Potty peer Christopher Monckton has stepped up his campaign to shut down John Abraham’s debunking of one of his talks last year, by asking supporters to flood Abraham’s university with emails demanding it start a disciplinary inquiry. George Monbiot points out the obvious irony in the Guardian today:
Reading these ravings, I’m struck by two thoughts. The first is how frequently climate change deniers resort to demands for censorship or threats of litigation to try to shut down criticism of their views. Martin Durkin has done it, Richard North has done it, Monckton has done it many times before. They claim to want a debate, but as soon as it turns against them they try to stifle it by intimidating their opponents. To me it suggests that these people can give it out, but they can’t take it.
Monckton has since posted at Watts Up WIth That, including this appeal for support:
May I ask your kind readers once more for their help? Would as many of you as possible do what some of you have already been good enough to do? Please contact Father Dennis J. Dease, President of St. Thomas University, and invite him “even at this eleventh hour” to take down Abraham’s talk altogether from the University’s servers, and to instigate a disciplinary inquiry into the Professor’s unprofessional conduct, particularly in the matter of his lies to third parties about what I had said in my talk at Bethel University eight months ago? That would be a real help. [My emphasis, Dease email removed]
In other words, please help me to bully Abraham and the University into caving in to my absurd demands, and take Abraham’s presentation off the web.
In my view, it’s time to stand up to the potty peer’s attempts at intimidation of Abraham and his University. Rather than flood them with email, I propose that anyone who supports the statement below leave a comment with their name, location and academic affiliation (if any). You will need to leave an email, but that will not be published. I will enforce strict moderation. If you want to support Monckton, go elsewhere. I will ensure that Abraham and the university are aware of the thread. Please leave a comment and encourage as many people as possible to join in.
We the undersigned offer unreserved support for John Abraham and St. Thomas University in the matter of complaints made to them by Christopher Monckton. Professor Abraham provided an important public service by showing in detail Monckton’s misrepresentation of the science of climate, and we applaud him for that effort, and St. Thomas University for making his presentation available to the world.
[Update 17/7: Thanks to everyone who has signed up so far -- keep them coming! And thanks to all the bloggers and tweeters who have spread the word -- Hot Topic's been seeing record traffic, and this post has been speeding up the chart of our popular posts to number two (with a bullet). John has been reading your comments, and I know appreciates the tremendous support you've given him. Dan Moutal of Mind Of Dan has started a Facebook group: Prawngate: Support John Abraham against Monckton's bullying, so if you're active on Facebook join and get the word out.]
Related posts:
- John Abraham: How to give good radio
- Monckton: the final slapdown
- Monckton is a fraud
- Monckton: still digging for failure
- The larrikin lord returns
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Hot Topic, the first popular science book to examine global warming from a New Zealand perspective, was 
{ 1063 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →
Probably unnecessary by now, but you need to not only ignore Monckton, but be seen to ignore him.
I fully support John Abraham in his effort to clear up misunderstandings of anthropic climate change. The deniers need to be thoroughly challenged in public view.
It would be a disgrace if the St. Thomas University did not back John Abraham fully as it is their duty as an institution to enlighten, not endorse ignorance.
I fully support John Abraham’s response to Monckton’s work (using the term extremely loosely) and suggest that if Monckton has a problem with Professor Abraham’s response, he should attempt to rebut it with facts instead of trying to intimidate a university. But then, facts aren’t really Monckton’s thing, are they?
The response to the presentation that Christopher Monckton gave at Bethel University should be a reasoned, science-based analysis of Monckton’s sources and his use/interpretation of them. This Professor Abraham has provided. With the ball in his court, Mr. Monckton has decided against replying in kind and has instead has resorted to accusations of libel and calls for censorship. By doing this he has not only failed to make his factual case, he has also destroyed any credibility he may have had. I applaud and support the approach taken by Professor Abraham and am convinced by his factual and fully attributed arguments.
