Quote of the Week

qotw_cropped

I’m glad Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. said this, because it is long overdue.

“More than any individual — James Inhofe and Marc Morano included — Joe Romm is responsible for creating a poisonous, negative atmosphere in the climate debate.  Responsible voices should say so, this nonsense has gone on long enough.”

Read the complete essay and the reason for this pronouncement  here.

The Center for American Progress, the organization that funds Climate Progress, would do well to reconsider their spokesman on climate, or at the very least, rein him in a bit.

Advertisements

63 thoughts on “Quote of the Week

  1. It might be a good idea to rein him in as he is not a monarch and so cannot be reigned.
    [Fixed, thanx. ~dbs, mod.]

  2. Amazing that so many commenters on the blog think that concatenating a couple of sentences or allegedly misplacing quotation marks is a hanging offence, but correspondence apparently about suppressing opposing views and destroying data is just a misunderstanding of what the writers meant and no cause for concern.

  3. The Center for American Progress is a political organization. George Soros is a major funder of it. It is not a scientific organization. This is more evidence that global warming is a political issue not a scientific one.
    would do well to reconsider their spokesman on climate, or at the very least, reign him in a bit
    I can’t imagine they want to reign him in. I think he is what they want.

  4. Bullying, intimidation, isolation, exclusion, misinformation, scaring, manipulating, fraud, false acquisitions, threats, you name it, they’ve got it.
    All part of the new system: Garbage in Money Out.

  5. The alarmist/warmist side is 99% responsible for the poisonous atmosphere that hangs around the vital area like a dark cloud.
    Elements of the sceptic side have had to respond if not in kind then shall we say vigorously and being far outnumbered and attacked in the most reprehensible ways imaginable subject to vitriolic personal attacks for years. Life for the few brave voices of dissent has been hellish.
    The refusal of the alarmists to enter into reasonable and rational dialogue is solely down to the alarmist side as we all know too well, if some people have been forced to respond to the alarmist tactics as a defence mechanism then I feel many would understand that. The refusal to engage, the dirty tricks, the hate campaigns, the spiteful revenge of those who control the purse strings and the utterly blatant media bias will be seen in the future as the hallmark of the failed AGW theory.
    BTW we sceptics owe James Inhoffe a massive debt of gratitude, he was our Johnny on the spot in the vipers nest of Washington DC, he almost singlehandedly fought off the depredations of the AGW fanatics at the seat of political power, history will judge him kindly although men like him dont do what they do for petty baubles and the mobs shallow gratitude.

  6. I don’t really agree with throwing in Jim Inhofe’s name among those making this a toxic debate. As mentioned above, skeptics owe him a debt of gratitude for his work in the Senate, being a voice of reason.

  7. Have to agree with Tallbloke – Joe is doing a great job and should be encouraged at any opportunity.


  8. At 4:12 AM on 6 August, Cassandra King had written:
    BTW we sceptics owe James Inhoffe a massive debt of gratitude, he was our Johnny on the spot in the vipers nest of Washington DC, he almost singlehandedly fought off the depredations of the AGW fanatics at the seat of political power, history will judge him kindly although men like him dont do what they do for petty baubles and the mobs shallow gratitude.
    I am disinclined – in the extreme – to credit Sen. Inholfe (Court Party, Oklahoma) with anything remotely resembling moral or intellectual integrity. Just as I recall former Sen. Bob Dole (RINO, Kansas) serving blatantly the role of political whore for Archer Daniels Midland, Sen. Inholfe has acted with regard to the anthropogenic global warming fraud (and the Climategate revelations) in accord with his Oil Patch sources of funding.
    I would sooner praise a Mafia underboss for ordering the death of a freelance drug pusher in his territory than extol the supposed “virtues” of a lifelong Red faction wheelhorse who has been playing the “go along to get along” game for decades as a participant in the big Boot On Your Neck Party maskirovka by which we are fed the illusion of choice at the polls.

