Lord Monckton debated Tim Lambert on the last day of his Australian speaking tour. Andrew Bolts’ comment:
Computer scientist Tim Lambert may be vituperative, deceptive, a cherrypicker, an ideologue, a misrepresenter and a Manichean conspiracist only too keen to smear a sceptic as a crook who lies for Exxon’s dollars. Oddly enough, he seems to have restrained his worst and most suspect traits to offer Lord Monckton a genuine debate at last.
True, Lambert is hardly the best authority on Lambert, but his summary of the debate at least indicates he landed a few blows, which sceptics who were there have conceded in comments on various threads is indeed the case, even if they scoff at Lambert’s claim that he “wiped the floor” with Monckton.
Anyway, this is how debate should be, and just to read even Lambert’s admittedly partisan account is to see how much faster we are likely to arrive at truths, or at least save ourselves from error, if we promote debate and insist it be held in good faith. If nothing else, it encourages a sceptic to publicise the point of view of a warmist.
Don’t ask me to adjudicate on the Lambert-Monckton stoush. Many of these issues are over my head, and I was not there in any case. All I know is that there was a debate, and that we have until now had terrifyingly few of them.
Read Andrew Bolt here…