Another case of a thug (Monckton) trying to intimidate an honest scientist (Abraham).
Whats not to support. Idont recall Bertrand Russell waving titles in debates.
As a fellow University professor, I can just echo Lisa Geoffrion’s statement:
“I fully support Professor John Abraham and his very well presented and professional critique of Christopher Monckton’s claims about climate change. I hope that St. Thomas University understands that the work of dedicated scientists such as John Abraham is vitally important to not only every single person on this planet, but to the countless generations to come.â€
I would like to add that mr. Moncton’s actions to pressure professor Abramson and STU (both through threat of legal action and e-mail campaigns) are nothing but bullying and an indirect admission of defeat in an intellectual debate.
I too fully support Prof. John Abraham for his scientific approach in debunking Mr. Monckton’s misleading speech.
Raymond Freeman-Lynde
Department of Geology
University of Georgia
Standing with John Abraham. Science can only do so much.
3 cheers for good science!
Thank you to John Abraham and St. Thomas University for revealing the misstatements made by Christopher Monckton. Please don’t let him intimidate you. The world needs the truth you are giving us.
John Abraham thoroughly and logically debunked Monckton on a point by point basis. I support him and his approach.
Rather than rebutting Abraham with facts, Monckton is now flailing, which is telling.
Erik Maes, Arnhem, Netherlands
I’ve watched John Abraham’s video, and was impressed with how reasonable and persuasive it is in concentrating on the arguments and avoiding personal attacks on Lord Monckton. St. Thomas University is to be commended, and supported in its resistance to intimidation.
Very late to this, but I fully support John Abraham in this matter too.
Terence
I wish to express complete support for Dr. Abraham, and I urge St. Thomas University to do the same.
Please add my name to the ranks of those interested in supporting the facts, critical thinking, free inquiry, honesty, and standing up to bullies like Chris Monckton who stand for the opposite values.
I attended the Monckton Circus event in Brisbane earlier this year and believe me his presentation is very convincing, especially to the scientific illiterati, but this is mainly because monckton cherry-picks the scientific data. I was staggered when he received a standing ovation from the industry and business executives who then queued up to have their photo taken with him. (sigh) I think they were perhaps more besotted with his peerage than his scientific credentials.
John Abraham is to be commended for his efforts in refuting Monckton’s arguments. I can only marvel at his tenacity.
I fully support John Abraham. It is long past the time that the professionals be properly appriciated for the debunking of idiocy and lunacy. Such praise is not given often enough and far too much attention is given to the denialists and lunatics.
Monckton plainly is incapable to taking criticism of any kind, and his only response to it is to demand discipline…for the crime of disagreeing apparently. Like so many of his fellows…moon landing deniers, Young Earth Creationists, and so on…their first reponse to strong resistance is to cry foul and try to smear their critics. He and his ilk need to be given a (metaphorical) public bating more often.
I fully support John Abraham, St Thomas University, in his very fair and scientifically scholarly refutation of the climate denying presentation given by Christopher Monckton in Minnesota in the Fall of 2009. I urge the administration of St. Thomas not to cave under the assault of protesters to this refutation, or Monckton, and his financial and legal helpers, who have unleashed them.
Once again, the climate deniers would run from debate rather than rebut the substance of the argument. If Monckton succeeds in purging a University website of legitimate criticism it will be a tremendous blow against free academic inquiry and rational discussion.
I fully support John Abraham in his efforts to expose and correct all the misleading drivel being spouted by Monckton and his acolytes. I urge St. Thomas University to stand behind Prof. Abraham and defend his academic freedom and the integrity of the scientific process. Science cannot be derailed by pundits and self-appointed experts with zero understanding of complex scientific issues.
Dr. Abraham has my full support for his efforts. Exposing lies is not a crime and his university should also stand next to him in this science vs. faith (faith in the notion that all is good with the environment) battle.
