CRITICAL UPDATES at end of post!
Joe Romm's debate defeat tour hysterically continued Thursday when he went against his own decree forbidding further references to Marc Morano at his Climate Progress blog by eviscerating the New York Times for having the nerve to write about -- wait for it! -- Marc Morano.
Oh the humanity!
In a tirade that would most certainly make Tonya Harding proud, Romm scolded Times author Leslie Kaufman in a piece deliciously titled "In a stunning journalistic lapse, the NY Times gives credulous coverage to Swift Boat smearer Marc Morano, the Jayson Blair of global warming":
Please email the NYT at nytnews@nytimes.com about this egregious piece and/or email its public editor at public@nytimes.com to explain you are “concerned about the paper’s journalistic integrity.”
Apparently the NYT felt a Magazine cover story pushing the pseudoscience of Freeman Dyson was not enough free publicity for the dwindling minority desperately trying to persuade humanity not to act in time to save itself from catastrophic climate impacts.
Dwindling minority?
Honestly, Romm must be inhaling too much of that carbon dioxide he believes is ruining the planet, for all the recent polling indicates that it is the alarmist view that has been experiencing declining support.
For instance, Gallup reported on March 11:
Although a majority of Americans believe the seriousness of global warming is either correctly portrayed in the news or underestimated, a record-high 41% now say it is exaggerated. This represents the highest level of public skepticism about mainstream reporting on global warming seen in more than a decade of Gallup polling on the subject.
Gallup followed this up with more stunning results on March 19:
For the first time in Gallup's 25-year history of asking Americans about the trade-off between environmental protection and economic growth, a majority of Americans say economic growth should be given the priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent.
Then, this blockbuster from Gallup on March 25:
[S]ince more Americans express little to no worry about global warming than say this about extinction, global warming is clearly the environmental issue of least concern to them. In fact, global warming is the only issue for which more Americans say they have little to no concern than say they have a great deal of concern.
As such, it appears what's dwindling are the public's concern for the global warming myth AND Romm's credibility. Of course, that's not the way he sees it:
In a second inexplicable lapse in journalistic judgment, the paper of record has decided to promote the new disinformation campaign of the least credible global warming denier in the country — Swift Boat smearer Marc Morano, a man whose record of making stuff up would make disgraced former NYT reporter Jayson Blair cringe.
Yes, I know, I just promised “this blog will be a Morano-free zone” (see “Memo to media, blogosphere: Swift boat smearer Marc Morano has no credibility. He is unquotable and uncitable“). But I was talking about ignoring his blog, since I assumed no serious reporter would flack Morano and his new disinformation-pushing website. Who would have guessed that a NYT reporter, Leslie Kaufman, would want to smear her own reputation with a remarkably credulous profile of the Swift Boat smearer, “Dissenter on Warming Expands His Campaign“?
In those two paragraphs alone, Romm referred to Morano as "Swift boat smearer" three times.
Yet, near the conclusion, Romm hysterically asked, "But who are you going to believe — a Nobel laureate and former Vice President or a guy who compulsively makes stuff up and smears people?" This after referring to Morano as "Swift boat smearer" six times.
Who's doing the smearing, Joe?
Of course, the really amazing part about Romm's rant is that the Times piece was by no means flattering to Morano, nor was it supportive to climate realism.
For example, only one realist was cited in support of Morano and his views on global warming:
“Before Marc, efforts to debunk global warming were scattered and disorganized,” said John Coleman, a weather broadcaster who helped found the Weather Channel and who has called global warming “a scam.”
By contrast, two alarmists were cited, one quite heavily:
Kert Davies, the research director of Greenpeace, said he would like to dismiss Mr. Morano as irrelevant, but could not.
“He is relentless pushing out misinformation,” Mr. Davies said. “In denying the urgency of the problem, he definitely slows things down on the regulatory front. Eventually, he will be held accountable, but it may be too late.” [...]
But some scientists and environmental advocates who have made it their business to monitor Mr. Morano see his reports — the most recent was titled “More than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims” — as far from balanced.
Kevin Grandia, who manages Desmogblog.com, which describes itself as dedicated to combating misinformation on climate change, says the report is filled with so-called experts who are really weather broadcasters and others without advanced degrees.
Chris Allen, for example, the weather director for WBKO-TV in Kentucky, is listed as a meteorologist on the report, even though he has no degree in meteorology. On his Web site, Mr. Allen has written that his major objection to the idea of human-influenced climate change is that “it completely takes God out of the picture.” Mr. Allen did not respond to phone calls.
Mr. Grandia also said Mr. Morano’s report misrepresented the work of legitimate scientists. Mr. Grandia pointed to Steve Rayner, a professor at Oxford, who was mentioned for articles criticizing the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 international treaty on curbing carbon dioxide emissions.
Dr. Rayner, however, in no way disputes the existence of global warming or that human activity contributes to it, as the report implies.
Hardly flattering, wouldn't you agree?
The Times also sought to discredit Morano with a well-known alarmist tactic:
Mr. Morano’s new Web site is being financed by the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, a nonprofit in Washington that advocates for free-market solutions to environmental issues. [...]
Public tax filings for 2003-7 — the last five years for which documents are available — show that the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the ExxonMobil Foundation and from foundations associated with the billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, a longtime financer of conservative causes best known for its efforts to have President Bill Clinton impeached. Mr. Rucker said Exxon had not contributed anything last year.
Add it all up, and this was closer to a hit piece on Morano and climate realism than puff.
But Romm is clearly so consumed with his March 27 debate defeat by Morano that he can't even notice when his foe is being criticized.
As such, he's taking the art of sore-losing to a whole new level.
I can't wait to see the next act...how 'bout you?
*****Update: Readers are strongly encouraged to review the comments to Romm's post at CP. It's a fascinating display of just how deluded these folks are, especially Romm.
For instance, here's Romm's response to a reader suggesting that his tone in the piece was counterproductive:
[JR: Nah! First, the editors pay no attention to the likes of me (a blogger) no matter what I write. Second, obviously the New York Times pays more attention to people without a calm tone -- else why would they profile Morano! Gotcha on that one, I'm afraid. I hear over and over again, oh, but any reasonably intelligent reader would be able to figure out this guy is a crackpot. Well, that was what many people said to me about the Dyson profile (including the NPR guy who does "On the media") -- and yet a reasonably intelligent guy wrote an uber-credulous piece on him for Newsweek that spread his disinformation further.
You miss the point entirely. If the NYT thought this guy was a crackpot, then he doesn't deserve a story at all. The mere fact of the story is the stunning journalistic lapse. And after the Dyson profile, the Gore hit-job by Revkin -- which was inspired by yet another person who any reasonably intelligent person should know is a non-credible source (Roger Pielke, Jr.) -- I'm afraid your analysis has been utterly proven wrong.
Dyson, Morano, Pielke -- these guys should be unquotable and uncitable, but by being featured in the pages of the New York Times, they are elevated to credible articulators of the anti-scientific.]
Getting a whiff of jealousy here?
Romm seems angered that folks like Dyson, Morano, and Pielke are being taken seriously and HE isn't? Maybe he should do some soul-searching to identify why that might be given the media's overwhelming support for his side of the anthropogenic global warming debate?
Or is that asking too much of an MIT-trained Ph.D.?
*****Update II: This is REALLY too delicious, for even the Soros-backed climate alarmists at MMA think this Times article was extremely critical of Morano and climate realism!
The Times piece is mostly helpful in letting readers know that Morano is in no way an independent or reliable source about global warming. Instead, he's a purely political player. Reporters should be clear about that when quoting him in coming weeks and months.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I like the irony of the
April 10, 2009 - 10:50 ET by CortillaenI like the irony of the line appearing at the top of every page on Romm's site, "“The indispensable blog” — Tom Friedman, New York Times", set right about his attack on... the New York Times. Trumpet it to high heaven when they agree with you; curse them when you misinterpret their hit piece on your archenemy as being too sympathetic. Gimme a break.
www.daybydaycartoon.... Proving that conservative comedy is very real.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
If Romm truly believes..
April 10, 2009 - 10:51 ET by Mark_for_SenateIf Romm truly believes the ignorant tripe he professes, he should quit breathing to save us all.
What is the planet's optimal CO2 level? If you don't know, don't tell me what I should do with my CO2.
Methinks...
April 10, 2009 - 11:48 ET by Wildcatter1980...Romm doth protest too much, a sure sign he is afraid of something--impending irrelevance perhaps?
--
We already have term limits. They are called elections. We can & should vote out those who do not represent & serve us! - Me
I think we NBers should
April 10, 2009 - 11:27 ET by R D HelmI think we NBers should pony up the cash and send Joe a huge block of cheese.
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.
Joe is out there
April 10, 2009 - 11:33 ET by Ralph Hansen Ph. D.Joe Romm is over the edge. He's become a liability to those promoting the hype of catastrophic global warming. I suspect many in the alarmist community are cringing as he calls further attention to the nut case that he is.
In the debate with Morano, Romm said the world would be 10-to-15 degrees warmer by the end of the century. But any thinking person understands in order for that to occur, the world's oceans would also have to be 10-to-15 degrees warming. Unless the sun goes super nova, the immense thermal capacity of the oceans makes that impossible.
The more likely warming scenario can be found here - maybe another half degree Celsius by 2100. Romm's prediction is off the chart.
Ssssshhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 10, 2009 - 11:54 ET by Wildcatter1980Logic, common sense and yes, even real scientific data is not allowed in this debate. ;-)~
--
We already have term limits. They are called elections. We can & should vote out those who do not represent & serve us! - Me
Well, just to tick him off,
April 10, 2009 - 11:37 ET by CortillaenWell, just to tick him off, I went and posted on his site poking fun at him for ignoring most of the article. My post is "awaiting moderation", heh. Any bets on whether or not Romm deep-sixes my post? Just for posterity, it was under this name and is reposted below, so anyone who wants to see can whether or not it appears.
{
Curious how you declare "Shame on the New York Times." Yet what is at the top of the page? "“The indispensable blog” — Tom Friedman, New York Times"
Really, how far out do you have to be to attack the paper for what is actually a hit piece on Morano? Did you miss the claim that "environmentalists and mainstream climate scientists" disagree with Morano's views? The quote by Kert Davies, "He is relentless pushing out misinformation... Eventually, he will be held accountable, but it may be too late"? How about the author's own opinion that "[Mr. Morano's] thick build fills out his suit like a bulldog in a restraining jacket"? Peter Dykstra's quote calling Morano the "drum major of the denial parade"? The anonymized claim "that many of those listed as scientists [by Morano] have no scientific credentials and that their work persuaded no one not already ideologically committed"? What about the three paragraphs dedicated to linking Morano to ExxonMobil, billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, and other hidden sources of funding? Another anonymized claim that "some scientists and environmental advocates who have made it their business to monitor Mr. Morano see his reports... as far from balanced"? Even most of what you did feel inclined to note is antagonistic toward Morano or given to his critics.
I'd think you'd be more appreciative of a hit piece on someone you hate, but, given your childish actions of late, I can't say that I'm surprised.
You've gone into "take my ball and go home" mode, and hit pieces are no longer good enough; you demand that everyone, even on your own side, ignore the opponent completely rather than trying to refute his claims. Riddle me this: If you demand only one side of an argument be presented, how are you different from any other propaganda engine? I always thought the idea behind freedom of information was that the populace could get both sides, then decide which was better. Oh, don't bother answering, though. I really don't feel like reading another rant about how the other side is just giving misinformation and should be silenced. Broken records aren't much fun.
}
www.daybydaycartoon.... Proving that conservative comedy is very real.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
Aaaand there we go...
April 10, 2009 - 13:04 ET by CortillaenPoof, gone. Not even the decency to explain why in an email. I didn't really expect any better, but here's more proof that Romm supports censorship of anyone now parroting him.
www.daybydaycartoon.... Proving that conservative comedy is very real.
"With your mind as high as Mt. Fuji you can see all things clearly. And you can see all the forces that shape events; not just the things near to you." - Miyamoto Musashi
I got banned from
April 10, 2009 - 17:42 ET by danboI got banned from ReallyScaredClimatologist, for pointing out a statement that was factually incorrect and linked to the truth. But at least Gavin was nice enough to say I was correct before banning me.
Their consensus is around because they pretend there isn't another side. Marc shows this is less than honest.
And they call us deniers.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
Romm--
April 10, 2009 - 11:39 ET by misterbill"ad⋅u⋅late /ˈædʒəˌleɪt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [aj-uh-leyt] Show IPA
–verb (used with object), -lat⋅ed, -lat⋅ing.
to show excessive admiration or devotion to; flatter or admire servilely.
""""""
For heaven's sake man--get a grip!!!!"
" Romm hysterically asked, "But who are you going to believe — a Nobel laureate and former Vice President or a guy who compulsively makes stuff up and smears people?"
Sorry, you are confusing me talking about the same guy that way..!
Oh--Romm, you think the other guy does it??? Oops!
Romm is hilarious.
April 10, 2009 - 12:17 ET by Dave in TexasI love reading Romm's site, mostly because he's an idiot and throws a lot of hissy fits. The picture of the crying baby fits him to a "T".
Kert Davies, the research
April 10, 2009 - 12:37 ET by Jack BauerThat sounds like a threat. Accountable by who? How? He's going to be "punished"?
Maybe someone should hold jackbooted Green Shirt Kert accountable.
