Register for an account

X

Enter your name and email address below.

Your email address is used to log in and will not be shared or sold. Read our privacy policy.

X

Website access code

Enter your access code into the form field below.

If you are a Zinio, Nook, Kindle, Apple, or Google Play subscriber, you can enter your website access code to gain subscriber access. Your website access code is located in the upper right corner of the Table of Contents page of your digital edition.

Environment

Romm Versus Revkin, Round 279

Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Joe Romm, the self-appointed climate journalism watchdog, goes bananas over this story by Andy Revkin. After a meanering 2,400 word critique, Romm hands down his judgment in bold:

Revkin should retract this entire piece.

At least he didn't demand that Revkin apologize to humanity. That's (climate) progress of a sort. But seriously, if anyone wants to get all lathered up over the real conundrum, this is the essential part from Revkin's piece that should keep climate advocates awake at night, not the issue of temperature variability:

At best, said Robert J. Brulle, a sociologist at Drexel University, global warming remains an abstraction for many people. "It does not have the direct visual or emotive impact of seeing seabirds covered in oil from the Exxon Valdez oil spill," he said.

2 Free Articles Left

Want it all? Get unlimited access when you subscribe.

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Register or Log In

Want unlimited access?

Subscribe today and save 70%

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Register or Log In