Pathological
That’s the only way to describe this post by Joe Romm. I’m serious. The man has tied himself in knots over a wild, unsubstantiated claim he made a few weeks ago:
Now that they have shut down his original blog, Roger Pielke, Jr., is desperately trying to remain relevant in the blogosphere.
Any reasonable person would take “they” to mean the University of Colorado, Boulder, where Pielke Jr. is employed and where Prometheus was housed. And if you read the comment thread from that particular post, you’ll see that Romm goes further out on a limb to defend his assertion. Additionally, the exchanges he has with some skeptical readers are cringe-inducing. I can’t tell if he’s being paranoid or hyper-sensitive.
At any rate, in today’s post, Romm tries to clear up the confusion over this matter:
True, I carelessly didn’t explain who I meant by “they” “” although I clearly did say in the comments section that I was trying to be snarky, to needle someone who had so viciously humorously misrepresented what I wrote, which I thought would be obvious to anyone with a sense of humor like Roger. So let me explain what I meant, why I put an asterisk next to “they” in the second paragraph above.
By “they” I meant “all of Rogers different personalities.”
Oh, that explains it. It wasn’t the university, but rather Pielke’s “different personalities.” Of course, Romm is actually joking about this–he says so in the post. He’s trying to be clever here, or as he puts it, “snarky,” with his interpretation of Pielke’s positions on various climate issues.
Still, just so we know that Romm is really, really joking about the matter at hand, he reminds us:
So whenever I write, “now that they have shut down his original blog,”you’ll all get the joke that I mean “now that Roger’s various personalities have agreed to shut down his original blog” “” but of course it won’t be funny anymore now that I’ve explained it. Darn.
Nice try, Joe.
Humor and irony-challenged, eh Keith? Had you paid attention you’d have known that Joe thinks my explanation is the most likely.
OK SB, I call BS on you. I have been reading along. Here is Max Boykoff’s direct contact info:
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/about_us/meet_us/max_boykoff/
Lets see you produce any shred of evidence that Boykoff holds any of the views that you attribute to him. Otherwise, your BS has been called. Put up or shut up.
Sorry, anonymous commenters don’t get to play this game. Also, apparently “reading along” isn’t the same as paying attention, since I didn’t ascribe any particular views to Boykoff.
Steve Bloom you are lying. Here is what you said at Romm’s blog:
http://climateprogress.org/2009/07/28/the-lies-of-roger-pielke-jr/comment-page-1/#comment-100496
“Steve Bloom says:
July 28, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Joe, just to note that I think the end of Prometheus was semi-voluntary. Although RP Jr. started Prometheus, it was a group blog for his institute and so open to any of his colleagues. As of this summer, one of those colleagues is Max Boykoff, who you will be aware is no fan of RP Jr.’s views and is not shy about saying so. Lacking any grounds for barring Max from Prometheus, shutting it down must have seemed like a far better option.”
So when you say here that “I didn’t ascribe any particular views to Boykoff” that is a lie. You said ” Max Boykoff, who you will be aware is no fan of RP Jr.’s views and is not shy about saying so”.
OK, I’m calling you on it. Prove it. What did Boykoff say? Or can you not produce the goods? I call BS.
Disputing RP Jr. isn’t a view, sweetie, and certainly not a particular one.
Re the remainder, I see that not only are you still anonymous, for some reason you’re unable to do a simple search.
Steve,
It’s time for you to stop being so coy. You’re the one that said Max is no fan of Roger. You’re obligated to provide a link in support of this. You know that’s the way it works.
In light of this game your playing, your complaints about anonymous bloggers ring hollow.
On that note, I should point out that the majority of commenters on blogs are anonymous. You are to be commended for using your real name. But that still doesn’t give you the right to make accusations without proof.
Keith, your reasoning is mushy given that all I said here was that Joe agreed with my hypothesis. He said so in the comments to the post, so no further defense of that point is necessary. Are you seriously claiming that “the way it works” is that I have an obligation to defend something I said on another blog even though I repeated none of its substance here? If so, presumably you have a link to back up that stance.
Accusing me of playing games is just a little ironic. Tell you what: I’ll give you a link if you explain to how you managed to get through this post without making any reference to Joe’s agreement with my explanation (subsequently confirmed to him by multiple other sources). Ruins the narrative, does it?
Oh yes: Notice that RP Jr. was participating in that thread and didn’t squawk about my characterization.
