Lord Monckton: Global Warming big scientific fad





The interactive transcript could not be loaded.



Rating is available when the video has been rented.
This feature is not available right now. Please try again later.
Published on Dec 7, 2009

The United Nations Climate change conference has opened in the Danish capital Copenhagen. RT's Laura Emmet has talked to one man who'll be there - who's also one of the most outspoken critics of global warming theory.

Comments • 1,380

Barack Obama
Man that guy is stupid as fuck 
View all 4 replies
Hide replies
BBC reports today that the Artic's ice volume has increased....the shock and horror when I heard it. http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30399079 Climate changes....ofcourse it has been changing since man set foot on this rock and it always will change, man didn't influence it then and we can't influence it in the future.
View all 5 replies
Hide replies
Adam Glasgow
Good old Monckton
Do you have evidence Lord?   Answer: Well, here are a few fractions for you, and here is a sentence that involves no experimentation or evidence, and now I'm going to say "nonsense" and somehow you will forget the 40 years of scientific research that has taken place.  Ridiculous.  Open a first year science textbook Lord.  
View all 3 replies
Hide replies
Ade Larsen
I'm Pro-Putin, Pro-Russia and Pro-RT. The EU is a disaster and causes wars. Climate change is real but it's not man-made. In the UK - Vote UKIP
David Hood
i would suggest every one should read the delinquent teenager by donna laframboise, its an eye opener and i believe its true otherwise she would be prosecuted for libel etc. it names names and is a must read book about the IPCC. you can download it from amazon as i did.
Rod Martin, Jr.
+Erling Andreassen Denier? What a lovely misnomer you've used. Deny what? That climate changes? As Lord (yes, Lord, because that's the proper address for a Viscount) Monckton said, climate always changes. Deny that man has some effect on climate? Again, Lord Monckton said that man has an effect, but it's miniscule. Many of the climate scientists working for the IPCC quit in protest over the political managers rewriting their conclusions. Consensus? Only in their dreams. One scientist had to sue (take them to court) the UN's IPCC to get his name removed from their fake consensus. Do more research in "denial" land and you'll find lots of scientists who disagree with your viewpoint. I used to believe the Al Gore fantasy, but I found out that I was wrong. I love science and reality more than ego and delusion. You game? And ask yourself this simple question: What leads to more rain, 1) Cold oceans, or 2) Warm oceans? If you're at all smart, this should start you thinking and changing your mind.
Rad Matic
The only reliable prediction you can make about the climate is that the ice sheets will be back, as they have been 25 times before during the current ice age, which isn't due to end until Antarctica moves off the S pole, Panama sinks and the Arctic Ocean opens up.
Contrary to this guys beliefs not all scientists are convinced about the real drivers for climate change. Of course mankind can make impacts on the environment, good or bad, but the fact is, in the grand scheme of things we simply haven't been around long enough to understand what normal weather is. When studying ice cores of previous ice ages, a common trend occurs and that is there is a spike in global temperature and CO2 right before a major glacial period. There simply isn't enough space to go into the details, but I can assure you, that between myself and my environmental science peers there is plenty of skepticism about anthropogenic climate change. That is not to say that we shouldn't curb emissions and look for cleaner fuel sources as it is beneficial for health and just cleaning up our environment. The data actually points towards a glacial period on the horizon (by this I mean anywhere in the next 100-1000 years). The important thing is we have much more to fear from a renewed glacial episode. Towards the end of the last ice age human populations were much smaller, in the millions. Now we are in the billions. Glaciation would destroy huge swathes of arable farmland, creating a famine on a scale you couldn't possibly imagine and billions would die in the mid latitudes alone. The Earth will do what it always has done, and that is, it will change and we don't truly understand why it does yet, but we're getting there.
Ingram Fry
When Europe went into the last Ice Age humans attributed the changes to witches they burned the witches for the cold temperature.  Now we use policies that kill third world citizens and stop them developing. Can't we just go back to burning witches? Why do we all have to shit on Africa and South America?
When autoplay is enabled, a suggested video will automatically play next.

Up next

to add this to Watch Later

Add to

Loading playlists...