Apostolos Georgakis, PhD
Ericsson Research,
Sweden
Monckton is attempting to stiffle debate by bullying John Abraham.
Monckton should put his money where his mouth is and move to Tuvalu with the other deniers.
Nick
I offer unreserved support for John Abraham and St. Thomas University in the matter of complaints made to them by Christopher Monckton. Professor Abraham provided an important public service by showing in detail Monckton’s misrepresentation of the science of climate, and I applaud him for that effort, and St. Thomas University for making his presentation available to the world.
Graeme Henderson
I hope and trust that St. Thomas University ignore the bullying tactics employed by Lord Monckton. Such attacks on academic freedom should not just be ignored: I would argue that St. Thomas University should issue a public statement of rebuke to Lord Monckton for attempting to stifle academic debate in this underhand way.
Far from instigating a disciplinary inquiry into John Abraham’s presentation, the University of St Thomas should be proud to host such an excellent example of reasoned scientific thinking and argument. The information is presented with clarity, is well-supported by sources, and treats Lord Monckton with respect, three qualities notably absent from the rhetoric of climate change denial.
I fully support John Abraham and the St Thomas University.It is vitally important that the tactics employed by charlatans like Monckton and others are exposed and challenged.
As a fellow University academic, I would like to echo Lisa Geoffrion’s and Kennneth Camargo’s statements of support for Professor John Abraham and his very well presented and professional critique of Christopher Monckton’s claims about climate change.
I also unreservedly commend St. Thomas University for its courageous and robust support of Professor Thomas and academic freedom. In so clearly refusing to submit to blatant attempts to use academic bullying to stifle scientific debate STU has set an example many larger institutions would do well to follow.
Rod Gibson
School of Engineering, Physics and Mathematics
University of Dundee
Scotland
I too would like to offer my support for John Abraham and St Thomas University.
Please add my support for John Abraham and St Thomas University.
Signed.
Submitted in continued support of Dr. John Abraham, St Thomas University, and the continued debunking of false/poor science.
Michael Rule
University of Florida
I unreservedly support John Abraham and St. Thomas University in the matter of complaints made to them by Mr. Christopher Walter Monckton (since he is an hereditary peer, his title does not derive from merit so I opt to ignore it).
Professor Abraham provided an important public service by showing in detail Monckton’s misrepresentation of numerous aspects of the science of climate and climate change, and I applaud him for that effort, and St. Thomas University for making his presentation available to the world.
Christopher Monckton, on the other hand, deserves nothing more than disdain, or perhaps pity, for his failed attempt to intimidate Professor Abraham and St. Thomas University.
I add my support to Professor Abraham against the bullying tactics of Lord Monckton and his supporters.
My personal comments on the debate: Various of Monckton’s supporters have objected to the term “climate change denier” which they equate to “holocaust denier” and claim that this therefore trivialises the crimes of Hitler against humanity (not that this has the slightest bearing on the vaildity of the science, of course.)
As it happens, I am not convinced about AGW. However, if the concerns of the majority of climate scientists are even moderately “true”, then to await the sort of proof that would satisfy Monckton and other deniers (though I doubt that Any degree of proof would convince many of them) before taking action would be catastrophic, and the deaths that would result would indeed make the number of deaths in the horror that was the holocaust appear trivial in comparison.
I say this not to trivialise the holocaust, but to remind of the stakes involved. But I could stretch the analogy further by suggesting that most of the perpetrators of the holocaust were not intrinsically evil, but were taking the easy course in difficult times. Only a few had the courage of Albert Speer to admit their culpability for events which were not of their direct bidding.
I genuinely am undecided over the “truth” of AGW, I do not believe that sufficient evidence yet exists to make that choice for certain. Yet, in assessing who suggests the most appropriate action based on current knowledge, it is certainly not Monckton and his “Gag and Bully” brigade.
Lord Monckton is at once the most absurd and frustrating of characters.
It is virtually impossible to argue against – let alone reason with – someone as tenaciously dishonest as Monckton. The mind-numbing falsities and shameless hypocrisy of his endless tirade are truly astounding. Of course, he has invested far too much of himself in this matter to back down now. Better to cling defiantly to a burning ship, than to acknowledge the humiliation of defeat.
I absolutely support John Abraham and St Thomas University in this matter.
I fully support John Abraham, and utterly deplore Lord Monckton’s (wearyingly regular) attempts to shut down scientific debate using legal threats.
I support John Abraham and his rational, fact-based refutation of Monckton’s sideshow antics.
Also bravo to The University of St Thomas for responding to Monckton’s blustering threats of legal action with polite dismissal.
I am not a climatologist, but I am a working microbiologist (Ph.D.) and so understand the importance of open and informed debate on scientific matters. I fully support John Abraham and his university in their effort to establish the discussion on firm and validated technical data. I have nothing but disdain for the bullying tactics of Mr. Monckton and his supporters who demand to be heard but then try to stifle those to seek the same right. Finally, to use the well worn phrase, Mr. Monckton has a right to his own opinions, but not to his own facts.
I offer unreserved support for John Abraham and St. Thomas University in the matter of complaints made to them by Christopher Monckton. Professor Abraham provided an important public service by showing in detail Monckton’s misrepresentation of the science of climate, and I applaud him for that effort, and St. Thomas University for making his presentation available to the world.
John
I support John Abraham and his work against the Era of Stupid that seems to be overwhelming our culture today.
clearly the argument has been won. going up against the fossil fuel industry takes more than intelect and bravery unfortunately. now we enter the realm of psycology of the masses. leveraging moncktons spectactlar failure will not happen via the mass media if not little by little, blog by blog at person to person level. people, get spreading the word!
abrahams – youre a real hero
i thank you on behalf of my baby son
I fully support John Abraham.
I’m a layman (another kind of engineer, acutally), but I do know that good ideas do not need to be lied about to be persuasive, and that supportable ideas are seldom defended by the types of attacks that Christopher Monckton has launched.
The only response to bad science is more science. One of the parties in this dust-up understands this.
I heartily second K F W’s stance and add that the truth doesn’t need to silence its competition to be right, and fully support John Abraham.
lao tseo once said elegant words are not sincere, sincere words are not elegant, another wise old chinaman once said you can only piss with the cock that youve got. credit where its due, lord monckton spins a good yarn!
Viscount Monckton should be ashamed of himself.
As a UST colleague, I am proud of the work John Abraham has done, and of the University for standing behind him, if only quietly.
I fully support John Abraham and applaud his efforts to engage the public in rational debate.
Monckton’s lunacy causes untold damage. This is just some of it. We desparately need people like John Abraham to help us save ourselves.
My family and I fully support Professor John Abraham and all his magnificent work he does….he really IS a HERO!!!! ..
HEARTFELT THANKS to Prof Abraham for caring so much about saving this wonderful planet of ours from our own stupidity!!…
As far as Monckton is concerned……who exactly IS he again???????Blah!!!!
BRAVO St Thomas University for standing by your man, and what a man he is!!!
I fully support what Dr Abrahams has been doing.
Much as I would prefer that we could ignore Monckton and those like him, failing to challenge them tends to lend support to their dangerously irresponsible campaign to discredit good science and honest scientists. It’s Mainstream news services that should be the ones doing the ignoring; their favoring of controversy over truth is far more irresponsible than Monckton. Given what’s at stake, giving airtime and space to his absurd and scientifically unsupportable opinions and presenting them as factual and relevant is not much better than supporting a form of terrorism against our most important institutions.
I attended a presentation by Monckton in Noosa, Queensland at the end of January this year and was stunned by the shear audacity and viciousness of his lies and the uncritical acceptance with which they were received by his audience, largely made up of self-funded retirees. He played shamelessly to their understandable resentment at the prospect of environmental belt tightening in their twilight years – no matter that their baby boomer lifestyles of profligate consumerism had helped to create the problem in the first place.
