Paraphrasing Forrest Gump, “Sometimes, I guess there’s just not enough adjectives to describe Peter Gleick“.
On Sunday, shortly after I heard about and announced the death of John Coleman, Dr. Roy Spencer and I had this short exchange on Facebook:
The first name that went through my head as I wrote that was Peter Gleick. It’s just too bad I didn’t write that prescient thought down.
Why Gleick? Well if you think of anyone who has been the most hateful, misanthropic, climate alarmist ever, one who believes so much in his own purity of thought that he lowered himself to commit a crime in the name of “the cause”, the only person that fits is Gleick. Not even the irascible Michael Mann comes close to that.
For those of you that follow his Twitter feed (I do, in the vein of “know thine enemy”) you can reach only one conclusion: he’s been taken over by the Dark Side, he lets the hate flow through him every day. Yesterday’s example:
This is right up there with what Climate Research Unit director Dr. Phil Jones had to say about the death of climate skeptic John Daly at the time of John’s death in 2004 Jones wrote (as revealed in the Climategate Emails):
“in an odd way this is cheering news.”
This disgusting, inhuman comment is not unique in the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) climate science community because William Connolley (Stoat) commented on the passing of Dr. Bob Carter, that
“Science advances one funeral at a time.”
Gleick couldn’t even come up with an original thought, in fact, neither could Connolley, as the quote is attributed to Max Planck That’s quite an accomplishment for a man who lists himself as a MacArthur Fellow. I guess he’s never heard of “Never speak ill of the dead.”
For a moment, perhaps realizing what a cad he made himself look like, it seemed like Gleick might be backpedaling:
But then that thought vanished a short while later:
Sigh.
The hate this man has embraced knows no bounds. I pity his soul.
Dr. Peter Gleick has been a noted environmentalist, a writer of several books and papers, and climate campaigner who had chaired an American Geophysical Union task force on “scientific ethics and integrity” until it was revealed, right here on WUWT as the person who had embraced the crime of identity theft to trick the Heartland Institute into providing him documents in order to create a completely fake narrative in his zeal for supporting “the cause”.
You can read all about Gleick’s crime on this website: fakegate.org
Gleick, unfortunately, wasn’t prosecuted for that crime, likely because the federal attorney in Chicago was part of the Obama administration. So he avoided that.
But now, he’s been removed to “emeritus” status by the institution he founded, The Pacific Institute, who removed him as president after his conduct was found out.
Clearly, there’s no scruples there nor is there any integrity, and Gleick keeps proving day after day on his Twitter feed, what his hate has reduced him to.
I’ll never forget the one and only time our paths crossed, at an AGU meeting in December of 2014 at the Moscone West 3rd floor work table. He stared right at me, and his contempt was palpable.
It was so palpable, that right then and there, this image flowed through my mind:
Like I said, there’s just not enough adjectives to describe Peter Gleick, a man who hates others, even in death, because they have a different opinion on climate than he does.
On a more positive note. I knew John Coleman for years, he had an infectiously positive personality, and I know right now, wherever he is, he’s laughing at the pathetic attempt by Gleick to mock him in death.
John would have chuckled, smiled, and said something like this. “Some people, you just can’t reach“.
He really just didn’t give a damn what people like Gleick thought about him. Coleman’s second to last comment on WUWT said this:
I am old
I am white
I am a denier
Guess they are correct. I will die. So will the others. Then things will be settled.
Got it.
How prescient of John.
Finally, I have something to say about the person who authored the article that Gleick quoted, one Emily Atkin, who wrote:
Coleman was a television meteorologist, not a climatologist; he didn’t even hold a degree in meteorology. But conservative publications began to cite him as if he were an authority on climate science.
James Delingpole at Brietbart has a fantastic riposte:
What? You mean a bit like the way liberals worship the climate science authority of Bill Nye, the ‘degree in Mechanical Engineering’ guy?
UPDATE: not one to miss rolling in the mud, Michael Mann retweets this with a comment, I guess neither of them realize that Atkin self-describes as “infobabe” or having “kitty claws”, as seen above. Sheesh.
But, let’s be fair.
Atkin doesn’t have a degree in meteorology or climatology, neither does Gleick. Yet their overblown egos allow them to think they are far more capable of speaking about it and judging merits, than the man who spent decades actually doing the work, so much in fact that he was recognized with one of the highest honors by the American Meteorological Society.
In 1983, Coleman won the American Meteorological Society award for Outstanding Service by a Broadcast Meteorologist. The organization credited Coleman for “his pioneering efforts in establishing a national cable weather channel,” according to the AMS website:
Like I said, there’s just not enough effective adjectives for people like Gleick and Atkins.
