Climate Progress, Joe Romm, outed as political operative by Wikileaks

WIKILEAKS: ThinkProgress Trashes A Climate Expert’s Career To Appease A Hillary Donor

Posted By Michael Bastasch (Daily Caller)

ThinkProgress Editor in Chief Judd Legum sent an email to a billionaire donor bragging how the liberal blog’s environmental writer targeted a climate researcher who challenged a major Democratic talking point on global warming, according to leaked emails.

The blog’s environmental arm, ClimateProgress, (run by Dr. Joe Romm) took issue with pollster Nate Silver’s 538 website, hiring Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. to write about global warming issues. Pielke is no skeptic of man-made warming, but he challenged a Democratic talking point that global warming was making extreme weather more severe.

Romm YouTube Image

Dr. Joe Romm of Climate Progress believes we are going to fry.

ClimateProgress immediately embarked on a crusade to discredit him “[p]rior to Pielke writing anything” for 538 — based solely on the fact they didn’t like his research on extreme weather.

“Pielke basically has made a career of ‘accepting’ climate change but disputing that we can really do anything about it or that it has much of an impact,” Legum wrote in a July 2014 email to hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer thanking him for his “support.”

Steyer is a major supporter of environmentalists and Democratic politicians. Steyer is a donor and bundler for the Clinton campaign, raising more than $100,000 for her campaign since 2015. He spent $73 million during the 2014 midterm elections.

ClimateProgress is part of the Center for American Progress Action Fund (CAPAF), which was created by Clinton’s presidential campaign chair John Podesta. Podesta also created the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, which gave CAPAF at least $1 million in 2015.

Legum’s email to Steyer was release by WikiLeaks from Podesta’s hacked Gmail account. It’s one of several emails involving the ThinkProgress blog.

ClimateProgress put out two articles attacking Pielke the same day he published a post on 538 headlined “Disasters Cost More Than Ever — But Not Because of Climate Change.” Pielke’s point was that extreme weather only does more damage today because there’s more wealth to destroy when hitting shore.

When economic growth is taken into account, “the overall trend in disaster costs proportional to GDP since 1990 has stayed fairly level,” Pielke wrote.

“Within hours, ClimateProgress published a comprehensive debunk, with quotes from many prominent climate scientists,” Legum wrote, chronicling Pielke’s eventual being forced to leave 538.

“Pielke was so upset with our piece, he called the scientists we quoted and threatened to sue them. Silver was forced to apologize,” Legum wrote. “Embarrassed, Silver was forced to publish a rebuttal to Pielke piece by an actual climate scientist, which was also devastating.”

Silver asked climate scientist Kerry Emanuel to rebut Pielke’s article. Emanuel wrote that he’s “not comfortable with Pielke’s assertion that climate change has played no role in the observed increase in damages from natural hazards.”

Silver never let Pielke publish any piece on global warming on 538 again — a fact Legum bragged to Steyer about in his email.

“I think it’s fair say that, without Climate Progress, Pielke would still be writing on climate change for 538,” Legum wrote.

“He would be providing important cover for climate deniers backed by Silver’s very respected brand,” he wrote. “But because of our work, he is not. I don’t think there is another site on the internet having this kind of impact on the climate debate.”

“Thanks for your support of this work. Looking forward to doing even more in the coming months,” Legum wrote to Steyer.


UPDATE: They are even worse – Climate Progess/Think Progress “making up stuff” as Joe Romm is so fond of saying:

 

There’s now this update to the Daily Caller article:

Update: Pielke told The Daily Caller News Foundation claims he threatened to sue his detractors was “a lie.” Reports that Pielke threatened legal action against two climate scientists came from The Huffington Post. Pielke says that’s false.

