviewer for the UN’s Fifth Assessment Report on the climate in 2013, said: "It is vital that the Pope should not lead the Church into another embarrassing Galileo moment by jumping on to the climate-change bandwagon just as the scientific wheels are falling off. Our paper marks the end of the climate scare."

Global Temperature Update

Onward marches the Great Pause

Global temperature update: the Pause is now 18 years 2 months

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Since October 1996 there has been no global warming at all (Fig. 1). This month’s RSS temperature plot pushes up the period without any global warming from 18 years 1 month to 18 years 2 months (indeed, very nearly 18 years 3 months). Will this devastating chart be displayed anywhere at the Lima conference? Don’t bet on it.

Figure 1. The least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomaly dataset shows no global warming for 18 years 2 months since October 1996.

The hiatus period of 18 years 2 months, or 218 months, is the farthest back one can go in the RSS satellite temperature record and still show a sub-zero trend.

What will the chart look like this time next year, at the beginning of the Paris world-government conference, at which the Treaty of Copenhagen will be dusted off and nodded through by the scientifically illiterate national negotiating delegates of almost 200 nations, ending the freedom and democracy of the West and putting absolute economic and political power in the hands of the grim secretariat of the UN climate convention?

When the November 2015 RSS data are available, how many years and months of zero global warming will have occurred? Enter our friendly competition by putting your best estimate in comments. For guidance, at the December 2012 Doha conference I was banned from UN climate yadayadathons for life for the grave sin of telling the truth that there had been no global warming for 16 years. And an el Nino of unknown magnitude is expected during the boreal winter, followed by a compensating la Nina.

See HERE for the full article by Lord Monckton

Opinion - Chris Dawson

The pieces of the puzzle may be coming together faster than we think; at Lima not Paris.

Under encouragement from US president Obama, the UN IPCC is set to steal a little more sovereignty, ‘in a little bit pregnant - kind of way’, at Lima on the way to Paris.

Obama will put up a draft 'Agreement' rather than a 'Treaty' at Lima which will enable him to ‘blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges’ and thus side-step US Congress by signing a ‘binding’ Agreement (hybrid).

The UN bureaucrats have understood Obama’s ‘problem’ with ‘democracy’ and assisted him in finding a creative way around his ‘problem’ with Congress. To get a global agreement up, the UN must have the US locked in.

This Agreement will reflect the terms of his US China Climate Agreement and all countries including Australia will be under huge pressure to sign, perhaps even as early as now, in Lima.

By springing the whole thing at Lima, the UN bureaucrats will catch us all off guard, being focussed as we are on Paris. The UN bureaucrats and fellow travellers are afraid the actual lack of global warming for 18 years and the ‘hottest year ever’ contradiction, can’t hold out until Paris. In their view, everything will be lost, their power and wealth, if they don’t get it up now.

Your country, and for me Australia, should only ever sign a UN Climate agreement where a sensible 'get out clause' is included.

This 'get out clause' should address the pretext of any Climate Agreement such that should carbon dioxide be found innocent and/or CAGW falsified and or/Global Cooling becomes obvious, we can pull out of the Agreement without penalty.

In other words, if what we have is predominantly natural climate change, we don't have to surrender any of our sovereignty and energy and land and mining and water policies, along with immigration, wealth and private property to unaccountable and remote UN bureaucrats. Claw back provisions.

The unelected, unaccountable, EU authoritarian bureaucrats ‘tricked’ each of the EU countries into signing away their sovereignty and now a growing number of European citizens realize they have lost their democratic rights to determine energy, land, mining, water, banking, immigration, wealth and private property policies, to mention just a few.

Please ensure your politicians are confronted with this scenario and invite them to avoid being ‘tricked’.

Stop your government signing away more sovereignty on the pretext of saving the planet unless at the very least, it has an iron clad ‘get out clause’ as above.

Global Temperature Update

It’s official: no global warming for 18 years 1 month

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The RSS monthly satellite global temperature anomaly for September 2014 is in, and the Great Pause is now two months longer than it was last month. Would this year’s el Niño bite soon enough to stop the psychologically-significant 18-year threshold from being crossed? The official answer is No.

Globally, September was scarcely warmer than August, which was itself some distance below the 18-year trend-line. Therefore, taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on the RSS satellite monthly global mean surface temperature anomalies, there has now been no global warming for 18 years 1 month.

Dr Benny Peiser, our good friend at the Global Warming Policy Foundation in the UK, had anticipated the official crossing of the 18-year threshold by a day or two with an interesting note circulated to supporters on the ever-lengthening period without any global warming, and featuring our 17-years-11-months graph from last month.