We’ll always remember John Coleman as a unfailingly positive man, who touched millions of people, and who reached out with energy and intelligence to speak his mind without worrying what others thought of him. His legacy is of truth and honor, and I was honored to call him a friend.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I would have appreciated a much more moderated post.
Still time to do so.
In particular if someone has appropriated another persons identity it would be best to take such remarks and all replies to such off.
Particularly if it is an innocent third party.
Thanks.
Sorry to hear about the passing of your esteemed friend, John Coleman. We need all the skeptical voices we have. Hopefully he has made a big difference to our views on the Climate and if he is being attacked it shows he was helping win.
No one on this forum will ‘publically’ gloat when Gleick kicks it.
You need to be from the left to have that special brand of hate.
What I do on his grave won’t pass for flowers. He is a monumental scumbag. Enemy of the human race. Originator of the “debate is over” lie made famous by Al Gore.
Made a career out of selling the idea that you can open the borders to millions of aliens and that the strain on barely adequate water sources is evidence of perpetual drought rather than perpetual Democrat oligarchy.
John Coleman left a legacy.
Peter Gleick will leave nothing – not even an absence.
Peter Gleick will leave …… an abscess that need lancing.
Peter Gleick;
It has been my experience in life that those who express hatred to those recently passed, had reason to fear them in life. So what, Peter, did you have to fear from John Coleman? Did he threaten you physically? No? Did he try and get you fired from your job? No.
He held an opinion different from yours, publicly stated it, and apparently, that is what you feared. A man with ethics need not apologize for his misdeeds for, having ethics, he would not have committed the misdeeds in the first place. Similarly, a man with facts to support his beliefs need not fear his critics because, well, he has the facts to rely on.
I can’t quite escape the feeling Peter Gleick, that based on your behaviour, past and present, you have neither ethics nor facts to rely on, and your hatred is borne of an abiding fear of being found out.
Well written David M.
Thank you.
RE Peter Gleick and his ilk:
This is not the conduct of rational, decent human beings – it is the conduct of sociopaths and psychopaths.
Read the reference below to understand these people, who reportedly comprise about 4% of the population.
Regards, Allan
Excerpt from”
“The Sociopath Next Door”, by Martha Stout, Ph.D. (2006)
Many mental health professionals refer to the condition of little or no conscience as “antisocial personality disorder,” a noncorrectable disfigurement of character that is now thought to be present in about 4 percent of the population – that is to say, one in twenty-five people.
…
According to the current bible of psychiatric labels, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV of the American Psychiatric Association, the clinical diagnosis of “antisocial personality disorder” should be considered when an individual possesses at least three of the following seven characteristics:
(1) failure to conform to social norms;
(2) deceitfulness, manipulativeness;
(3) impulsivity, failure to plan ahead;
(4) irritability; aggressiveness;
( 5) reckless disregard for the safety of self or others;
( 6) consistent irresponsibility;
(7) lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person.
The presence in an individual of any three of these “symptoms,” taken together, is enough to make many psychiatrists suspect the disorder.
“The Sociopath Next Door”, by Martha Stout, Ph.D. (2006)
I call bullshit.
(1) failure to conform to social norms;
He who conform to all social norm, I don’t call human. I call him sheep, and hypocrite (as there are contradicting social norms, you just cannot conform to all).
(2) deceitfulness, manipulativeness;
You actually need mind reading power to say for sure if someone check the box, and you can in any case pretend anyone does. Wasn’t Christ himself manipulative, when he succeeded in saving the life of the sinful woman?
(3) impulsivity, failure to plan ahead;
(4) irritability; aggressiveness;
( 6) consistent irresponsibility;
These three ARE in just every human. We need to make effort, to plan, to check our irritability, and to accept responsibility.
paqyfelyc:
Argue with the shrinks – it is their Professional Manual.
Actually, it sounds like you have done a lot of arguing with shrinks in your lifetime.
When are they going to let you out?
I hope he dies soon. That will be a good day, a very good day. His friends and family can then enjoy our memories of him. Scum.
That attitude is no better than Gleick’s. It gains nothing to embrace it.
Do not become your enemy.
Hate and lies never lead to victory. The truth wins out in the end! Patience!
The Anger is the Disease.
Slimy weasel is worthy of nothing but contempt. My first parody song featured Gleick
Gleick will be shown in his life time to be utterly wrong. Coleman may have never known how right he was, but perhaps he didn’t need to.
The environmentalist’s “mythology”
The great classical scholar Jane Harrison summed up the logic of mythology like this: “First comes the ritual dance mask, then the monster to explain the mask, then the hero to kill the monster” – meaning that human activity precedes the story which is supposed to justify and explain it.