In fact, it was Legum who contacted 538 claiming Pielke had made legal threats against two scientists, according to HuffPo.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/20/wikileaks-thinkprogress-trashes-a-climate-experts-career-to-appease-a-hillary-donor/#ixzz4NeKFmFTD

UPDATE2:
In another Podesta email, outed by Wikileaks, Joe Romm is referenced to Podesta as somebody who could vouch for another political climate operation

Hi John: I am the cofounder of Climate Hawks Vote, whose mission is to >> build political power for the grassroots climate movement. Brad Johnson is >> the ED of Climate Hawks Vote. You can check us out w/ Joe Romm.

Readers may recall that Brad Johnson (who left Climate Progress to start the “forecast the facts” operation against TV weather presenters and meteorologists) made some pretty slimy political hacks in the past, such as blaming tornadoes on how state representatives voted in the spirit of “they deserved death and destruction for not being onboard with consensus based climate views”:

The graph that Joe Romm and Brad Johnson don’t want you to see: tornado deaths per million over the last century

Source: NOAA’s US Severe Weather Blog, SPC, Norman Oklahoma

http://www.norman.noaa.gov/2009/03/us-annual-tornado-death-tolls-1875-present/

Related:

Facts about the “Forecast the Facts” campaign – they’re just another paid mouthpiece of the Center for American Progress

Advertisements

99 thoughts on “Climate Progress, Joe Romm, outed as political operative by Wikileaks

    • Meanwhile, Pielke Jr. has said he is changing his area of study and may never write another article on climate again. This is after years of this kind of stuff, not just this one incident.

      • This was the entire point of the attack, and this is the goal of all of the climate activists – shut down all speech which attempts to contradict their dogma in any way.

        Yes, Dr. Reddy, this IS fascism. This is what it looks like when a fascist element is orchestrating a takeover of society.

    • How very funny. I’ve just finished rebutting a Joe Romm story on another site. Here’s my comment
      I got curious as to how Chile was “delivering cheapest electricity ever anywhere by anyone” as the Joe Romm headline says– especially with unsubsidized solar. And guess what?

      “In Chile’s power auctions, developers offer to provide a certain amount of capacity at a specific price, without saying what type of power plant they’re planning to build. . . and distribution companies select the lowest-cost proposals available. ”
      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-17/chile-power-auction-rattles-market-for-incumbent-electric-firms

      Chile subsidizes solar and wind. And, by law, there is a penalty for power companies who fail to meet the quota of a certain percentage of renewable generation.
      http://www.energynet.co.uk/webfm_send/1191

      So no one has “delivered” electricity. They are bidding to provide it w/o saying how, and if they choose solar it’s subsidized. Joe Romm was consistently incorrect.

  1. Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. is a reasonable, fair minded climate scientist, if not a full skeptic.
    Nate Silver is a reasonable, fair-minded liberal with a passion for statistical analysis.

    Clearly, the Clinonistas can’t tolerate people who are reasonable and/or fair-minded. This is basically Stalinism.

    • It is inappropriate to use words like Stalinism and Fascism. Please don’t use such words when we are discussing science. If you really think what they are saying is inaccurate in scientific terms, you say so.

      Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

      • The use of political words to describe political movements is both appropriate and descriptive. Personally, I prefer Lysenkoism to the ones used since it is descriptive of scientifically failed policy driven by politics that killed millions, but a rock is a rock even if you call it a rose.

      • I respectfully disagree, The discussion is not about science, but the politicization of science. Terms such as Stalinism, Fascism and I would add, Lysenkoism, are wholly appropriate.

      • Excuse me, Dr. Reddy, but this is not a discussion of science, but a discussion of how those (Stalinists? Facsists?) who use immense wealth and power to attack scientists who dissent from “consensus” climate science.

      • Sorry, but “science” does not exempt scientists (and their political allies) from criticism from their behavior, or allow them to ban words used to criticize them.

      • With all due respect, you are wrong. A really good example of anti-science political nastiness is documented in the book Galileo’s Middle Finger by Alice Dreger.

