Joseph,

Good, lively article. A question I have, though, is the context for the statement, "No matter what you've been told, the technology to significantly reduce emissions is decades away and extremely costly."

That of course is not generally true, but if he was talking about "clean coal" it's correct, hmm?

Drives me nuts our pols talk about it as if it existed anywhere, and make it seem like it must be both easy and imminent.

Joseph -

While it is an honor to be hated by someone who expresses himself in such an uncivil way, and while I am always glad to have people judge my character by the character of those who attack me, your writing about my recent speech is a disgrace to the publishers of Grist, as well as your colleagues whose work must stand alongside your sneering, vicious tirade.

I've had civil conversations with Dave Roberts, engaged in some pleasant post-exchanges on Umbra's column, and generally support the goals of Grist even if I do often disagree with their means to our shared end, which is a healthy and protected environment. It's a shame that Grist is tainted by writings like yours, which exhibit a scorched-earth zealotry that can brook no disagreement at all, either about the nature of a given environmental problem, or the pros and cons of proposed solutions.

Your recent column was a particularly good example of such uncivil discourse, which I'd normally ignore, but in this case, I must take exception with a few points:

As it happens, my birth name actually IS Green. I know who my father is, and I have a birth certificate to prove it. I'll be glad to send a copy to Grist. You are out of line in ridiculing my family name. I am 47 years old, and had this name before your movement did. If you have the vaguest hint of civility, you'll retract your comment.

I am not your, or anyone else's "boy." I have no doubt that if I'd called Umbra "girl," in anything I've posted to Grist I'd have gotten an earful from the publisher and readership, and deservedly so. Again, if you retain any vestige of civility, you'll disavow your derogatory comments.

You suggest that the IPCC reports are the only thing people need to read to understand the climate, and you suggest that I do not read the IPCC reports lest it "shatter his carefully crafted ideologically-driven worldview." Later, you attempt to ridicule my accomplishments as an expert reviewer of two IPCC reports by asserting that the IPCC lets pretty much anyone ("it's right up there with being a member of AARP") serve as an expert reviewer. How can you cite the IPCC, which derives its authority because of its extensive peer reviewed, then ridicule the peer review process? I was solicited as a reviewer by the US government in one case, and by a lead author in another. If you think that's invalid, then you should explain why you think so, rather than impugning the entire process. The IPCC technical reports (not the bureaucrat-written summaries) are a good, strong touchstone to the basic science of climate change, but they're only a summary of climate science at one point in time, seen through the lens of one group of people. Suggesting that people need ONLY read the IPCC reports to understand all of climate science is like saying that people need ONLY read the Encyclopedia Brittanica to understand all that can ever be known. Oh, and by the way, people in AARP are over 55, which does not, as you imply, suggest they are brain-dead. We can add ageism to your list of slurs.

You are in violation of Grist's own posting rules, which calls for posters to avoid being jerks, avoid personal attacks, and stick to substance.

I call on the editors of Grist to publicly reject the kind of personal attacks that Joseph Romm has engaged in with his recent post. He has gone far beyond the bounds of civil discourse into vulgar abuse, to the shame of both himself and the publishers of Grist.

Kenneth P. Green

Kenneth Green Resident Scholar American Enterprise Institute (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) //= 0; i=i-1){ if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') output += "&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";"; else output += unescape(l[i]); } document.getElementById('eeEncEmail_yjLjcYbAsC').innerHTML = output; //]]>

Good you're here, Ken,

I'd like to take the opportunity to ask the same question I asked Joseph. What was the context/what did you mean with the statement:

"No matter what you've been told, the technology to significantly reduce emissions is decades away and extremely costly."

?

I assume than no has failed to notice that Mr. Green has no response to the factual content of Mr. Romm's posting.  It's just "wah, wah, he called me names."

Close of thread?

Given Mr Green didn't respond to a simple question, I'd say Joseph's assessment was correct.

Green hogwash occurs to me as doubly applicable here.