In this case, the ritual dance is the explosion in data collection made possible by modern technology; the masks are the various graphs signalling temperature rises, thinning ice, etc; the monster is global warming; and the hero – identified as such by Monbiot, Gleick, Klein, etc – is the climate scientist, who must transgress and be sacrificed to expiate our sins.
You could not make it up. You do not need to. It is all in standard anthropology textbooks. In this case, the dominant theme in climate hysteria is mediocrity. Mediocre politicians, mediocre journalists, mediocre academics, mediocre scientists …
The mediocre journalists, politicians, and academics on the global warming bandwagon belong to the non-reading, university-educated classes. They get their information from places such as the Guardian, the BBC and the Independent because that is where they also write and have their pronouncements published. You could say that ‘global warming’ and ‘climate change’ is an international craze started by a tiny élite group pretending to be a mass movement.
If your looking for intellectual integrity and an honest intellectual conscience from Gleick, then you are looking in the wrong place. This lack of substance is a kind of endemic disease. It is historical and, therefore, must be endured. Gleick must be conscious of his mediocrity but let us not personalize, or think to much about him. Mediocrity is so painful and dangerous, especially when you are desperate, and one must be careful with it. He is a bully, and a nasty one at that, but this can never be our concern.
Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others. (Some of documents he released contained information about Heartland employees that had no bearing on climate science.) That is Gleick’s personal tragedy and shame, and I am sure it is devastating for his colleagues, friends and family.
Nothing new under the sun, alas…
http://www.history.com/news/how-medieval-churches-used-witch-hunts-to-gain-more-followers
Great point!
In an Economic Journal article, economists Peter Leeson and Jacob Russ demonstrated that two churches advertised their finesse at persecuting witches as proof that they were the ‘best’ church to join if you wanted protection from Satan. Their ‘selling point’ was that witches were doing the bidding of Satan, so getting rid of witches was the best way to protect yourself from him.
There is a 68-page pdf describing the process in detail:
http://www.peterleeson.com/Witch_Trials.pdf
Very good, thank you. I hope you’re right that we must just endure but as Prof. Peterson has pointed out the catastrophies of the 20th century don’t give much support to that hope.
Remember Dr Rajendra Pachauri head of IPCC with his degree in railway engineering and his ongoing trial in India for multiple sexcrime.
“Atkin doesn’t have a degree in meteorology or climatology, neither does Gleick.”
You could be excruciatingly magnanimous and say that’s one saving grace for Gleick. The lack of a degree in climatology I mean.
Gleick unmasked – death wisher and tormentor of the dead
Inadvertently, French Google translate has recently supplied me with the best characterization of the Gleick-reflex:
People like Gleick and Mann (and Jones – and Nye) corrupt climatology with the world of character defects..
Bill McKibben, also venerated as a climate expert, calls himself an “environmentalist”. Studying humanities at Harvard, he became enraged by the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, and vowed to dedicate his life to saving the planet. So what was his next move? He became a society gossip columnist for The New Yorker.
Having just watched the film “Patton” on interweb TV………
Where to start..
My assertion #1… John Coleman was a ‘Patton’
Possessed of all the things that roll together to become that much sought thing: a GSOH
Namely quick wit, clear head, self confidence and a good memory for people, places and stuff-in-general.
I’m gonna suggest that such people are not afraid of death and one of the things JC did before he died was to set a trap.
A trap for people who, shall we say, ‘didn’t get on with him while he was alive’
That trap had The Man himself as bait and it became ‘live and dangerous’ from the very moment of his passing.
Why he did this was because he was possessed of that ’empathy thing’ and knew that the Human Animal is quite incapable of passing off untruths. Mendaciousness is a very discomforting thing to do and he could sense that in the folks he made acquaintance of.
So, John passes away, the trap goes live and bingo! Look who is first into it if not King Rat himself.
This is the deeper than deep bit – Gleick actually seriously admired JC and in the totally kak-handed way that warmists think, he’s paying actual real respect to JC, RIP.
It goes to alleviate Gleick of his discomfiture from all the untruths and bad behaviour he’s been up to and damn well knows it, in his heart of hearts.
But this is it, chronically depressed brains will never admit a failure – I think we all know how you take your life into your own hands simply trying to tell a drunk that he is actually, drunk.
So maybe not be thinking of ‘adjectives’ to describe Gleick – pity the man.
But also, as we know, The One Thing all warmists (and chronic depressives) are absolutely scared sh1tless of, it is the idea of death.
Obviously because they are patently intent on destroying life on Earth in an attempt to save themselves. They cannot accept death’s inevitability and Gleick’s response is also anger, a child like anger that someone he really actually admired and wanted to be like, has gone and done something he is so utterly terrified of. Dying.
any thoughts on what might cause such muddled thinking……………..