        Even if you support their cause, if they see that you have put a foot even slightly wrong, the social justice warriors will go after you. They will try to get you fired. They will spam bad reviews of your books. They will make sure you never have another speaking engagement or media interview.

        If they could send offenders to a gulag or gas chamber, they would not hesitate. Call them fascists or stalinists, it doesn’t matter, the methods and motivations are the same.

      • I support your comment.

        Calling the behaviours and actions Stalinism and/or fascism is not accurate. The real problem is anti-intelligentsia.

        Intelligent people have the ability to determine what is or is not likely true. What we have now is a mania.

        CAGW is part of a weird, new world liberalism vision which is a fantasy. A fantasy cannot be defended by logic, hence the need for anti-intelligent ‘politically’ correct behaviors and activism.

        The current anti-intelligentsia process is so dysfunctional we do not even know what are the greatest problems on the near horizon. The developed and developing countries are heading full speed into the mother of all financial crises

      • Dr. Reddy We are not discussing science – but politically motivated dirty tricks. The UN agenda to tax the world for energy use has a long history – and the financial reward is almost incalculable.
        Since its origins, the IPCC has been open and explicit about seeking to generate a ‘scientific consensus’ around climate change and especially about the role of humans in climate change http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/18115/

      • “Fascism” (Merriam-Webster):
        : a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government
        : very harsh control or authority
        Apart from “a dictator”, I think that sums it up pretty well. Dr Reddy, this discussion iis about politics not science. The truly disgusting thing about the politics is that it is actively corrupting and misusing science. When it is all over, and rationality prevails again, I hope that science can recover. The damage being done to science is horrendous. (I also hope that this political regime does not last as long as, for example, the soviets or Mao. It is starting to look like the USA has at least 4 more years of it.)

      • “Please don’t use such words when we are discussing science.”

        Please indicate the bit where science appeared in the context.

      • “Fascism” is an economic system where the means of production remain in private hands while the fruits of production are controlled by the State.

        The US is heading towards a fascist system as the State directs more and more of the economy.

        Please don’t silence the use of words by people who actually understand what “fascism” means. Stick to your science if you must.

        Moa (PhD, Physics)

      • Is Dr Reddy a fraud? There seems to be little on the net about him or his work history. No record on WMO. Strange..

      • It’s not science. It’s politics. It’s been done several times before. E.g. 1: nutrition: the hypothesis that saturated (animal) fat caused heart disease. Those with an alternative view, blaming sugar, were marginalized, and demonized as pseudoscientists. E.g. 2: Dose response, which affects regulation of all substances. There’s been a systematic campaign by scientists to pretend no-safe dose – linear no-threshold (LNT) – has the status of scientific theory, and anyone contradicting it is a maverick or quack. We watch the UN cancer agency: IARC investigate over 1000 substances but declare only 1 non-carcinogenic <- politics not science.

        Most of the people promoting LNT, and substance bans, do not understand the underlying science of toxicology and cancer causation. Can not explain how no-safe dose make sense. The (pseudo-)science relies entirely on misuse of statistics to argue its case. Coincidence? – most of the activists promoting CAGW don't understand the underlying science either. The science relies on …

      • “Moa” above has the best take on fascism: private ownership/state control.

        State control is currently by means of extensive regulation. The private ownership part is more difficult to overcome here in the States, but a trial fix is underway in the health care industry, where the government’s single-payer goal would eventually result in all physicians effectively working for the government.

      • Dr. Reddy,

        As the other commenters have stated, you missed the mark here – those words are absolutely proper to use in the analysis of people and their behavior. This discussion is not about climate science.

    • Unfortunately when Hillary is elected (and she will the fix was in a year ago) this will get worse, much worse.

  2. There’s plenty of money in the game that pays the ‘Joe Romms’ of this world to rain death down onto sensible skeptics by a thousand hatchet jobs. What a miserable game.

