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":
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.
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.