(Jones) Now - scienceandpublicpolicy.org
whatsupwiththat.com ... THE leading
fighter of the Global Government Carbon
Fraud, Lord Monckton.  So people just tuned-in
I think we should go for the political lies;
How the elites are making money on this.
You know we already know,
from "hide the decline", their own
documents; it's a fraud; other studies
that are out there. I know your at the
tip of the spear with top researchers
publishing in top journals. You say you got
a new mega-findings that have just been
discovered coming out soon.
So ... er ... tell us about that Sir.
(Monckton) The most important
thing you need to know is that yes
you're right; that of course we can say
they're all making money out of it, and
so they are, but the only way to stop
them and stop them quickly is to prove
that they are wrong; and they thought
they could get away with making a
wafflley story that is very hard to prove
wrong, and they get away with it ...
However they made Several Large Errors, which
have taken us a lot... taken me 11 years to
find these errors.  I've been working
quietly away at it. We finally got there.
We know what they did wrong. We know 
how big this is. What it means is that ...
Yes you'll get a little bit of warmer
weather as a result of putting carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere but it's not
going to be much more than kind of ...
1 Celsius for every doubling of CO2
concentration. You're looking at
1 Celsius of warming over the next hundred
to 150 years it's not exactly anything
that really needs to be worried about,
and here's the difference Alex, We Can
Prove it. I'm not going to go into the
weeds of how we've proved it. That will
be for the scientists to pick through
once we publish; but the point is that
this is different from just saying well
it's probably not going to happen as
they say. We can Prove that it's not
going to happen as they say, because
their estimates are based on these four
huge errors in the model's calculations.
that we have now found; we've calculated
them. We've been to our National Science
Laboratories, on both sides of the Atlantic
to get confirmation of our understanding
of what we've found. That's not to say
they will endorse what we've found; 
they don't do that, but they will do
measurements for us, we've had them done
and what those measurements show, is that
we are right about this; and once this
paper is out there, then everyone who
goes around saying there's a 97%
consensus and Trump must toe the line with
the rest of the world community. All he
needs is this one paper, and all he has
to do is to give this; to anyone who
tried to say that to him; Juncker or whoever
and say "go away get your scientists read
this and come back and tell me if I am wrong"  ...
and of course they won't be able
to because this is a formal mathematical
and physical proof; and that's the
difference. Nearly every paper until now
on climate science has been speculations
because, em, well we think this might
happen and we think the other will
happen and some of the observations
point this way and some of the
observations point that way. What we have
done is to go right back to the theory;
to look at the theory that they're using
to multiply up how much warming we're
going to get from the very small effect
you get just from the CO2 itself, and 
we have found; that to put it really at its
simplest Alex, they screwed up and we
can prove it, and what that means is that
once this paper is published; 
and it can't be stopped.
Eventually it will be published, not long
away now I think. Once it's published
then that's the end of the Climate Scare.
You watch how quickly it collapses
after this comes out, because however
much they may want to go on making money
out of this; there will no longer be any
reason to have a UN Framework Convention
on Climate Change. That was based on
these mistakes. No longer any need for an
IPCC. No longer need for the Paris
Accord, or any of the other plethora of
treaties, by which just like the EU ...
a treaty here - a treaty there; until suddenly
all your freedoms are gone. They were doing
it on a World Scale with this climate thing.
All of that will now come to an end,
because we can prove that they were Wrong.
This is over Alex,  it's over and it's
"all over bar the shouting"  ... We've got
to publish the paper sure,
 but we've had it read by
the greatest expert in the World on the
particular kind of mathematics we
are looking at... (Jones) Let's be clear, you've
already published with other scientists,
some of the top, I'm not just saying this ...
Don't you have one - the most read paper in the World?
(Monckton) Well, on yes, in ...
The Chinese Science Bulletin, which is the
science bulletin of the Chinese Academy
of Sciences;    the world's largest
scientific academy. We published a paper
a couple of years ago, which was so
popular around the World that it would be ...
it had been read by 12 times as many
people as any other paper in the entire
history ... the 60-year ... archive of
that distinguished journal. I mean this
is the world's largest academy of
science. They don't suffer fools
gladly. We had quite a time getting it
through peer review, because we were
saying then, we were beginning to point
to some of the areas of the mathematics
that we're looking at, and then I wrote a
further paper which was published, in the
Energy and Environment Journal; again a
couple of years ago; which said look
there are problems with this mathematics
here; and what the problems are we can't
yet see what they've done wrong, can anyone ...
(Jones) Sure, I mean the truth is we don't if they know?
(Monckton) Someone came forward and they said ...
"You need to read this textbook" 
I read it, and the moment I saw it
I saw what they'd done wrong, and we'd done the math,
and well that's the end. (Jones) That's
coming out in the next few weeks,
but just getting back to the beginning,
that's very exciting. Just in closing
here ...  I want folks to know history is
happening right now, and they've spent
how many decades, and how many?
I know it's over a hundred million dollars.
Big central banks; government's pushing the
carbon tax; and you know you're pushing
this planetary regime; and to monitor all
the Nations, and make the Nations go
under it. So beyond the tax it's the
global control; it's the global Court;
it's the global enforcement; it's
... the climate crimes. All that's
happening. This is so big; Trump's doing
this - A and then B. Every time you're on
I get tweets and emails, and on the street
that will go ...  "next time Monckton's on
bring up this", and I know there's people
that think every ice crystal trail ...
you know is some type of weather
modification; but they have patents.
They admit there's Barium salts, Aluminum dioxide.
They admit there's massive weather mod on  ...
Bill Gates is involved. Dubai's involved.
China's involved. They've got antenna
arrays that are manipulating
the ions, and the nuclei.
You know. they guess; mimicking some of
the things that solar radiation does.
We know when there's a big solar flare we have
thunderstorms or whatever. I mean this has
all been documented. They're
artificially manipulating the
weather already. and we know there's a UN
climate manipulation weather weapon...
1979 treaty; introduced in 78 passage 79.
So we know this is going on...  it's very
secretive so then people exaggerate ...
They don't know what's really going on,
but from your deep research into climate;
I mean do you have any comments on ...
how that might be affecting? Thanks.
(Monckton) Yeah, the first thing is that we
are far smaller and far less powerful in
affecting the climate than they think,
and that's why they can't do much more
than a little bit of Silver iodide
dropped on the clouds, to make them rain;
when you have a drought in a local area.
You can't do anything worldwide to alter
the weather; however hard you try, and
this is really the result of our research.
You can just see that there is a ...
kind of inbuilt stability to the climate
system which means that short of letting
off every nuclear bomb around the world,
and go on doing that every day for the next 400 ...
(Jones) That's right. We wouldn't have this ancient
planet with an ancient atmosphere if it
wasn't in a very stable position ...
(Monckton) That's exactly right Alex I mean
your'e quite right. Here we are four-and-a-half
billion years on... OK there may be a few
people think it's only six thousand,
because they believe in the rather
barmy calculations of an Anglican
"Divine" in the 17th century.
(Jones) I was going to say The Bible doesn't say ...
The Bible doesn't say that. Some preacher did.
(Monckton) yeah that's right it was the
Bishop Ussher. He was a very worthy
amiable Divine, and he just amused
himself by calculating how many
generations they'd been since Abraham
in the Bible, and from that he worked out
that the world was created on the 15th
of April 4004 BC, and there are even
Bibles of the period; I've got one which
show every date thereafter from 4004 BC,
until the time of Christ. All written into
the margins, and it's all very silly,
but the point is this is a very old
planet. It's a very stable planet. To
destabilise it you need to do something
to the Sun. You need to have a big
asteroid hitting us. We'd need to go
through a large cloud of
intergalactic dust. There'd need to
be an enormous supervolcano eruption.
These are the things that can alter the
climate, but altering one part in two
thousand, of the composition of the
atmosphere over the next hundred and
fifty years, is not going to make any
difference at all, and as I say the magic
thing about our paper is that we can
prove it; and it's already beginning to
worry people because they begin to begun
to hear about it I've given a couple of
talks about it; but the latest thing we
found just in the last couple of weeks, so
the stakes are even bigger than we thought,
and therefore we are now just
concluding our research in the next
couple of days. Then it goes off to the
journal for peer review and it will have ...
(Jones) OK, we'll have you on then, almost no
time, I will just say this - (Monckton) Yeah ...
(Jones) You've got six years ago
the main group coordinating the
universities globally saying let's hide
the decline. I think it's pretty clear
they know this is a joke ... but ... er
(Monckton) I'm here to prove it.
That's the difference. Once they know
we can prove it. Once they know; we
know what they did wrong. Once they
know that anyone who in future tries
to say that we are going to have a
significant impact on the climate will
be a laughed at, because there is no
scientific basis for it...
(Jones) Here's my final two questions ...
(Monckton) The one thing these people don't like is 
to be laughed at and they're going to be, if they
try to position this line any longer ... 
(Jones) They don't like being questioned.
They say every scientist agrees and almost 
none of them actually do though.
(Monckton) And now we can prove that they're wrong.
(Jones) Sure. OK now let me, these two final ...
Skype's a little bit off here so ...
I hope you can hear me?  (Monckton: "Yeah") 
I know there's different numbers from ice cores
and mud cores other things that they've
done. The numbers hundreds of times the
CO2 in our history, and that didn't make
the planet overheat too much; in fact
a lot of scientists and climatologists,
I've read believe if CO2 tripled or
quadrupled it would make plants grow
faster, and make the oceans more healthy
and that they believed the planets so
old they were actually in a Carbon
starved position, and down the road could
off gas, and even end up like Mars; that
clearly lost its atmosphere.  I know you
talked to climatologists. You've talked to solar
... solar physicists you talked
to astro physicists, I mean I  ...
(Monckton) Let me give you figures on this.
It's very interesting I mean you're quite right.
Patrick Moore the founder of Greenpeace ...
who is of course no longer with Greenpeace
because he doesn't believe in global
warming he has done a very interesting
paper which I helped him write which
shows that over the last 2000 years
they've had 2 million years I should say
the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has
been steadily declining almost to the
point where plants will being starved a
bit. Now we're putting more CO2 into the
atmosphere everything grows like Billy-o in the
garden.  I don't know if youv'e ever had time to
plant a garden? If you do, everything
grows much faster now because of what's
called CO2 fertilization. CO2 is plant food.
The paradoxical thing about this is that
we know now from the satellites
that CO2 is greening the planet. You can
see it from outer space. Areas like ...
(Jones) So should we actually terraform or ...
what do they call it?  If you've already got an
atmosphere shouldn't we geoengineer with more of it ?
(Monckton) Of course we should and
that's what we're doing of course ...
because despite all the preaching and
the whinnying from these prophecies of
doom; everybody is burning more fossil fuels.
(Jones) It's almost like there's a God involved?
(Monckton) The climate is responding very
favorably because everything is growing
at a rate it's never grown in our
lifetime. This is a thoroughly good thing.
(Jones) Sure, what about the danger?
we're closing in thirty seconds ?
(Monckton) The total plant biomass of the Earth
has gone up by something like fifteen to
thirty percent in the last hundred years.
(Jones) What about the cycle ?
Aren't we due for a new ice age?
(Monckton) Well who can tell?  It's 5000
years overdue, so don't hold your breath
(Jones) But I mean we should actually worried about
cooling then ... I mean that's what evidence shows.
(Monckton) Cooling is the real killer.
Cooling is the real killer. If the planet
were to cool even by as little as one
Celsius degree large amounts of
agricultural area would disappear, and
that would impose real strain
on the populations of the World ...
(Jones) Thank you, Lord Monckton, thank you so much.
Summit... big day with President Trump.
Thanks so much for your work, bringing us
this point and the listeners. We're all in this
together ladies and gentlemen. We're
making history; we're changing things;
we're on the march, the Empire's on the run.
 
