Gosh, I try to keep a semblance of decorum here at WUWT. I get upset when name calling starts and moderators are trained to clamp down on this sort of thing. That being said, can you imagine the caterwauling that would ensue if I wrote something like this piece below?
Andrew Revkin and I disagree on climate, but we maintain what I deem to be a civil, professional tone when we correspond. That’s how it should be. Foul language isn’t needed to get points across.
Joe Romm at Climate progress just showed his true colors by not only allowing such foul behavior, but actually encouraging it in the form of a guest post that he edited. I don’t buy Romm’s excuse that he was trying to “show some of the real anger over Revkins column”.
In my view, profanity is the last refuge of the disingenuously desperate.
Warning – foul language follows
Here’s the guest piece from Climate Progress, the last few paragraphs follow:
So, here’s a challenge for Andy Revkin: Do not write another word about climate science until you have spent one whole month as a visitor in a climate research institute. Attend the seminars, talk to the PhD students, sit in on meetings, find out what actually goes on in these places. If you can’t be bothered to do that, then please shut the fuck up.
Update: On reflection, I think I was too generous to Revkin when I accused him of making shit up, so I deleted that bit. He’s really just parroting other people who make shit up.
Update #2: Oh, did I mention that I’m a computer scientist? I’ve been welcomed into various climate research labs, invited to sit in on meetings and observe their working practices, and to spend my time hanging out with all sorts of scientists from all sorts of disciplines. Because obviously they’re a bunch of tribalists who are trying to hide what they do. NOT.
– Steve Easterbrook
=================================================
Gosh.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“I’m not a climate scientists, but I’ve hung around with some.” I guess that makes them your peers now.
Why shukins y’all!!!
And he couldn’t just say “STFU”?
Son of a B**tch. Lol. 🙂
Son of a B*tch. Lol. 🙂 Oops – lol typo
Losers lose it like losers do.
Steve Easterbrook is a for sure neverwuzzer who cannot even make it to wannabe status.
No wonder he found such a good home at Romm’s place.
What a maroon.
Expletives aside (because they don’t deserve any attention):
“Because obviously they’re a bunch of tribalists who are trying to hide what they do. NOT.”
Apparently because they’re not hiding what they’re trying to do, it makes them “right”. NOT.
Gee, Steve Easterbrook has been hanging out with all sorts of scientists from all sorts of disciplines.
Now ain’t that somethin’….
A computer scientist is not, IMO, a scientist. I work with computers and I have come to believe that the name “computer science” is a wanna-be name. The field has aspects of math associated with it, but not science …
Steve Easterbrook
Instead of “hanging out with all sorts of scientists from all sorts of disciplines” perhaps you should learn and apply the scientific method?
I have worked with people like that. I try not to.
I know quite a few scientists at NCAR, NOAA, NIST, EPA, CIRES, NREL, FDA, USGS sites in the Denver/Boulder area and the use of profanity is not common. Now alcohol, that’s another matter. Get a few beers in some of these guys and they turn skeptic. Unfortunately, their livelyhood depends on AGW.
Okay, let’s drop some expletives:
WTF?!?!
Why trash Andy Revkin, who’s trying to give a forum to all sides in this debate? Unless the AGW’ers are freakily desperate and know they’re losing the greenie policy (i.e., the hearts and minds) war. This may be an indicator of a turning point in the AGW wars.
Every cannibal feast ends this way.
Wow!! And he is invited to the Met Office surface temperatures meeting. If the effort crashes and burns, it won’t be because of pot shots. It will be because of the quality of the participants.
If I’m not mistaken, it isn’t that Revkin jumped sides on them either. He simply failed to follow the narrative, EXACTLY. This was the outrage over minor dissent.
My debate instructor said when your opponent loses their cool, becomes irrational and foul mouthed, that usually means they know they’re losing the debate.
Could not resist….
Sounds like this boy might have a little Delusional disorder:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delusional_disorder
Indicators of a delusion from wiki with some comments (-) :
1) The patient expresses an idea or belief with unusual persistence or force.
-he does sound quite worked up.
2) That idea appears to exert an undue influence on his or her life, and the way of life is often altered to an inexplicable extent.
-he does spend a fair bit of time on the subject.
3) Despite his/her profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when the patient is questioned about it.
-you are from big oil.
4) The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief.
-I smiled when I read this one. no comment
5) There is a quality of centrality: no matter how unlikely it is that these strange things are happening to him, the patient accepts them relatively unquestioningly.
-I would accept them too with a big check every month.
6) An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility.
-yes… er YES
7) The belief is, at the least, unlikely, and out of keeping with the patient’s social, cultural and religious background.
-is it even worse when it is the religion? is that a cult?
8) The patient is emotionally over-invested in the idea and it overwhelms other elements of his or her psyche.
-16 hours a day
9) The delusion, if acted out, often leads to behaviors which are abnormal and/or out of character, although perhaps understandable in the light of the delusional beliefs.
-I’m sure he is a great guy outside the AGW bubble.
10) Individuals who know the patient will observe that his or her belief and behavior are uncharacteristic and alien.
-unless youre all drinkin the same coolaid, getting big checks every month.
Posted on August 30, 2010 by Anthony Watts
“In my view, profanity is the last refuge of the disingenuously desperate.”
In fact, profanity is the constant refuge of the profane.
So the mainstream / legacy media is even worse than the climate scientists.
Agreed….. By George I think we have finally found some common ground with Romm !
BTW this (presumably the same) Steve Easterbrook, in a more temperate mood, made this comment over at the Met surface temperature blog regarding White paper 6 Data provenance, version control, configuration management:
“Oh, and we need to beef up the discussion on provenance. E.g. can we capture not just what processing steps have been carried out on various higher level products, but also by whom, when and for what purpose? ”
http://surfacetemperatures.blogspot.com/2010/07/white-paper-6-data-provenance-version.html
His comments on that forum are not so bad (not least because they gave me an opening to comment re: controls via segregation of duties 🙂
I don’t know, maybe Romm doesn’t bring out the best in people….
The phrase ‘sore loser’ comes to mind, if that’s not too impolite.
Can we say it is a case of impotent rage?!
IMO, what an over-reaction.
Did Steve Easterbrook and I read the same article, or did he just forget to take his meds?
How many computer scientists does it take to change a light bulb? Nobody knows. They are still trying to work out the algorithm.