    • Money is the keyword; the global warming scam is Mussolini’s definition of fascism; a UN-NGO alliance, specifically Martin Bormann’s Third Way. This was described by FDR’s Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles in his 1944 “A Time for Decision”, a year after half a million Nazis went underground, planning to return in around two generations to achieve a NSDP global takeover. Dr. Dennis Cuddy’s book on the Nazi/Illuminati/elite alliance, the Fourth Reich NWO plan, is online; “THE POWER ELITE AND THE SECRET NAZI PLAN”, http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis149.htm. The parallels with Lysenkoism are undeniable; Communism and fascism are creations of the same Wall Street bankers and industrialists. They planned a fascist US coup and the assassination of FDR in 1933; the Business Coup, and continued their agenda by funding Hitler and supplying materials for his war machine. Germany surrendered at the end of WWII, but the Nazis didn’t.
      George Hunt, whose first-person accounts and audio and video recordings document the UN’s political/financial program here; http://www.abeldanger.net/2011/07/edmund-de-rothschild-world-wilderness.html, http://www.abeldanger.net/2010/05/british-imperium-racism-exhale-co2-is.html. Physical geography professor emeritus Eric Kalstrom discusses the UN-Nazi Thule Society -Illuminati spirituality here; naturalclimatechange.us.
      There’s plenty of money in the game that pays the Joe Romms, but very little for the handful of scientists like Tim Ball who are broadminded and fearless enough to acknowledge both politics and science in opposition to the fascist agenda. Comments such as the following, posted here;
      “oebele bruinsma
      March 16, 2016 at 11:23 pm
      Being trained as a scientist myself, overhearing in 1972 in Nairobi at an UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) preparation conference two bankers declaring carbon dioxide a toxic substance, made me probably one of the earliest global warming sceptics. Am I proud, no; rather sad.”

      are inappropriate accounts of personal experience, and routinely ignored.

  3. Basically, in their book, anyone who’s not a mindless automaton programmed to repeat what they tell them about climate change is a denier. We knew that. I didn’t know who precisely was responsible for Roger Pielke Jr. giving up climate writing.

  4. Joe Romm’s hit list of scientists and journalists who deviate from the party line even includes Andy Revkin of the New York Times. Revkin is a dedicated environmentalist with a record of 25 years’ service to green causes. That didn’t stop Romm from starting one of his smear campaigns against Revkin for a perceived lack of enthusiasm for one of Romm’s more laughable doom-laden prophesies.

    Future historians of science will rank Romm with Lysenko in their poisonous effect on free scientific discourse.

    • I have said this before an I will no doubt say it again, we need annual Trofim Lysenko prizes that formally recognize outstanding work in the natural pseudo sciences.. The prize itself would most appropriately paid in a volume of the worthless currency of a socialist “utopia”. . This would indirectly draw attention to excellence in in the pseudo social sciences. A cubic meter of Venezuelan Bolivars would be a good start. In a personal display of my own humanitarianism I hereby commit to donate the first years prize money.. (limited to a maximum of 20 m^3 of Bolivars.)

  5. And to think, the activists actually claim that the lack of voices in the media supporting the skeptical position is proof that the skeptical position is wrong.

    • It is not correct. In media bad news carry more weightage over good news. For PR rating, this is essential.

      Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

      • Mr Reddy,

        Perhaps it is true that “In media bad news carry more weightage over good news”, but that in no way prohibits outright corruption, it seems to me . . anymore than people tending to spend more than they have in the bank, prevents outright bank robbery.

    • Lawless Lucy is nothing more than your normal “celebrity” hypocrite.After being convicted for burglary and criminal trespass her first thoughts were whether the conviction would impede her frequent air travel between NZ and US.

      If I had been the judge in the case I would have required :
      1..Full payment of the losses caused to the drilling company concerned.
      2..That Lawless Lucy ceases and desists from using any oil or oil products for a period of not less than one year.

      The combination of bankruptcy and starvation might have made it think that it was wrong.