Romm
April 10, 2009 - 13:07 ET by sevenThe poor creature makes Rev Fred Phelps seem mellow and stable.
Eco Police
April 10, 2009 - 14:15 ET by dboAccountable by who? How? He's going to be "punished"?
Maybe he thinks like environmental whack job David Suzuki and thinks that Morano should be thrown in jail because of his opinions.
This is too much...
April 10, 2009 - 15:17 ET by taocpaYou know, its funny, they love to quote Al Gore, but the "hockey stick" analogy he used was absolutely debunked. They also quote him as a "Nobel Laureate" when everyone knows that was a booby prize given to him because he wasn't handed the presidency on the silver platter like he demanded. It was also given to him as a slap in the face to George Bush for his climate policy.
I do know Marc Morano and know he is an honest guy. This other guy Romm seems to be a smug, arrogant fellow who loves to throw epithets around to justify his opinion. What a moron.
When will the madness end? Hopefully, January 20, 2013.
Tom
Mother Nature isn't
April 10, 2009 - 17:51 ET by danboMother Nature isn't cooperating with the greenies. People are more concerned with the bottom line. The ROW is starting to wise up that this is not a hoax but an out and out scam.
Watching these folks decompensate is fun.
Limited Disclosure: I used to belong to the Sierra Club untill they went crazier. Worse of all, I was bribed by Exxon with free New Orleans Saints glasses with fill ups in the 70's.
Steve Rayner, Ph.D. Anthropology
April 10, 2009 - 19:18 ET by PopularTechLook what I found about the Professor from Oxford...
Steve Rayner, Ph.D. Anthropology
Which makes him as qualified to talk about the subject as...
Benny Peiser, Ph.D. Professor of Social Anthropology, Liverpool John Moores University
Existential risk and democratic peace (Benny Peiser, Ph.D. Professor of Social Anthropology)
Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard
The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming (Michael Crichton, A.B. Anthropology, M.D. Harvard)
Michael Savage, M.S. Anthropology, M.S. Ethnobotany, Ph.D. Nutritional Ethnomedicine
Michael Savage: Al Gore is a Crazy Con-Man! (Michael Savage, M.S. Anthropology, M.S. Ethnobotany, Ph.D. Nutritional Ethnomedicine)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution
We are supposed to believe Al Gore? The Fraud?
April 10, 2009 - 19:29 ET by PopularTechRomm says would should believe Al Gore but how does being a former VP make you a science expert?
Al Gore, B.A. in Government, Divinity and Law School Dropout (no science degree)
The Education of Al Gore (The Washington Times)
"Mr. Gore's high school performance on the college board achievement tests in physics (488 out of 800 "terrible," St. Albans retired teacher and assistant headmaster John Davis told The Post) and chemistry (519 out of 800 "He didn't do too well in chemistry," Mr. Davis observed) suggests that Mr. Gore would have trouble with science for the rest of his life. At Harvard and Vanderbilt, Mr. Gore continued bumbling along.
As a Harvard sophomore, scholar Al "earned" a D in Natural Sciences 6 in a course presciently named "Man's Place in Nature." That was the year he evidently spent more time smoking cannabis than studying its place among other plants within the ecosystem. His senior year, Mr. Gore received a C+ in Natural Sciences 118.
At Vanderbilt divinity school, Mr. Gore took a course in theology and natural science. The assigned readings included the apocalyptic, and widely discredited "Limits to Growth," which formed much of the foundation for "Earth in the Balance." It is said that Mr. Gore failed to hand in his book report on time. Thus, his incomplete grade turned into an F, one of five Fs Mr. Gore received at divinity school, which may well be a
worldwide record."
Gore's 'carbon offsets' paid to firm he owns (WorldNetDaily)
UK Court finds 9 Inaccuracies in Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth (The New Party, UK)
Whose Ox Is Gored? The Former Vice President's Environmental Exaggerations and Hypocrisy (The Wall Street Journal)
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is Not Pollution
Believers Getting More and More Desperate
April 10, 2009 - 19:55 ET by dboNot to be outdone, the Huffington Post is now joining in and piling on Marc Morano and apparently agrees with Romm that the NYT is throwing softballs.
A very serious problem, we know the real enemy.
November 3, 2009 - 14:57 ET by Rafael LomenaThere are probably other more important causes being systematically ignored, not only for experts and researchers, but by the IPCC dependent of the ONU, for example, the rapid upward trend of forest fires exorbitant DIRECTLY proportional to population growth in the world.
More information on this sites (spanish documents):(
+ http://calentamiento...
They can also read this news published in some media for months:
+ http://www.cubanuest...