Potholer54 and The Search for Lord Monckton

March 24, 2012

As many of you know, YouTuber Peter Hadfield (Potholer54) has Lord Monckton in a bit of a pickle, having challenged His Munificent Majesty to a debate on the Monckton-friendly turf of the Wattsupwiththat site.

Monckton so far, is a no show –

“Climate Denial Crock of the Week” editor greenman3610 (Peter Sinclair) and Hadfield discuss the ongoing manhunt for the noble no-show – Potholer from his home outside Sydney, and Greenman from the upper midwest, USA.
See Potholer’s open letter, and video broadsides so far in the post below.

17 Responses to “Potholer54 and The Search for Lord Monckton”

  1. mrsircharles Says:

    Good to see two of the best climate change denial debunkers in one video clip 😉

  2. John Empsall Says:

    There is much about Mr. Monckton to dislike and criticize. But personal attacks (ie Marty Feldman) demean your otherwise excellent critic.

  3. Monckton is nothing more than a snakeoil saleman. Gives himself a title that is not his, makes claims that he is an expert because of a ficticious background, proclaiming he has acure for AIDS and now selling a product using dubious facts.

    • rwpikul Says:

      A correction: He really is a viscount.

      Now, you may want to refuse to address him using styles and titles and that would be your right. However, accusing him of falsely claiming them is about as accurate as one of his speeches.

  4. ThePowerofX Says:

    Fine detail is to Christopher Monckton what Kryptonite is to Superman. When you get into the nitty-gritty and examine his sources, things begin to fall apart. He is a brilliant public speaker. Possibly on the same level as Christopher Hitchens. The difference, of course, is that Hitchens had genuine knowledge and intellectual ability. The Greeks had a word for people such as Monckton. ‘Sophism’.

    • greenman3610 Says:

      Monckton’s other advantage is that he is speaking to a group of authoritarians, the great, great, great grandchildren of those who were against our split with the King in the first place. They want to be ruled, and are suckers for the royalty schtick.

  5. In reading about Monckton’s desire to be titled a ‘Lord’, I came away with the impression that he really does feel that ‘some of us’ have, by ‘divine succession’ I suppose, the right to define society for others to live in. He really does think of himself as a Lord, who should sit in the House of Lords, and define policy. He sprinkles his talks with his coat of arms, and signs his emails ‘M of B’ (Monckton of Brenchley). People who call themselves ‘classicists’ often hold to extremely rightwing views, like ‘gosh, don’t you just miss the Aristocracy, when everyone knew their place?’ At some point, his reluctance to continue his debate with Potholer54 may come down to the absurdity of having to hold a discussion with an Australian commoner named Peter Hadfield. Clearly, Moncktons ‘role in society’ is to talk AT people and thus dazzle with his classically-trained blue-blooded mind, not WITH people, who he might subsequently be forced to treat as equals. In the meantime, I wouldn’t mind seeing them together in a stage debate, because if anyone has a better English accent than ‘Lord’ Monckton, its Peter Hadfield (and its not even English)

    • Mahn England Says:

      For the record I think you might find that Peter Hadfield is a pom (read Englishman by birth) hence the English accent. He has settled in Oz and is most welcome here.

      Alas the inexecrable M of B is a frequent visitor to these shores and for me much less welcome. But I am decended from convict stock and have inherited a deep suspicion of titles.

    • ThePowerofX Says:

      A clue is in the name.

      Lord CHRISTopher Monckton.

  6. Does anyone have any info on who pays him to speak against man made climate change? Where does he get his money?


  7. kat1e1 Says:

    I know this thread is old but thought I’d mention this in regards to who pays Monckton to go around peddling his snake oil.

    I read in the Adelaide Advertiser about a year ago that an MP Ann Bressington was sponsoring his tour. Considering what I knew about Monckton’s inaccuracies due to having watched potholer’s videos I was kind of incensed that public monies possibly might have been wasted on his promotion.