  6. Remember the proportion of brave dissidents in the USSR was fairly small. Even though it is often expounded that the main duty of a scientist is to be sceptical, thereby exacting more and repeated effort to disprove or improve hypotheses, I believe real (thinking) sceptics who cause a lot of heartburn for bandwagoneers are a small percentage of society, a percent or so at most and these are not all doing science. Dissidents and sceptics are a vulnerable but indispensable societal resource that elites and tyrants have invested a lot in trying to exterminate. Pielke Jr. numbers among this besieged few.

  7. Donations? Did they change the meaning of bribery when I wasn’t looking?

    These kinds of smear campaigns are a more benign (for now) method of old skool communistic “unpersoning”. I guess Dr. Pielke should be happy they haven’t (yet) moved towards the Soviet-style method of sending opponents to mental hospitals or the Gulag. Or the even more extreme Khymer Rouge “re-educating”.

  8. No surprise, I mean Steyer is not donating tons of money for nothing, he has interests in windmill and solar panel companies that depend on the GW storyline

    • As far as I know, Steyer doesn’t have any windmills on his California ranch property.

      But check again using online search for aerial photos of Steyer’s ranch.

      • Well, there is a reason why the Kennedys campaigned against having those earth-saving automated Messiahs off Hyannisport. And that reason is galactic-sized hypocrisy.

      • That’s consistent. Al Gore had no solar panels on his house and left all the lights burning, at the time of release of his Nobel Prize-winning fantasy film “An Inconvenient Truth”.

  9. Steyer follows Maurice Strong out of the money-making business of fossil fuels. Strong did quite well as an Alberta oil entrepreneur, as did Steyer in coal. So as they both sit/sat atop a fortune (Strong is now deceased) made in the very industries they each eventually came to loudly and politically criticize, the rest of us can just eat cake and suck wind.

  10. Steyer type “free enterprizers” and political elite civil servants who become multi millionaires by milking the system, earn their money without risk – Steyer by collecting fees as a hedge fund guy, those in the political establishment by “pay to play” earnings. Even W. Buffett, from whom I take no credit away vis a vis his investment acumen, is in an industry where you don’t make or build anything and investment risk is mitigated by generous capital gains taxes (which I am all for btw).

    I’m always surprised that Trump doesn’t make the point that much of America’s industrial businesses have gone bankrupt or moved to China or Mexico because of choking domestic regs and incentives to leave the US. The elite freeloaders trash him because he declared bankruptcy several times and actually nearly went broke entirely. Bankruptcy isn’t a worry or threat for the elites because they haven’t invested in anything, made anything, built anything. They simply have guaranteed handout income. These schmucks should definitely pay more income tax and people in risk industries should get a better break re regulations and taxes (short of incentives to leave the country).

    • Well, that’s a bit of a problem for the warmunists then. If the dummies who vote Democrat don’t get it, and the dummies who vote Republican won’t get it…that leaves the Bubble People of the Super-Sophisticated Enclaves living on the East Coast and California to do all the thinkin’.

      And, according to some, all the votin’…

  11. It is interesting that Democrats portray themselves as more caring. But when dirty tactics are required, there are an army of backroom institutes that are ready to attack at a moments notice. They also got caught the other day paying people to cause disruptions at Trump events, even ones that lead to violence.

    This should actually be criminal activity should it not. This is not what society is supposed to be based on.

      • “Both ‘parties’ are facades for corporate payola.”

        You are describing the “Elites” of both parties. You are correct, the elites are on the coporate payroll. That’s what Trump is running against. He is not on the corporate payroll. Those on the corporate payroll are the ones who are going down to defeat: The Elites in Both political parties. God willing.

        My other point is the Left is much more corrupt and criminal and ruthless than the Right. Corrupt to the point of being unfit to govern, especially when you throw Hillary Clinton Inc into the mix.

        The difference between the Left and Right, when it comes to criminality, is like Night and Day. The Left pays thugs to bring violence to Trump rallies and make it look like its Trump’s fault. The Right does nothing of the kind.