  9. “More than any individual — James Inhofe and Marc Morano included — Joe Romm is responsible for creating a poisonous, negative atmosphere in the climate debate. Responsible voices should say so, this nonsense has gone on long enough.”
    only if you read what he has to say – I choose to avoid him.

  10. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    “The Center for American Progress is a political organization. George Soros is a major funder of it. It is not a scientific organization. This is more evidence that global warming is a political issue not a scientific one. ”
    I have read that the WWF has a financial interest in the prospect of part of the rain forest being declared a carbon sink and being granted carbon credits. Further down the line Lord Oxburgh (of the notorious report fame) chairs a company that makes its money from wind turbines. Major car manufacturers are spending millions on the development of electric vehicles despite the fact that these may actually be less carbon efficient than petrol or diesel engines.
    There are still a number of concerned environemtalists who believe that much, if not all, the scepticism as regards anthropogenic global warming is funded by large oil companies. Is it not time for the sources of funding for the proponents of the hypothesis that all climate change is manmade to be investigated and the results published?
    There is now so much money to be made by being “green” that the credentials of climate lobbyists and their political supporters should be given at least the same exposure as that given to their opponents.


  11. At 5:12 AM on 6 August, Gnomish had written:
    Roger [Pielke Jr.]’s deft bit of calumny totally stains an otherwise good article.”
    In order for Dr. Pielke’s characterization of Dr. Romm (and in particular his description of the specific “attack [perpetrated by Dr. Romm as] …unhinged and bizarre“) to be calumny, Dr. Pielke’s opinion (including the rest of that concluding paragraph) must be untrue.
    Dr. Pielke having made an argument supporting his conclusion, is it really possible to describe his characterization of this rabid warmist weasel as aught but truthful?
    Detraction it might be, but calumny? Nah.

  12. R. de Haan @ 3:50 AM
    Garbage In Much Money Emitted or GIMME.
    Joe is a paid political propagandist, and his paymasters aren’t paying enough attention to see that he is counterproductive. Be fearful of when he’s silenced; the really effective disinformation begins then.
    Oh, have I told you yet that he banned me at his blog? Heh.
    ================

  13. Many people detect in Romm’s style indications that since he is so over the top in his promotion of a climate catastrophe the opposite is likely true.
    Let him keep at it.
    Romm, the RC gang, the whitewash reviews, the implosion of Mann, all help people see that CAGW is a social movement disconnected from reality.

  14. There is an entirely different character to name calling on blogs, and that done by major media and big name scientists. When Nature uses the term “denier” THIS is poisonous. When Mann, who gives hundreds of interviews per year, insists that deniers are well-funded by the oil industry, when Hansen calls for coal executives to be tried for crimes against humanity, when Jones and buddies get editors of journals fired, this is dangerous stuff.

  15. I could NOT agree more with Roger’s assessment. Romm is absolutely completely out of control, and he is NOT giving “those guys” a good name. At all. On another forum, just this week I said exactly this: “Romm is a shrill, [snip], slanderous [snip]. [OTT for this for forum ~mod]

  16. Craig is right and so is Roger jnr. Inhofe and Morano should open the door, step aside and let a more lucid and accurate person take the stand. They do as much damage as Romm. I also believe that leaving Romm to rant and rave is good for the skeptics.

  17. It is quite absurd for Pielke to lump Sen. Inhofe and Marc Morano together with Romm. Both have worked indefatigably to shine the light of truth on the AGW fraud while exposing the lies, distortions and true agenda –emissions trading and energy taxes — of the “climate change” movement.

