Taranto Reports, You Decide About Snowy

When I read this just now immediately after having read Snowy's latest bit of idiocy directed at me, I couldn't help thinking that what follows is the sort of thing Snowy would do if he were a learned liberal lunatic (LLL)…

Mr. James Taranto:

The latest global-warmist email is revealed not by the East Anglia whistle-blower but by Steven Hayward (who by the way has a fine overview of the climate-science scandal in The Weekly Standard).

The email's author, Michael Schlesinger an atmospheric scientist at the University of Illinois, was so proud of what he had to say to New York Times reporter Andrew Revkin that he decided to send a copy to Hayward–and, one supposes, to Schlesinger's entire email list:


Copenhagen prostitutes?

Climate prostitutes?

Shame on you for this gutter reportage.

This is the second time this week I have written you thereon, the first about giving space in your blog to the Pielkes.

The vibe that I am getting from here, there and everywhere is that your reportage is very worrisome to most climate scientists.

Of course, your blog is your blog.

But, I sense that you are about to experience the 'Big Cutoff' from those of us who believe we can no longer trust you, me included.

Copenhagen prostitutes?

Unbelievable and unacceptable.

What are you doing and why?


So Revkin accused climate scientists of prostituting themselves to a political agenda in order to get grant money? No, he did not.

He merely made a passing mention of actual prostitutes. In the blog post, Revkin quoted from his own Twitter feed, which in turn linked to a story from Der Spiegel:

Copenhagen Mayor Ritt Bjerregaard sent postcards to city hotels warning summit guests not to patronize Danish sex workers during the upcoming conference. Now, the prostitutes have struck back, offering free sex to anyone who produces one of the warnings.

Schlesinger is all het up over that? As Mark Steyn notes, "Even by the standards of fanatical ideologues, these guys seem humorless plonkers." You thought they were telling you to "save the earth." Actually, it's "save the mirth."


A 'Profound Emergency' Not Worth Writing a Sentence About
"Today 56 newspapers in 45 countries take the unprecedented step of speaking with one voice through a common editorial," announces that editorial, produced by London's Guardian. "We do so because humanity faces a profound emergency. Unless we combine to take decisive action, climate change will ravage our planet" blah blah blah, etc.

To put it another way, this is such a dire emergency that the editorial boards of 55 newspapers (including, in this country, the Miami Herald) cannot be troubled to write a word about it. It's the equivalent of just filling space with wire copy–and in fact, that would work just as well, since the Associated Press has its own global-warmist editorial.

The Guardian even solicits "reader leaders" (to go with the extraterritorial editorial–ha ha, what wits), although if you scroll down on the page, you will see that a good many of the submissions have been "removed by a moderator." That is what scientists call peer review.

Actually, though, one can make the case that running a prefab global-warmist editorial is a sensible cost-saving move. No one would argue that the New York Times got its money's worth when it paid someone to write this:

No one should be misled by all the noise. The [East Anglia] e-mail messages represent years' worth of exchanges among prominent American and British climatologists. Some are mean-spirited, others intemperate. But they don't change the underlying scientific facts about climate change. . . .

It is important that scientists behave professionally and openly. It is also important not to let one set of purloined e-mail messages undermine the science and the clear case for action, in Washington and in Copenhagen.

But in the very same section of the Times, "public editor" Clark Hoyt reports that science writers Andrew Revkin and John Tierney agree that "there is sharp debate over how fast the earth is warming, how much human activity is contributing and how severe the impact will be."

Oh well, at least the Times editorialists won't be subjected to the Big Cutoff.

A follow-up on a Friday item: We had faulted Politico for failing to ask Al Gore, in an interview published last Thursday, about the scientific misconduct revealed in the East Anglia emails. Mike Allen, Politico's chief political correspondent, says in an email to one of our colleagues: "Alas, we talked to him like a month before climate-gate." So instead we'll fault Politico for sitting on the interview until long after it became stale.


We Blame Global Warming
"Time to Take the Gloves Off in Pakistan"–headline, Commentary Web site, Dec. 4

We Blame Rumsfeld
"Rice an Unlikely Global Warming Culprit"–headline, Agence France-Presse, Dec. 5

Read and post comments | Send to a friend


About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s