    • “This should actually be criminal activity should it not. This is not what society is supposed to be based on.”

      This *is* criminal activity. The Left has no rules when it comes to obtaining and keeping political power. The law does not matter to them, only winning matters, and they don’t care how they do it.

      • Do you have a point ? The only difference between ‘Left’ and “Right’ ( misnomer ) is a matter of positioning, rather like ‘Good Cop, Bad Cop’ i.e. who is the more openly authoritarian and oppressive. Both ‘parties’ are facades for corporate payola.

  12. Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
    Sweet justice for Pielke Jr. who has been smeared, slimed and threatened by the activist Climate gang for not towing the party alarmist line. Leading to him partly removing himself from the mainstream debate – the progressive Left’s intimidation tactics working as planned. Threat neutralised. (their aim at least.)

    Pielke Jr. writes of such intimidation in 2010 after appearing at a Republican congressional committee:
    http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.co.id/2010/06/do-climate-blacklists-matter.html?m=1

    Pielke Jr. has been mocked as the “political scientist”, in a partisan sense, by the likes of Podesta’s activist site ‘Climate Progress’:

    “I have a PhD in political science, but no political science department would ever hire me….The main reason for this is that I do policy research with an eye to being relevant. *Policy research has never ranked highly in the axiology of political science.* ” :
    http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.co.id/2010/09/why-i-am-not-political-scientist.html?m=1

    In 2015, Pielke Jr. was one of 7 US academics being investigated by US Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) – ranking member of the House of Representatives Committee on Environment and Natural Resources – for the “crime” of presenting data that disagree with alarmists who make bogus claims about weather and weather-related losses:

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/25/roger-pielke-jr-being-investigated-by-representative-grijalva-for-presenting-inconvenient-data/

    Excellent piece by Pielke Jr on the damage to science for discrediting free-thinking academics:

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2015/apr/23/playing-the-ball-not-the-man

    —–

    The Wikileaks Podesta emails – the gift that keeps on giving…

  13. I had the misfortune of working with Joe Romm for one summer in the Physics lab of Dr. John G. King at MIT, when Joe was an incoming freshman. Everyone who worked in the lab considered him a major league clown. I guess at least he is true to form.

  14. If Nate Silver is such an expert statistician why didn’t he predict Donald Trump would win the Republican Party Primaries and the Nomination for President.

  15. If these climate activists really do have “consensus” and the “facts” on their side, why do they have to resort to lying, cheating, and underhanded efforts to silence those who disagree with them? It just doesn’t add up. Apparently, they don’t have as much confidence in the sound basis of their message as they try to portray.

    • Sure it adds up. 94% of statistics are made up on the spot clearly applies here. A ‘Push Poll’ is a device to get people to fall in line by representing public opinion as accepting one description as correct. Appeal to Authority – the Logical Fallacy – is a case of exploiting this deception.

  16. Is anyone surprised by any of this? Note that line about ‘within hours Climate Progress published a comprehensive debunk…’ That’s EXACTLY what they do EVERY time something – anything, falls against AGW theory. Hence SkS has a running total of ‘climate myths’ currently scoring 193-0 in their favour! They lie, simple as that.

  17. Prof Muller says the same thing in his Physics for Future Presidents / Physics 101 presentations, that is, that adjusted for inflation, there is no increase in weather related loss/damage.

  18. We are just a bunch of peons. Nothing we can say, no Red flags which we can fly, or maintenance of the truths of climate will make a difference. We are now witnessing constant revelations of corruption at the highest levels of our government and with those behind the scenes players who would rule us all. Then, nothing happens, as result. No one goes to jail, or misses a paycheck. They even flaunt their actions… take that, you peasants… there’s a place for all of you and you better know your place.
    What we are witnessing is nothing new. The elites and the puppet masters have apparently learned nothing from history.

    Listen carefully and you can almost hear the sound of blades being sharpened on the guillotines.