Steve Bloom, I said:
“Lets see you produce any shred of evidence that Boykoff holds any of the views that you attribute to him. Otherwise, your BS has been called. Put up or shut up.”
Either you can or you can’t. Joe backed off his claim with some talk of multiple personalities or something. Are you going to back off as well?
Either you have the goods or you don’t. Show us you are not lying. Should be simple enough.
Steve,
This is becoming so tedious. Here’s the thing: I wasn’t asking you to back up your hypothesis–merely the statement you made to support it:
“As of this summer, one of those colleagues is Max Boykoff, who you will be aware is no fan of RP Jr.’s views and is not shy about saying so.”
You are not hypothesizing there. You are making a bald-faced claim. Or baldfaced lie, as Not Steve Bloom suggests.
That’s all I’m asking you for–some link to written words from Max Boykoff–an article he wrote, a quote of his in an article, something in his own words–that demonstrates that he is, as you claim, “no fan of RPJ’s views.”
There’s lots of stuff I could say about Joe Romm that would be second or third hand, because I know people who know him. But I don’t think that’s fair to do. So if I criticize Romm, it’ll always be based on stuff he writes–not what people say about him.
So please state for the record here: is your statement based on information gleaned from a written record, or gossip you heard second or thirdhand? If it’s the former, then you should have no trouble providing a link. If its the latter, then you’re trafficking in the lowest form of smear tactics.
Steve? Got nothing, eh?
This seems right, “you’re trafficking in the lowest form of smear tactics”
Very late into this debate and now it’s obsolete, but here are a few excerpts obtained from a direct dialogue between Dr. Piekle Jr. and Dr. Romm:
Dr. Piekle Jr.: Who shut down my blog?
[JR: Some very wise people shut down Prometheus.]
Dr. Piekle Jr.: To set the record straight, the decision to terminate Prometheus was mine and mine alone. My university has been nothing but supportive of my blogging and even offered to put whatever resources were necessary to keep it going. So your intimations are unfounded, unless of course you are calling me wise.
[JR: Ahh, well, not quite what I heard, but you are entitled to your spin. So it was you who shut down a popular blog so you could start a much more obscure one. Another commenter hear offers a plausible explanation for that … unusual behavior.]
With phrases such as “some very wise people…” and “not quite what I heard…”, it is very beyond reasonable doubt that Dr. Romm insinuated the shutdown of Prometheus was a decision made by someone in addition to Dr. Piekle Jr. The way he tried to spin it is despicable if not also laughable. Too bad no one called him out over there (or maybe all contrary comments has been eliminated, I don’t know). Your use of the term “pathological” is right on the mark, if not too courteous.
Bloom obviously cut his losses and won’t be back.
So Keith and his pet troll still haven’t gotten it together to spend the three minutes of googling necessary to find a prominent example of a dispute between Boykoff and RP Jr. It’s weird, one might say even pathological, that they’ve both spent more time than that avoiding doing so.
Cutting to the chase, Keith, you’re complaining about a statement I made on another blog. If you have a problem or a question about it, ask it there and you’ll get your answer. That way a lot more than your handful of readers will benefit from the information.
So, gt, perhaps you’ll explain why it is that Piekle Jr. did shut down the blog. Joe correctly points out that it makes no sense to shut down an established blog simply to shift to another one, since a traffic reduction is inevitable, so his supposition that someone else was involved is reasonable absent some other explanation from Piekle Jr. None was forthcoming.
New challenge: Find the Prometheus post wherein RP Jr. trashes Max Boykoff’s “balance as bias” thesis.
Steve,
You’ve never had a problem supplying links before on this site or other blogs to support your arguments, so why you won’t do so now is obvious. The only conclusion any of my handful of readers can come to is that you have no evidence to back up your statement.
Oh, and thanks for being one of the loyal handful.
Let’s see, rather than do a three-minute search yourself or take even less time to pose the question on the CP thread, you conclude I must be lying. You’re the perfect journalist, Keith.
FYI re my commenting history, I’ve often refused to cooperate with demands for links from people who are perfectly capable of finding the information themselves, especially when the demands are rude (as they were from both yourself and your troll).
Nice try, Steve. You have impeccable logic, just like your infallible guru on climate change. You’d make a great debater, too, just like him.
Also, FYI: Joe has banned me from posting comments at his site. He doesn’t let mine through. The last time this happened–a few weeks ago– I posted on it here. And besides, who says I always have to go directly to someone else’s blog to pose a question? I got my humble shingle right here. It’s also worthwhile drawing sycophants like you out into the sunshine.