The Great Pause is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for a little over half the satellite temperature record. Yet the Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Figure 1. RSS monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature anomalies (dark blue) and trend (thick bright blue line), September 1996 to September 2014, showing no trend for 18 years 1 month.

See full discussion HERE

The case for the CAGW hypothesis has only failed models and a so called 'consensus' of 'settled science' going for it. There is no empirical evidence, only models outputs in support of the CAGW hypothesis and now it is clear that the 97% of 'Climate Scientists' were not in support of the CAGW hypothesis as the image below, derived from Legates et el. (2013) demonstrates.

Announcement - Loyal Visit to Australia

Christopher Walter Monckton, the Third Viscount Monckton of Brenchley; Lord Monckton for short; Christopher to his friends all over the world, has landed in Australia for a Loyal Visit.

Lord Monckton is in Australia for a low key (in terms of public presentations) visit, meeting up for private functions, to meet some politicians and for some party faithful political rallies and to catch up with friends across NSW, VIC, SA & QLD. He hopes to bring people up to date on how Australia is now viewed around the world following the repeal of the Carbon Tax.

In addition he wants to warn Australians of the UN plans in Paris in 2015 (or before) for a Global Bureaucracy Managed Climate Agreement. This plan for Paris will amount to a world government along the lines of the unelected, unaccountable EU Commissars who run Europe, where Australia and other signatories will irreversibly sign away some key elements of their nation's sovereignty on the pretext of saving the planet from global warming which stopped some 18 years ago.

Watch this space for public presentation details.

See HERE for Alan Jones interview Sept 10th 2014

See HERE for Andrew Bolt and Steve Price interview Sept 9th 2014

Global Temperature Update

No global warming for 17 years 11 months …

… or 19 years, according to a key statistical paper

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

The Great Pause has now persisted for 17 years 11 months. Indeed, to three decimal places on a per-decade basis, there has been no global warming for 18 full years. Professor Ross McKitrick, however, has upped the ante with a new statistical paper to say there has been no global warming for 19 years.

Whichever value one adopts, it is becoming harder and harder to maintain that we face a "climate crisis" caused by our past and present sins of emission.

Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on Remote Sensing Systems’ satellite-based monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature dataset, there has been no global warming – none at all – for at least 215 months.

This is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for half the satellite temperature record. Yet the Great Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.

See full report HERE

Global Temperature Update

Still no global warming for 17 years 10 months

El Niño has not yet shortened the Great Pause

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

Remarkably, the el Niño warming of this year has not yet shortened the Great Pause, which, like last month, stands at 17 years 10 months with no global warming at all.

Taking the least-squares linear-regression trend on Remote Sensing Systems’ satellite-based monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature dataset, there has been no global warming – none at all – for 214 months. This is the longest continuous period without any warming in the global instrumental temperature record since the satellites first watched in 1979. It has endured for about half the satellite temperature record. Yet the Great Pause coincides with a continuing, rapid increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Figure 1. RSS monthly global mean lower-troposphere temperature anomalies (dark blue) and trend (thick bright blue line), October 1996 to July 2014, showing no trend for 17 years 10 months.

The hiatus period of 17 years 10 months, or 214 months, is the farthest back one can go in the RSS satellite temperature record and still show a zero trend.

Yet the length of the Great Pause in global warming, significant though it now is, is of less importance than the ever-growing discrepancy between the temperature trends predicted by models and the far less exciting real-world temperature change that has been observed.

For the full report from Lord Monckton, see HERE

History & Science in the Making

Over at the JoNova Blog HERE, Dr David Evans is creating History by doing science the way it is supposed to be done. 

You will appreciate that in the current politically correct ‘climate’, no empirical science indicating a major cause other than CO2 for climate change will be published in any climate journal. This will change soon, but only after we win the argument.

So the new Evans Solar Based Climate Theory is being published as science was traditionally done prior to WW2.

Three things that make this theory stand out:

1. It’s quantifiable, with a model that successfully hindcasts and predicts. Not just a concept with hand-waving or a rough one-off computation.

2. It’s got physical interpretations for all the parts. So this is a physical model, not just curve fitting or an unexplained correlation.

3. It comes with a prediction and a falsifiability condition. As Bob Carter says, ' is about testable hypotheses'.

So David is releasing a series of short background papers, prior to very soon releasing the full paper on his Theory.