    So I went to Bressington’s web site and posted the following:
    “Dear Ann, I read recently in the newspaper that you are providing financial backing for Christopher Monckton’s visit. I am aware of Mr Monckton’s claim to fame, as I am also familiar of his critic’s critiques. Those critiques are devasting to whatever claims to truth and/or authority Mr Monckton might present. They debunk the background authority he claims to have (not the recent lordship matter, but that he was ever an advisor to Maggie Thatcher, or that he has ever had any of his material peer-reviewed, and the fact that his formal education was in journalism, not science); the misquotes he uses to attempt to back his viewpoint (and his misquotes are quite extensive)…” (cont)

    • kat1e1 Says:

      (cont 1) “…); and the misinterpretation and/or misrepresentation (again, extensive) of the peer-reviewed work of others as an attempt to back his viewpoint. There are various sceptics who have shown Mr Monckton to have little to no credibility – but I’ll refer you to one particularly well-researched and seriously presented series of 5 videos available via Youtube – the link to the first video follows: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM If the link doesn’t work, you can also locate those videos by searching Youtube for the phrase “Monckton Bunkum” – the title of the series. As far as I can understand it Mr Monckton is not unlike those companies who advertise finding you a job for a fee, only to find out when you paid the fee that all they are selling is a software package to set you up in self-employment, not a real job. His presentation has little to do with presenting the truth, but is more a presentation to people who want to believe what they are being told and therefore who will not question the validity of what is being presented to them. I know I’ve rattled on a bit, but since you seem to have already committed yourself to providing financial support to his tour I cannot see whether you did so out of ignorance because you also want to believe what he peddles, or are supporting it from any other reason. ” (cont)

      • kat1e1 Says:

        (cont 2) “…The public policy on environment issues is one that needs to be taken seriously, and any snake oil peddlers should be discounted. My primary concern is this – the funds you have provided, are they governmental/tax-payer funds? Or are they coming out of your own pocket? Because if you have used public monies instead of your own I think you have a personal responsibility to the South Australian public to ensure that whatever information Mr Monckton peddles to our fellow South Australians purporting to be facts, are facts, and if they are not then I think you have a personal responsibility to the South Australian public to correct the record. I hold this view particularly strongly if public monies have gone to Mr Monckton’s visit, but I also hold it, if not as strongly, if you have only supported Mr Monckton of your own accord – because of the position you hold in South Australia. The very fact that your name has been linked as a financial supporter of his visit, being a name of import, holds you accountable for any misinformation which he might peddle.” (cont)

        • kat1e1 Says:

          (cont 3) “….I don’t expect you to take my word for the above, but I do hope you have both the integrity and accountability which persons of public office should have, to use this message as a spur to do an in depth check of Mr Monckton’s credibility before providing any further form of support to him (even if in name only). Sincerely, A Concerned (and very private) South Australian.”

          From their email headers I can see they received my posting to their site on Tuesday 26/7/2011 at 3:02pm.

          • kat1e1 Says:

            (cont 4) On Thursday 28/7/2011 at 9:27am I received the following response from bressingtonoffice@parliament.sa.gov.au

            “Dear Concerned South Australian,

            Thank you for your concerns over the credibility of Lord Monckton. I suggest that you go the “GetUp” website and view their plans to discredit this man 2 or 3 weeks before his arrival. This is a typical approach used in australia these days i.e. character assassination for anyone who holds a different view. I am comfortable with supporting this man and after seeing his presentation prior to sponsoring him I am also quite at ease with the information he presents. We live in a democracy and that includes free specch and freedom to seek out information, test it and come to our own conclusions.

            Yours sincerely
            Ann Bressington”

            That’s it. No acknowledgement of whether the monies used were public funds or her own, not acknowledgement of whether she’d checked his credibility, no acknowledgement of her duty of care to ensure whether the presentation she is funding is reputable and factual. This is the quality of our political system people.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: