pielke jr

An excellent article by Michael, again, and an interesting comment thread underneath. I have rarely seen RPJr more forthcoming and clear about his whole angle in the climate policy debate. I also have to confess I see very little value in the "honest broker" concept as he defines and advocates it (Eli is quite right) and no justification for his distasteful attacks on Real Climate and Jim Hansen.
At least this is the standard if you are Roger Pielke Jr and the accused is a member of Real Climate. When pressed as to how he knew an accusation of plagarism he was leveling was really true, in his own words: if the authors provide evidence [...] I'll stand corrected. [...] Meantime, I am perfectly comfortable with the views expressed in this post. This is how he defends his very serious accusation of plagarism against a commenter who expresses surprise at Pielke leveling such a charge with admitted lack of anything more than circumstantial evidence. maybe they were alerted by one or more…
Michael Tobis is famous. (Okay, just until the rabid dogs of the right wing noise machine find another bone to obsess over.) For the record: Michael Tobis is an intelligent, thoughtful and concerned man who does not deserve to be ridiculed, but rather read closely and contemplated. Pielke is a **** ****** and ******** ****. (Sorry, I violated my own comment policy) who is simply playing a very different game than the rest of us. Morano and Beck (why that last name??!!) and the rest of the echo chamber are not worth much more than a guffaw. Maybe there will be something to learn or achieve by…
Roger puts up another post (guest post, gotta love plausible deniability) about James Hansen: blah blah blah....dictator who ordered millions of people to be gassed and then burned in crematoria...blah blah blah No, he isn`t (yet) calling Hansen a Hitler, but we all know how Godwin`s Law works. Or almost all of us... [UPDATE: Things Break has a stronger stomach than I do, and he takes a more thorough look at Roger's latest. As usual with Pielke's positions, the closer you look, the less it holds up.]
...and he puts you on his mailing list! [Please note: Marc Morano is nowhere near as relevant as Beelzebub!! It is just a gimmick for a blog title.] So I poked fun at Marc Morano the other day, and though he thankfully did not pop up in my comments he must have read the post because the next day I started receiving his spam. The first email was approvingly quoting Pielke Jr, which I have no doubt thrills him. Roger's fear? Not that humanity is facing daunting challenges and may not act quickly enough, no what keeps Roger awake at night is James Hansen's belief that politicians should take…
So last week I asked "how low", Things Break provided an answer, and Roger continued his love-to-hate realtionship with Real Climate folks. The sopa opera continues, spilling out into Real Life, as Gavin seems to want some formal retraction. Being called a thief is no small matter, and like most of Rogers conclusions, this is just not born out by the evidence. He is once again finding the smallest bit of wiggle room and prying it open until it is wide enough for his ego to fit through! (And BTW, none of this matters if you are interested in what is actually going on in Antarctica.) But…
Just a quick update on my recent post noting Roger Pielke's lack of integrity: Roger makes a note of my post and John Fleck's and adds this underhanded toss-off line: Hansen's forecast "did not survive the peer review process" and so did not "appear in PNAS". Of course, the alledged "prediction" of a super El Nino ("there is a good chance") from the draft was not submitted to PNAS for peer review. Roger is refering to Hansen's passing the draft to a few friends and colleagues, inadvertently distributing it more broadly (oops, Roger's not a friend!). There is a must read exchage at John…
So, Pielke Jr's blog, Prometheus has a new look. Congratulations! But just a minute...they have also changed the URL's of all the past postings, thereby breaking the links to to all things Roger in the climate debate blogosphere. And Roger at best is unconcerned, but most likely prefers it that way, judging from his answer to my question as to whether it will remain so. "Gee, I don't know." Hmm. Why would they do that? All the internal links have been updated, so his favorite reference sources (himself) can still be clicked, but all of the blog responses to his writings now have broken…