. . . or are you just displeased to see me?
I’m beginning to feel sorry for Andrew “Andy” Revkin, Senior Climate Alarmist at the New York Times. He does not emerge well from his chummy e-mails with the Settled Science enforcers (“You took the words right out of my mouth“), and evidently he resents the notion that he was merely a willing dupe:
It’s hard to keep up with syndicated columnists, but the Mark Steyn piece you just ran that mentions my reporting on climate was a gross distortion of reality (particularly where it asserts that “week after week” I somehow acted as an apologist for the climate scientist Michael Mann.
So the other day he makes the briefest of references to the news that during the upcoming Copenhagen shakindownen the city’s prostitutes will be offering their services free to “climate campaigners.” He eschewed the cheap jests — nothing in there about what to do if you’re a climate scientist and it’s not just the temperature rising; no jokes about letting you sample her tree rings. Nonetheless, even the mere mention of this story from the Euro-press prompted Prof. Michael Schlesinger, Head of Warm-Mongering at the University of Illinois, to take the metaphorical tire-iron to Revkin’s legs:
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… 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.
Unbelievable and unacceptable.
The ice caps may be melting but fortunately the ever-bigger chill between the Settled Science Syndicate and Revkin seem likely to compensate. He’s done sterling service over the years, but one mild hooker crack and he’s being fitted for the ice-sheet overcoat. Steven Hayward adds re the CRU documents:
How is it possible for a group of smart people to write over 1,000 e-mails over the course of a decade without a single shred of wit or humor in any of them?
Even by the standards of fanatical ideologues, these guys seem humorless plonkers.