It’s not as if cannabis is being legalised in California right now and THC just being a more potent depressant than, maybe some other stuff…….
RIP 18987 my younger brother John, self inflicted victim of tedious bureaucracy and an extended bout of sh1t weather.
But livestock farmers have a quite different outlook on….. ‘some things’
Similar to veterinarians and doctors as it ‘appens.
Now there’s today’s puzzle for ya…..
fat fingers innit.
1987 – the third in a succession of three cold, dark and wet years while tedious desk-bound bizzies in Europe quibbled about Milk Quotas and laid out a minefield of rules, regulations and not least, penalties for non compliance. My bro’ was not the first and has not been The Last by any means
And what have now in Europe (France especially) if not a bureaucratically created shortage of butter – and there is no more more certain way of winding up a Frenchman than by trying to take butter out of his diet
I was saddened this week by the passing of John Coleman, and went for a long walk to enjoy the world around us and the beauty and wonder of life.
John Coleman exemplified the human qualities that I value most – he was strong, courageous, and true – and he was a happy man, whose joy was shared with everyone.
I think John would not be upset by the likes of Peter Gleick – he would dismiss Gleick’s drivel with a humorous phrase and a big smile, and move on to truly important things.
Best, Allan
________________________________
You’ve all heard this before:
Go placidly amid the noise and the haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence. As far as possible, without surrender, be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly; and listen to others, even to the dull and the ignorant; they too have their story.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. If you compare yourself with others, you may become vain or bitter, for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans. Keep interested in your own career, however humble; it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
Exercise caution in your business affairs, for the world is full of trickery. But let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism.
Be yourself. Especially, do not feign affection. Neither be cynical about love; for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment it is as perennial as the grass.
Take kindly the counsel of the years, gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune. But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings. Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.
Beyond a wholesome discipline, be gentle with yourself. You are a child of the universe no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should. Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be. And whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life, keep peace in your soul. With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.
– Desiderata by Max Ehrmann, 1927
It is quite unfair to pick on a mental midget like Gleick. Like many others with feelings of “save the world” grandeur and who suffer heavily from paranoid delusions, they deserve our sympathy more than anything else.
John Coleman was a brave, happy, helpful, honest person. He will missed by many people who knew him but little. To his critics and detractors I will say only that if you want to be remembered kindly by others after you die, maybe respecting the example he set would not be your worst move.
One should not be surprised that warmunists exhibit hatred for AGW skeptics as their intense desire to impose Marxism upon all and destroy free markets, economic competition, and unimpeded transfers of financial worth is their raison d’etre.
Skeptics play the ball not the person, because they have the facts on their side. Warmunists play the person not the ball, because they don’t. Simple.
Gleick’s quoting Khun is probably the most ironic behavior in this turn of events, because I always thought that the climate alarmists were the ones to whom Khun’s quote best applies.
In other words, Gleick has got it ass backwards as to whom Khun’s writings apply.
Specifically, I have a strong feeling that the “greenhouse theory” paradigm is on a slow road to extinction — a very slow road, but I can foresee its end in the future, using my climatastic crystal ball.
He was dangeous, because his job was studying and predicting what the real weather does and how it changes naturally, versus what our priestly climate “scientist” computer jockeys assert for their easy money grants. IMO.
May John Coleman rest in peace. May the vile detractors find redemption and change their ways. That they have lowered themselves to speak the most wretched of remarks only demonstrates the brilliant power John wielded against their narcissistic, passive aggressive debauchery of science.
Gleick’s incorrect attribution of the ‘one funeral at a time’ chestnut to Thomas Kuhn seems to suggest that, like a lot of trendies who quote Kuhn’s ‘Scientific Revolutions’ book, he hasn’t actually read it. Kuhn actually cites and quotes Max Planck as follows, “a new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” (p150 4th Edition) This more accurate translation lacks the bounce of Connelly’s more jazzed-up version. One page later Kuhn reiterates/hijacks the idea (without citing Planck) stating, “Conversions will occur a few at a time until, after the last holdouts have died, the whole profession will again be practicing under a single, but now a different, paradigm.”
I have far more respect for Max Planck as a scientist than I have for either Kuhn or Gleick.
(In a spirit similar to Anthony’s ‘know thine enemy’ (i.e. enemy of science) I am currently forcing myself to read my way through Kuhn’s painfully badly-written book – every smug, pipe-smoky, circumlocutory, pseudo-erudite sentence of it! So far in my (admittedly incomplete) reading, I have found that he presents very little evidence to support his dubious theory. And out from this scanty base of evidence, he extrapolates great sweeping generalisations – like certain bad scientists!)