I resolved to devote some of my free time in retirement to an investigation of the deniers, including Monkcton and his travelling companion in Australia, Professor Ian Plimer (Heaven and Earth). I am booked to begin a series of rebuttal lectures commencing next month. With any luck I’ll be hearing from Monckton myself. Bring it on!
It’s a thankless and dull task, but somebody has to do it every once in a while. Thank you John Abraham.
John Abraham provided a real public service with his rebuttal of some of Monckton’s wooly thinking and spin. His University also did their part in standing up to the silly intimidation tactics from cranky blog fans incited by Monckton against them. Good on John and U of St. T.
I fully support John Abraham in his efforts to counter dangerous, self-appointed ‘geniuses’ like Chris Monckton.
It’s frustrating that precious time is being lost in the effort to limit climate change by having to debunk quasi-scientific rubbish, but unless it is done we run the risk of lazy, unthinking people being swayed by this deliberately misleading, cherry-picked ‘evidence’. As Monckton is obviously aware, the best lies are those with a speck of truth in them; we need people like Dr Abraham to show them that it’s only the whole truth that matters.
Keep up the good work!
I support Abraham, as far as I’ve been able to personally verify his slide shoe, 42 slides so far, he is honest and accurate 100% of the time.
@Please Get Real:
No one wants to censor that evidence… if you were genuinely interested in knowing the whole story, as opposed to the flashy bits that suit your already-made-up mind, then you’d actually listen to John Abraham’s lecture.
In it he shows that the very same graph you link to is only a tiny bit of the story… as you can see from the graph, it only covers the last eight years or so. When you use the rest of the existing data set, there is a very clear trend over a much, much longer time period showing that there is indeed a steady decline in ice levels.
You people need to stop thinking that there is some sort of conspiracy to censor your ‘brilliant’ viewpoint and realize that the people who are disagreeing with you are the ones who have actually bothered to take the time to study the relevant sciences… just having an interest in the area doesn’t make you a champion for the ‘normal’ guy against the hordes of ‘arrogant’ scientists that make you feel insecure.
You can’t delete the facts either, but it appears you’re pretty good at ignoring them when it suits you.
Thank you Dr Abraham for engaging in the public debate about climate change, and St Thomas University for supporting him in this engagement.
If you’re still noting academic affiliation, mine is with Massey University.
Kudos to Abraham and St Thomas University!
I support anyone debunking ‘Lord’ Monckton.
A few of the posts here seem a bit confused and seem to be saying that Monckton is trying to shut down scientific debate about climate change. This is not true. Apart from the time that people like John and myself put into this, climate science debates are unaffected by the antics of Monckton or Plimer. As just a sample of current debates: (a) is the airborne fraction of CO2 decreasing? (and decreasing more than expected)?, (b) is the southern ocean taking up less CO2?; (c) is Jim Hansen’s 0.5 degree range around a climate sensitivity of 3 degrees more precise than is justified?; (d) are the 1400 to 1500 year Dansgaard Oeschger cycle in glacial times really periodic? In my view all these are debates in current scientific literature (although some on each side may claim they are pretty much settled).
What Monckton is trying to do is shut down communication to the public of the science that is well established. It is part of an anti-intellectual exercise to discredit science as a whole. The recent book, Merchants of Doubt, by Oreskes and Conway spells out how the same tactics have been used (often by the same people) over tobacco, ozone and starwars. My own analysis of Plimer’s book:
http://www.complex.org.au/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=91
shows the degree of fabrication involved in these efforts to mislead the public.
For anyone who wants to see what an overall debate on climate science looks like, try the book “Pole Apart by Gareth Morgan and John McCrystal. They pulled together panels for both sides, hit them with questions over 18 months and then wrote the book. Unsurprisingly I don’t agree with everything they say, but it’s an important book for anyone who cares about the truth.
