We have completed maintenance on DiscoverMagazine.com and action may be required on your account. Learn More

Romm's Slimefest

By Keith Kloor
May 27, 2009 9:14 AMNov 19, 2019 9:28 PM


Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Joe Romm rarely disappoints. Nary a day goes by when he isn't showcasing his intolerance, inconsistency, and disaster fetishism. Let's highlight the most recent best of the worst, starting with the bile he spewed on Friday to kick off the long holiday weekend. You won't find any disgust expressed by Climate Progress readers (or such comments that make it past Romm's censor), so check out Tom Yulsman's reaction and takedown at CEJournal. After that, read the point-by-point rebuttal offered by the Breakthrough folks, the objects of Romm's ire. On Sunday, Romm inadvertently revealed why debate over global warming is so often driven by non-related weather conditions or events, when he expressed hope that a vote on Waxman-Markey by the House occurs before the August recess

since the ideal time to debate a global warming bill is probably during the hot summer.

Yeah, nothing focuses people's minds more than a typical July scorcher. Oh wait, it turns out that hurricanes are even better, so I suppose it makes sense that Romm continues to play up the specter of future Katrinas, as he did on Monday and Tuesday:

We are stuck with a fair amount of warming over the next few decades no matter what we do. But if we don't reverse emissions trends soon, then Category 4 and 5 storms smashing into the Gulf coast seem likely to become a rather common in the second half of this century.

Whether you agree or not with his hurricane frequency-global warming connection, you have to at least admire Romm for his measured prescription, when he advises that we simply need to act "soon." Oh, scratch that. In the next breath, Romm reverts to style with this kicker:

Preserving the habitability of the Gulf and South Atlantic Coast post-2050 can only occur if we reverse U.S. and global emissions trends immediately.

Sorry, Joe, but "immediately" seems out of the question. Can we settle for "soon"? Or does that still spell doom?

1 free article left
Want More? Get unlimited access for as low as $1.99/month

Already a subscriber?

Register or Log In

1 free articleSubscribe
Discover Magazine Logo
Want more?

Keep reading for as low as $1.99!


Already a subscriber?

Register or Log In

More From Discover
Recommendations From Our Store
Shop Now
Stay Curious
Our List

Sign up for our weekly science updates.

To The Magazine

Save up to 40% off the cover price when you subscribe to Discover magazine.

Copyright © 2024 Kalmbach Media Co.