    • Look at the EPA. All the people and organizations they have fined and prosecuted for “violations” (many of which are somewhat dubious”, but they release a literal flood of toxic waste water into a major watershed, and the DOJ declines to prosecute. DOJ got the investigative report that showed exactly how and how badly the EPA screwed up and that it was ALL THEIR FAULT, and 24 hours later announces that no charges will be filed. I do not know if any actions were taken internally at the EPA, but it would not shock me if all of the responsible parties got the Lois Lerner treatment.

      Imagine if a private company had committed such a stupid action.

      • The government was in charge when the Gulf of Mexico was contaminated from below.
        The government was in charge when NYC subways flooded during a storm.
        The government was in charge when the forest fires burned our woodland.
        The government was in charge when the mines caved in.
        The government was in charge in Flint Michigan when they polluted the drinking water.
        The government was in charge when they created a lack of water in California.
        The government was in charge when young black boys were gunned down in Chicago this weekend.
        etc, etc, etc!
        Maybe the government shouldn’t be in charge of so much?

    • Indeed. But we, the peons, have three things going for us.

      1/. They, the elite, are stupid and complacent. They make big mistakes.
      2/. Collectively, robots haven’t taken over yet, so we, the peons, have power. And are exercising it.
      3/. There are some smart peons out there.

  19. “The elites and the puppet masters have apparently learned nothing from history.” The winners write His Story ( the ruler’s purported experiences and heroism fiction ) Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 book burning novel was based on a historical event in 1410 England.

  20. The decline in tornado death rate is probably at least in part a consequence of the demographic shift away from farms in tornado country and towards cities on the coast.

    • Ian, there has certainly been a rural depopulation via migration to the cities, However, the decline in tornado death rate is probably most attributable to advances in storm prediction, tracking and warning technology. The sprawling Oklahoma City metropolis serves as prime example. Some huge tornadoes, including the most violent storm ever recorded, have struck the city, but residents were given advance warning sufficient to save themselves. Tens of thousands of people in the storms’ path took shelter when given warnings from the Storm Prediction Center and National Severe Storms Lab at the National Weather Service in Norman, OK.

      • Alan, good point. And we can thank the storm research and warning system development over the years, at a cost of Millions of $$$. One can estimate that storm research and warnings have saved thousands of lives, all for just Millions of $$$, or just pennies a second.
        By contract, the Billions of $$$ – that’s Billions with a B – spent on “climate change” over those same years have not saved a single life, not of a human, or a cat, or even a gnat.
        Over my 50+ years of employment in something do with weather, I’ve been on some of those projects that turned doppler radar from experimental to operational, and radically improved storm warnings. I take great satisfaction in the life-saving achievements of that work. I’ve also been in the climate biz, examining assorted causes of climate change (in the original sense of the phrase). Climate is intellectually stimulating, a fascinating problem, and just fun working on by a warm computer on a snowy day. But that warmth is nothing like that which comes with saving lives.

  21. “John Podesta” is an evil bastard, and I mean “EVIL”, in it’s most wicked form !

    That thing is the Devil’s “offspring” !

    Not figuratively, but “literally !!!

    If someone “shaved” his head, underneath would be written, “666 – 01” !

    The “Beast” will have “associates” and that “freak” will demand a place in the hierarchy to rule !

    Podesta is amongst the most EVIL alive today on Planet Earth, but the good thing is, soon it has will arrive to a “pit” waiting for “IT” (I am “not” convinced that he is entirely “human”) with a “name” Written above it saying, “Here [ ROTS ] a beast of beasts, a disease of Mankind”, and it lasts for ever, and

  22. You mean there is a well funded conspiracy to undermine skeptics? From the very people who claim there is one against them?

    If the science is so clear why would you not let the data speak for them? Something to hide?

    And no big oil stepping up to help the skeptics when they need it?

    Maybe i have this all wrong??

Comments are closed.