Thursday, May 30, 2013

Inconvenient question for Joe Romm

Joe Romm is hyperventilating again that NPR doesn't always put a warmist spin on every news story. This time it's about a plant that was covered over by a glacier 400 years ago at the peak of the Little Ice Age [LIA]. The glacier has now receded enough due to recovery from the Little Ice Age to expose the plant once again. Comment "awaiting moderation" for Romm:

0 Responses to NPR Airs Story On Melting Glaciers Without Explaining Why They Are Melting
  1. Your comment is awaiting moderation. 
    You miss the point that there was no glacier covering the plant prior to the peak of the LIA 400 years ago.
    Why was that?
UPDATE: Romm deleted this comment

NPR Airs Story On Melting Glaciers Without Explaining Why They Are Melting
By Joe Romm on May 30, 2013 at 12:28 pm
NPR aired a story Wednesday about a “plant in the Canadian Arctic that started growing again after being buried under a glacier for 400 years.”
The story never mentions carbon pollution or even global warming. Neither does the NPR’s blog post on the story, which has an even better ending: “In fact, as glaciers around the world continue to recede, we may be hearing a lot more about bryophytes.”
But apparently we won’t be hearing more about why more glaciers are receding or speeding up — or what it all really means for humanity, like say, that whole sea level rise thing (see “JPL bombshell: Polar ice sheet mass loss is speeding up, on pace for 1 foot sea level rise by 2050″).
Related Post: NPR (2/13): Remember That Whole Global Warming Problem People Once Worried About?


  1. I reposted your question. So far, no deletion.

  2. @ the Romm post

    Sasparilla says:
    May 30, 2013 at 4:22 pm

    'It would seem so Mike…very disappointing.
    While I was expecting what we’ve seen with things the Koch’s actively had their financial fingers in all along (like PBS’s Nova science show that ignores climate change for the most part) – I’ve been very disappointed with what we’ve seen with NPR in particular…this story is a disgrace on their news operation."

    I responded with:

    " You mean to say you believe the Koch Brothers own the National Academy of Sciences? This was published in PNAS, not NPR.
    Or maybe you think they bought the Canadian biologist?
    Let's say they did. Let's say they bought both of those things.

    Now tell me how on Eaarth could they buy a plant, four hundred years dead and buried, then will it back to life?

    Is one of the Koch Bro's named Lazarus?"

    We'll see which site clears me out of moderation first.

  3. papertiger says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    May 30, 2013 at 7:19 pm
    You mean to say you believe the Koch Brothers own the National Academy

    Joe has done a pass over on my comment.

    Posting a post dated comment by Mulga Mumblebrain
    May 30, 2013 at 8:32 pm .

    Ah well.

  4. Woh. Joe posted it.

    I didn't expect that. It's been my impression that Joe had my IP address tagged to go straight to the dust bin.

  5. In moderation on Romm's site:

    Hockey Schtick says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    May 31, 2013 at 10:34 am

    Mumblebrain is the one who needs to look up the answer, which is that it was as warm or warmer than today during the Medieval Warming Period, followed by the high volcanic activity/low solar activity of the LIA that allowed glaciers to advance, and followed by natural recovery from the LIA during the current warming period. Temperatures lead CO2 on both short and long timescales, and are controlled by the Sun and ocean oscillations. CO2 is a bit player at most.

    1. yeah. I replied to that one too.

      And my reply to that one was dust binned by Romm, along with yours.

      You notice how when he publishes my response he is Joe, but when he dumps my comment he is Romm?

      He's a squid dick either way.
      I'd love to see his tax returns. All the scam money he's been soaking up.

      Maybe under the next regime.

  6. I posted this response on his story.


    Not every story is about climate change. The topic of this particular story happens to be plant biology. And every story on plants or biology does not have to include an obligatory reference to biofuels or global warming.

    Your complaint brings into mind the Spanish Inquisitors, where even a hint of less than 100% belief and conviction was cause for investigation and castigation.

    Whether you want to believe it or not, this is exactly the sort of behavior that lends credence to claims that people who are passionate about the issues related to climate change exhibit traits more in line with religious faith than scientific reason.

    Bets on seeing it making it out of moderation?

    1. doubt it, the priest of AGW shall not tolerate any heresy of the dogma