Please see the links below for each of these background papers released to date:

First HERE

Second HERE

Third HERE

Fourth HERE

Fifth HERE

Sixth HERE

Seventh HERE

Eighth HERE

Nineth The Model HERE

"David Evans’ ground-breaking work is a devastating new approach to the climate question. I have been lucky enough to observe the development of this project, and am full of admiration for both Jo and David for their dedication to carrying out a breathtaking research project with no financial reward, simply because it so desperately needed to be done. Let this be the last nail in the coffin of climate extremism. I hope that, as a result of this work, David will be properly recognized by the Australian Government, which – unlike its unlamented predecessor – is open to the possibility that influences other than Man are the principal drivers of the climate. David’s work is heroic in its scale, formidable in its ingenuity, and – as far as a mere layman can judge – very likely to be broadly correct. One should not minimize the courage of David and Jo in persisting unrewarded for so long in what was and is a genuine search for the truth, starting not from any preconception but from that curiosity that is the mainspring of all true science. I wish this project well and congratulate its justifiably proud parents on its birth."

Monckton of Brenchley June 15th 2014.

– Thank you Christopher– says Jo.

(Monckton stayed with us in March 2013 and was one of the first to see the developing model. We all got quite caught up in the excitement.)

A major project is the distribution of information on the actual average global temperature as measured by satellite versus the temperature projections from the Models.

The Journal of Pattern Recognition in Physics has been closed down - for doubting the UN IPCC's near-term predictions.

Christopher Monckton writes to Martin Rasmussen of Copernicus Publications suggesting a phoenix may yet rise from the ashes......

".......You must appreciate the gravity of what you have done. You have killed a learned journal in a field only peripherally connected with the climate because you have decided – or you have cravenly obeyed others unknown who have decided – to take a lamentably unscientific and aprioristic stance on the global warming question, a stance so uncompromising that you will not countenance even a single, passing question about whether the IPCC’s previous predictions are likely to prove correct, even though the IPCC has itself now abandoned its former predictions. And you will not – indeed, cannot – offer a single shred of scientific justification for your viewpoint.

Your challenge to a surely temperately-expressed but serious and by no means illegitimate doubt about the IPCC’s near-term predictions is not itself expressed in the usual scientific manner by a reviewed paper or comment responding to the scientific conclusion that – on no stated ground – you purport to dispute, but by a petulant and irresponsible decision to shut the entire journal down.

This decision of yours, taken without the slightest regard for the scientific method or for the usual canons of disciplined enquiry, logical discourse or peer review, is one too many of its kind. It is not acceptable. I do not propose to accept it or to tolerate it.

Let me tell you, therefore, what will happen next.

First, I shall give Copernicus seven days to reconsider its ludicrous decision to abort the journal for a nakedly political reason and without offering anything that even makes a serious pretense at being a scientific justification.

Secondly, if after seven days I shall not have heard from you that the journal is to continue, I shall invite all of the contributors to the special edition to participate with me in a relaunch of Pattern Recognition in Physics, to take effect immediately. If you or Copernicus object to this course of action on copyright or any other grounds, you will no doubt be sure to let me know within the next seven days. Otherwise, you will be presumed to have forfeited all interest in producing the journal and you will leave the journal to me.

I shall invite Professor Mörner to be the lead editor. The journal will be published online and, I hope, may eventually be taken under the wing of one of the scientific publishing houses with which I have connections.

Thirdly, the first editorial in the relaunched journal will perforce have to address the reasons why Copernicus decided to try (unsuccessfully, as you will by now have realized) to kill the journal. You will come in for some justifiably severe personal criticism in this editorial, for on any view you have not behaved as a senior executive of a reputable scientific publishing house should have behaved. You have taken a corrupt, anti-scientific decision, inferentially because you believed (or perhaps were menaced into believing) that if you did not toe the Party Line on the climate you would be financially or socially disadvantaged.

Fourthly, as the editorial and the press release relaunching the journal will have to point out, you have also, through ignorance, put yourself outside the emerging mainstream of climate science. For, as far as global warming is concerned, that mainstream is now flowing in a far less catastrophist direction than ever before. As you have seen above, even the IPCC, after many strongly-worded representations from expert reviewers such as me, has been forced to abandon its former naïve and imprudent faith in the expensive computer models that have so relentlessly failed to predict global temperature with sufficient conservatism since the 1980s ....."