  18. 3×2 says:
    August 6, 2010 at 4:58 am
    “Have to agree with Tallbloke – Joe is doing a great job and should be encouraged at any opportunity.”
    I did so once, telling him he should refrain from being so soft on commenters with opposing views. When i visit the circus, i want to see clowns. 😉

  19. Solomon Green says:
    August 6, 2010 at 5:14 am
    There is now so much money to be made by being “green” that the credentials of climate lobbyists and their political supporters should be given at least the same exposure as that given to their opponents.
    They are funded by the EU and by the back door the UN.
    Hoover Institution Stanford University
    The EU Connection in Climate Research
    by John Rosenthal
    Millions of euros come with an agenda

    http://www.hoover.org/publications/policy-review/article/43291

  20. “On another forum, just this week I said exactly this: “Romm is a shrill, [snip], slanderous [snip]. [OTT for this for forum ~mod]”
    Over The Top? Tell me I’m wrong…

  21. In what way have James Inhofe and Marc Morano created a poisonous, negative atmosphere in the climate debate??? When I read this comment (and Anthony Watts’ assertion that this accusation was long overdue), I had to double-check which website I was at. I’m shocked that he would attack them this way. I hope the explanation for this slam is that Watts was merely applauding Pielke’s criticism of Romm, not of Inhofe and Morano. (But if that is what he meant, then he should have said so.)
    Those who vociferously stand up for the truth against the deceptive and false scare tactics of the catastrophic AGW crowd cannot validly be attributed with responsibility for creating a toxic atmosphere in the debate. On the contrary, those on our side who keep silent or tone down their comments to the level of being insipid are the ones who help create the toxic debate. When the crocodile is attacking, blame the person who appeases the beast, not the person who stands up to it.

  22. PJB writes:
    “Free speech…..worth way more than what it costs.”
    OK, you jerked my chain, maybe inadvertently. Fortunately, our founding fathers taught us that you fight to the death for free speech. In addition, they gave us a history of robust free speech. No other people in the history of mankind has enjoyed robust free speech. Those who came closest to us, the Brits, enjoy nothing approaching robust free speech. The sceptical fight against BIG AGW is a fight for free speech. It is a fight against political correctness, the most potent enemy of free speech that humankind has encountered. Orwell wrote about people who had to use guns to enforce their speech codes. He would be astounded to learn that speech codes can be enforced without guns. As regards Romm and similar folk, anyone who claims that the science is settled thereby proves that he does not understand science.

  23. I agree with Pielke’s assessment of Romm but I disagree with him listing Inhofe’s name in that paragraph.
    Senator Inhofe has been one of the few politicians who have consistently fought the warmists, I’m grateful that we have him on our side.

  24. Romm’s attitude reflects his audience. There’s an anthropological problem that needs to be addressed, and it is…’Why, even in a democracy, are there people in the world who will go to any means and believe anything to bring about authoritarian rule?’


  25. At 7:51 AM on 6 August, Theo Goodwin had written:
    …our founding fathers [in America] taught us that you fight to the death for free speech. In addition, they gave us a history of robust free speech. No other people in the history of mankind has enjoyed robust free speech. Those who came closest to us, the Brits, enjoy nothing approaching robust free speech.
    Some of our Founders had adhered to this dedication to freedom of speech. Not the Federalists. Despite the current trend among traditionalist conservatives to worship John Adams and Alexander Hamilton, it must be remembered that the Federalist presidential administrations and Federalist-dominated U.S. Congresses saw such measures as the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798) imposed upon the nation for the explicit purpose of suppressingrobust free speech.”
    These violations of the First and Tenth Amendments of the U.S. federal Bill of Rights were responsible not only for Jefferson’s and Madison’s authoring of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions (which set the case for the nullification of federal violations of constitutional constraint, presently a hot-button issue as the several states now defy our Fraudulence-in-Chief and the unlawful actions of his National Socialist co-conspirators in the Congress) but also for the effective obliteration of the Federalists as a political party.
    The Federalists were killed, gutted, stuffed, and mounted in the national elections of 1800, and never again came to power in this nation, dissolving to resurface under the guise of the Whig Party, which then underwent re-branding as the present-day Republican Party.
    Understanding this, one should never wonder at H.L. Mencken’s fulminant opposition to the populists like William Jennings Bryan and the progressives such as Woodrow Wilson, who captured the Democratic Party and turned it against its heritage of free trade, sound money, constitutionally restricted government under the rule of law, and anti-imperialism.
    He correctly hated the Republicans, and only came to an even more jaundiced opinion of the Blue Party during the reign of the sanctimonious “St. Woodrow.”
    The Jeffersonian respect for free speech lost all genuine political advocacy in our federal government when the “solid gold” Bourbon Democrats were driven out by the populists/progressives in the period 1892-1904. The Republicans have never supported freedom of speech, much as they mouthe platitudes about the concept.

  26. So true, free speech is worth more than its cost, yet it has cost so much (such as “lives, fortune, and sacred honor….” or something like that) that one hates to see it so irresponsibly abused.
    So do not seek to muzzle Romm. Instead, continue to expose him for the McCarthyite that he is.

  27. What does OTT stand for?
    Your abbreviation search returned 21 meanings
    Category Filters > All
    definitions (21) Information
    Technology (1) Military &
    Government (6) Science &
    Medicine (4) Organizations,
    Schools, etc. (4) Business &
    Finance (3) Slang, Chat &
    Pop culture (4)
    sort results: alphabetical | rank ?
    Rank Abbr. Meaning
    ****** OTT OTT awa (Ontario, Canada)
    ****** OTT Office of Technology Transfer
    ****** OTT Over The Top
    **** OTT Office of Transportation Technologies (US DOE)
    **** OTT Off the Truck
    *** OTT Office of Technology Transition (ODUSDS&T)
    *** OTT Office of Training Technology (Chief of Naval Operations)
    *** OTT Our Toxic Times (newsletter of the Chemical Injury Information Network)
    *** OTT Office of Travel and Tourism
    ** OTT Optical Technology Training Ltd (UK)
    ** OTT Obelisk the Tormentor (Yu-Gi-Oh! card)
    ** OTT One-Time Tape
    ** OTT Operator Tactics Trainer
    ** OTT Ontario Traffic Tickets (OTT Legal Services, Inc.; Canada)
    ** OTT Operating Theatre Technician (UK)
    ** OTT Off Their Trolley
    * OTT Ocean Tactical Targeting
    * OTT Office of Technological Terminology (Technion, Israel)
    * OTT Output Threshold Test
    * OTT Origin Truck Terminal
    * OTT Operational Training TestObject Type Translator *****
    Outreach and Technology Transfer ****
    OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER ****
    Oracle Type Translator ****
    Overseas Teacher Training ***
    On The job Training ***
    Order of the Trapezoid ***
    Overseas Trained Teachers ***
    Of Training Technology ***
    On Target Technologies ***
    Olsen Thielen Technologies ***
    Over the Top That ***
    Omicron Tau Theta ***
    Of the Technology Transfer ***
    Oil Tanker Terminal ***
    Old Testament Theology ***
    Orientation to Teaching ***
    Over the Top Too ***
    Office of Thrift ***
    Offices of Technology Transfer ***
    Old Tongham Tasty ***
    Over the Top Then **
    Oesophageal transit time **
    Optacon Tactile Tester **
    Optional Thinking Test **
    oral transit time **
    oral triple therapy **
    overall treatment times **
    oxalate tolerance test **
    onset-to-treatment time **
    Offer to Transfer **
    One Time Transfer **
    Open Team Train **
    Ole Thybo Thomsen **
    Olympic Tournai Templeuve **
    Outward Telegraphic Transfer **
    Open Tubular Trap **
    Oral Transit Times **
    Out There Technologies **
    Overall Treatment Time **
    Okuma Techno Thailand **
    Open Track Times **
    Oxygen Titration Test **
    Other Than Teachers **
    Online Training Technologies **
    Opportunities Thru Transit **
    One of the Transfer **
    Ontario Traceability Taskforce **
    Office of Treasury Technology *
    Oklahoma Texas Telecomm *
    Order of the Triskele Trimaris *
    Other Than Tuition *
    Online Teaching Tools *
    Orascom Training Technology *
    Order of Tamar Tigers *
    Off the Track Thoroughbreds *
    Office of Technical Transfer *
    Optional Team Targeting *
    Oregon Trail Travelers *
    Oxygen Tolerance Test *
    Objects and Tangible Things *
    Objects or Tangible Things *
    Observational yield Trial Test *
    Ocean Tidal Terms *
    Original Tremont Tearoom *
    Osteolaemus Tetraspis Tetraspis *
    Owning The Titanic

  28. k winterkorn,
    I would hesitate to compare Romm with Sen. McCarthy, who was vindicated by the Venona papers as telling the truth about the widespread Soviet infiltration of American society in the 1950’s.
    McCarthy was caught in one lie, and was hounded out by a suspect press — which gave a pass to other Senators who casually tell lies, just like they do today.
    A much more accurate comparison is Romm and Goebbels.

  29. “Yes – well said Dr. Pielke. Romm clearly has “issues”.”
    Issues? Sounds to me like he has a whole subscription. 🙂

  30. This is one of the most blatant areas of MSM anti-skeptic double-standards.
    Some “random dude on the internet” blog commenter makes an overly harsh remark on a comment thread at a skeptic site and the big boys try to tar the entire skeptic community with it. The actual blog owner starts chewing the carpet at a major pro-AGW site and nothing but silence from the big boys.

  31. Rich Matarese says:

    I would sooner praise a Mafia underboss for ordering the death of a freelance drug pusher in his territory than extol the supposed “virtues” of a lifelong Red faction wheelhorse who has been playing the “go along to get along” game for decades as a participant in the big Boot On Your Neck Party maskirovka by which we are fed the illusion of choice at the polls.

    Rich, this looks like language of escalation. He did an invaluable list of climate skeptics of high scientific calibre, which I was glad to refer to in my introductory piece; it goes a good way to counter the latest PNAS blacklist. His strongest word there seems to be “debunk”. Politicians may be a grubby lot but I’m glad to have two on our side.

  32. I can see no reason for the Center for American Progress to rein in Romm . He’s prefect for them .

  33. I don’t see the point of all the fuss over Joe Romm. All he has done is made public what a lot of the CAGW believers already feel. Last winter, I spent nearly a month with a group of CAGW believers on a field project taking atmospheric measurements. One of them brought up global warming at literally EVERY meal (I ate with these guys about 2 meals/day on avg) and loathed any dissent from it (first time I heard “deniers” said vocally in a sentence like an everyday word). Over and over he bashed republicans, Fox News, capitalism, church, etc (fill in the blank on whatever isn’t socialist). Oh, and he drove an SUV. 🙂 He made a huge deal over how the skeptics based their ideas on things that weren’t scientific, to then go on and praise a warmist thing that had no scientific backing in literally the next sentence.
    The rest of the warmists at this field study were similar, just not quite as bad. Thus, their feelings go right in with Joe Romm.
    -Scott

  34. Free speech is OK but without rebuttal it corrodes.
    Cluckers together became racists. If 20 guys told each Clucker they were a putz, maybe less blacks would be dead? Ditto apartheid…….
    All our papers said how we should bomb Iraq: if more had said why? We, the people, said so but were disregarded.
    Put Romm up with the most moderate, ruthless arguers of a moderate skeptics case with global exposure. Do it 10 times, 100 times. See what people say.
    The Wall disappeared after folks said ‘basta!!’
    Blogs here are back-rubs.
    The fight must be at MSG.

  35. I for one am glad Inhofe is fighting this CAGW hoax. And it’s even better that he’s on the side of abundant energy.
    If the warmist agenda gets its way, the energy plug will be pulled on America. 10’s of millions will be locale-stranded and face mass starvation as the food supply and transport net atrophies.
    Nobody sends their disaster-aid packages to the USA.

  36. Joe Romm who?
    He doesn’t seem like a real person, just a theatrically projected stage image.
    John

  37. Well as a former marine let me say any body in this country has free speech and I WILL DEFEND TO MY DEATH thier right to say what they wish [short of fire in a crowd]!!!!!! Joe romm can say what he wants and personallyhas done more for the sceptics than most people reliaze. Morano has a good blog himself but i believe he should not put peoples e-mails up for hate mail or whatever gets sent ,Inafoe has been our gaurd in congress thankfully despite the fact he is a career politiction, hate them,. I always wanted to do this HAPPY B-DAY to me.

  38. Rich Matarese says:
    August 6, 2010 at 5:28 am

    At 5:12 AM on 6 August, Gnomish had written:
    “Roger [Pielke Jr.]’s deft bit of calumny totally stains an otherwise good article.”
    In order for Dr. Pielke’s characterization of Dr. Romm (and in particular his description of the specific “attack [perpetrated by Dr. Romm as] …unhinged and bizarre“) to be calumny, Dr. Pielke’s opinion (including the rest of that concluding paragraph) must be untrue.
    —————————————-
    Wait- had you noted that my comment was in support of C3, the misapprehension wouldn’t have occurred.
    I don’t know if anything said about Romm could be called calumny, but I wasn’t suggesting that.
    The article was about Romm except Roger has now acquired a self image that requires the exhibition of extraneous snark with any name he can drop. This is what has germinated in Joe to full bloom. I see Roger has germinated the same seed.
    It’s all about Roger for Roger, for ‘blogs’ are nothing if not vanity, are they?
    Very few have kept the high tone and most are doomed to never even get 15 minutes of opprobrium.
    This one WUWT, is a phenomenal exception. The reason is self evident.

  39. Did I miss some big fuss?
    Just took a part time job. We are buying free trade yarns and knitting green booties and stocking caps for green unicorns. It will be getting cold this winter. Millions of animals have been frozen in Bolivia and our winter not looking good.
    Does Joe Romm have his internet filter set to block south american Frost stories?

  40. John Whitman says:
    August 6, 2010 at 12:30 pm
    Joe Romm who?
    He doesn’t seem like a real person, just a theatrically projected stage image.
    John

    It is real It is sincere. he was on a talk show with mark Morano once and it was non stop insults, name calling and interuption.

  41. Al Gore’s Holy Hologram says:
    August 6, 2010 at 8:39 am . . .
    That’s simple as I have first hand experience here in Africa of this phenomenon.
    They hope to be allowed onto the bandwagon and thereby benefit.

  42. Anthony,
    Joe Romm isn’t qualified to carry your briefcase. He is the Andy Dick of climate politics and will be remembered along with Rob Pilatus, Dana Michelle Strain and Herve Villechaize.
    MrC

  43. Rich Matarese asserts that there is a “current trend among traditionalist conservatives to worship [Federalists such as] John Adams and Alexander Hamilton … .”
    Oh really? I’m sure that my limited experience among traditionalist conservatives makes any personal conclusions I might draw purely anecdotal, but I find that assertion by Matarese to be completely incongruous with anything I’ve seen. While there was much good that Adams and Hamilton did, ALL conservatives that I have known and read see in them the philosophical seeds that have germinated into the current liberal trends of centralized, big government — things totally odious to conservatives.
    The accusation that those Federalists repressed free speech does not attach at all to conservatives. On the contrary, what I have seen is that conservatives are increasingly anti-Federalist, and would with today’s hindsight have not ratified the Constitution until the lacunas in it (through which liberals have rammed their agendas) should be filled. This rejection of centralized government among conservatives is hastened and heightened by their own experiences of constantly being censored in academia and the media and government.

Comments are closed.