I fully concur with Garath. I watched the debate between Christopher Monckten (Lord) and Dr Tim Lambert (UNSW) in Sydney. The moderator decided not to take a call on who won the debate. It was clear to me that Tim Lambert won on the grounds of logic and data. Professor Quiggin (UQL) debunked Monckton’s conspiracy theory in a few lines. I viewed Professor Abraham’s presentation. The patience shown by Professor Abraham is impressive. Academics are more or less forced to debunk Monckton’s verbal output again and again. This is very wasteful of resources.
‘Lord’ Monckton = the Pied Piper of the dim-witted, leading brain-washed rats into the rising ocean since the late 90′s…Can someone buy this guy a flight to Malawi to speak to the farmers, who left their farms because of drought and flooding, who are now working in the city, and whose wives have turned to prostitution in the rural areas.
I’d like to express my sincere gratitude to Prof. Abraham for performing this important public service. I’d also like to emphasise that it really is a public service: Prof. Abraham is unlikely to gain anything personally (aside from gratitude) by taking on this task, must dedicate his own personal time to the project, and simultaneously risks being targeted by people (such as Monckton) who are both influential and as far as I can tell, immoral. He has my respect and admiration.
Duncan Mortimer
in support of John Abraham and St. Thomas University
Mark asserts that Abraham’s rebuttal is riddled with errors, and that he has mis-represented Monckton. This might well be true, Abraham does make a few mistakes that I’ve detected.(I wonder if Mark was clever enough to detect real errors, not those funny red fish that Monckton spread across the path). Were that claim legitimate we could simply say “One all draw”. However Mark does not balance his remarks by admitting to his hero’s own mistakes, like when he deliberately misrepresents the facts in relation to Al Gore’s condominium purchase in San Francisco. This is absurdly easy to check – Google Earth it, the St Regis is 1.2km from the water, and 7 m above mean sea level! There is no chance that it will get wet this century, even on the most ambitious global warming timetable. Indeed it will become a waterfront property worth many more millions! But by the time that happens, poor old Al will be 150 years old and unlikely to see the benefit of it. Monckton, Mark is a joke, thank God we have the wit to know it.
I appreciate John Abraham’s work in debunking Monckton’s claims. I’ve attempted similar things to a lesser extent in online discussions, and it takes a surprisingly big amount of effort: it’s easy to spew lies, much harder to go to the original sources and debunk them with proper references.
Hats off.
I wish to register my support of debate and to strongly protest this rabid attempt at censorship
Please add my name to Abraham supporters and Monckton refuters.
Go hard Hot topic, Go hard John Abraham. suck it up potty peer.
Mark’s post claims that John Abraham’s rebuttal is riddled with errors. Let’s see the list. There are plenty of denialist sites to ready to host such a list. Mark, post your claims and send us the link.
Put up or shut up.
Hurrah for John Abraham! We need more like him speaking up.
I offer unreserved support for John Abraham and St. Thomas University in the matter of complaints made to them by Christopher Monckton. Professor Abraham provided an important public service by showing in detail Monckton’s misrepresentation of the science of climate, and I applaud him for that effort, and St. Thomas University for making his presentation available to the world.
Andrew Davison CEng MIChemE
“Magnificently bonkers” polemicists may be fun to watch, but genuine, solid science is far more useful to the human race. And censoring serious scientific critiques of said bonkers polemics is a really bad idea.
You have my full support John.
It’s boring work rebutting loony science deniers. We all thank John Abraham and support him for doing it. It is extraordinary that anyone could even dream of censoring science, this is like a nightmare return to the superstitions of the middle ages.
I strongly support the work of John Abraham in revealing the misinformation spread by Christopher Monckton.