See Blog HERE

See Lord Monckton Letter in full HERE

As a follow up to these milestones, Lord Monckton wrote the following:

From: The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, Edinburgh, Scotland

To: The Ethicist, New York Times

Mr. Ethicist, - Al-Haytham, founder of the scientific method, said the scientist does not place his faith in any mere consensus, however venerable and widespread. Aristotle [1] said that reliance upon a consensus even of experts is doubly fallacious. Newton, Huxley, Einstein and Popper agreed. There is a scientific consensus that consensus is not scientific. There has been no global warming at all for 17 years 3 months [2]. The consensus did not predict that [3]. A recent paper [4] analyzing 11,944 scientific papers on climate marked only 64, or 0.5%, as endorsing the climate consensus. Major uncertainties persist in climate science [5] and economics [6]. How ethical is it, then, for a newspaper to refuse to publish any letters counter to a consensus that has been proven not to exist; that, even if it did exist, is not the way science is done; that, even if science were done by consensus, has been proven wrong even on the central question how fast the world will warm; and that, even if the problem were as real and as costly as the consensus and the newspaper profit by asking us to believe, demands political solutions many times costlier than the imagined (and now imaginary) problem?

[1] Sophistical Refutations, c. 350 B.C.

[2] Least-squares linear-regression trend on Remote Sensing Systems, 2013, Monthly Global Mean Surface Temperature Anomalies, December

[3] IPCC (1990) predicted 0.35 [0.20, 0.50] K global warming per decade to 2020. IPCC (2013) predicted 0.23 [0.13, 0.33] K global warming per decade to 2050. Since September 1996, no global warming has been observed. At no time since 1750 has either of the two central estimates of warming occurred.

[4] Legates et al., 2013, on agnotology and climate science, Education and Science.

[5] See e.g. IPCC, 2001, para.

[6] Monckton of Brenchley, 2013, Is CO2 mitigation cost-effective?, 45th Annual Proceedings of the Seminars on Planetary Emergencies, Erice, Sicily, and CERN, Geneva, August.

In Australia the Climate Commision was disbanded by the new Abbott Government and has morphed into the Climate Council.

This has not stopped them making unsupported claims about the environment.

As a plain English service to science and truth by the Lord Monckton Foundation to the Public See HERE

We are concerned to improve things with a focus on four major program areas:

  • Education
  • Science
  • Public Policy
  • Media & Communications
The Lord Monckton Foundation will use its best endeavours to develop, promote and support better Education; encourage the active pursuit of empirical Science whilst fighting the range of 'Post Normal', 'Consensus' and 'Settled' activities purporting to be or masquerading as Science (particularly in, but not confined to, ‘climate science’); provide a forum, tools and resources for evidence based Public Policy formulation, critique and deployment; establish Media and Communications resources, activities and strategies designed to ensure more rigorous questioning and critique of those fashionable and powerful ideas and policies which can so easily take root, unimpaired as they currently are, by open debate, rational assessment, proper due diligence or any understanding of consequences (intended or otherwise).
For some information on Lord Monckton himself, see here.



Sponsors & Donations Information:

For your security and for our security, the bank requires some identifying information. Click HERE to make a donation.

You can cancel this Account Information at any time. Please follow the prompts to Create an Account. We have found that the best way to keep you and the Bank and the Lord Monckton Foundation SAFE is for you to set up an Account (as an Account and thus the information can be cancelled at any time). In addition, you can use this Account to obtain benefits knowing that the Lord Monckton Foundation will not pass this information on to any other party (See also our Privacy, Confidential Information and Data Security Policy at the bottom of this page).


Disclaimer for the Lord Monckton Foundation website: 

Material on this site:

Photos and material on this site are used for educational and research purposes and are sourced from media outlets and the internet. If you are the copyright owner of any material used on this site and you object to its use, and such use falls outside the fair use provisions in ss. 40 - 42 of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), please email, and it will be removed.


Site Mailing List 
"The Lord Monckton Foundation shall conduct research, publish papers, educate students and the public and take every measure that may be necessary to restore the primacy and use of reason in science and public policy worldwide, especially insofar as they may bear upon the rights of the people fairly and fully to be informed, openly and freely to debate, and secretly by ballot to decide who shall govern them, what laws they shall live by and what imposts they shall endure."

The Lord Monckton Foundation

ABN 51 154 843 213 Registered Address: PO Box 371 Balwyn North VIC, Australia 3104

Ph: 03 9878 3333 - Int’l: (+61) 3 9878 3333 - Mobile: 0409 805 425

Postal Address: PO Box 14, Nunawading LPO, Nunawading VIC Australia 3131


See our Privacy, Confidential Information and Data Security Policy (here)


Site Powered By
    Turnkey Website Solutions
    Online web site design