I took an opportunity to attend a presentation by Monckton earlier this year in Canberra, Australia. What a snake oil salesman. At one point, after he had just espoused lower food prices, the farmers who had paid for him to speak all gave him a standing ovation. Amazing!
J M Palin, PhD
University of Otago
Dr. Abraham provided a great service to science by his detailed and careful rebuttal to the misinformation which Lord Monckton continually disseminates. To allow Monckton to continue to bully those who have the courage to challenge his corruption of scientific process would be a travesty. Dr. Abraham has my unreserved support in his endeavors to improve public information regarding climate change.
By all means add me to the list. I’ve been off-net or I’d have signed up much earlier. In a few minutes, my own post on the ludicrousity will appear.
I wish to add my full support for Prof. Abraham.
I support Dr. Abraham in his fight against liars and the people who want to believe those lies.
I appreciate the open and honest communication on climate issues by John Abraham. I think this is in the highest standard of academic scholarship.
If one has an issue with any of the scientific analysis; they should post their scientific differences.
Attempts quiet thoughtful and reasoned science are juvenile and not helpful to serious discussion of important issues.
Another supporter of John Abraham.
“Lord” Monckton is a plausible fraud with considerable talent as a presenter of pseudoscience. He has no relevant scientific qualifications. He is a right wing journalist who appears to obtain his income substantially from US corporations with financial and political interests in the suppression of climate science. He has falsely asserted that he is a Nobel Laureate.
Dr Abraham’s painstaking and meticulous work in exposing Monckton’s deceitful presentations is in the best traditions of science.
And in the unlikely event that Dr Abrahams ever requires any legal assistance in this part of the world in connection with Monckton’s disingenuous threats of litigation, he will find that there are experienced litigators who relish the exposure of scientific fraudsters like Monckton and who are willing and able to provide pro bono services.
Think you have to be a touch British to get the phrase “potty peer” at a glance but this American did eventually figure it out, and I’m happy to be able to put in a word for the sanity expressed by John Abraham and this site.
We started a counterattack in support of John Abraham, an argumentum ad moncktonem:
http://friendsofginandtonic.org/
I support John and the University of St Thomas.
I would like to add my name in support of John Abrahams, both for the work he does and against the bullying actions of those who would rather see that work silenced.
Keep it up John!!! See you next semester!!!
I hope John Abaraham and the University of St. Thomas resist and defy the bullying tactics of Viscount Monckton, who apparently believes that free speech is something only conservatives have.
I wish to add my support for John Abraham.
I support John Abraham. These attacks by climate “skeptics” have become absolutely insane. Lord Monckton chiefly needs to apologize for misrepresenting honest researchers work.
Physical Oceanography grad student at University of Alaska Fairbanks
I thoroughly support Professor John Abraham, and I’ve told him so.
Monckton is a blight on humanity.
I offer my support to John Abraham.
Best,
Kris
I fully support the actions of Professor Abraham and the University of St Thomas in maintaining a factually based exploration of the talk given by Viscount Monckton, and in resisting unjustifiable calls for its removal.
As a former student of Dr. Abraham, I know his passion is to pursuit truth and progress mankind. This Monckton character has some loose screws
The actions of John Abraham are commendable and warrant the full support of St Thomas University.
I support Professor Abraham in his pursuit of truth and science.
My congratulations to the University of St. Thomas for supporting science and reason in the face or bitter, self-serving bullying from Mr. Monckton and his minions. I fully support Dr. Abrahams’ very reasoned critique of Monckton’s presentation.
The health and welfare of our grandchildren lies in the hands of people like Dr. Abraham who have the courage and are willing to take the time and effort to slay the dragons of misrepresentation and obfuscation around this issue.
Thank you, Dr. Abraham
Mr Monckton should, as the head of an institute which promotes “sound science”, be capable of openly refuting any of Mr Abraham’s claims. That he would rather bully his way into preferential censorship is very telling, and should not stand.
← Previous Comments
Next Comments →
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 22 trackbacks }