“Honest Broker” bemoans lack of “common decency” and in the same breath accuses others of plagiarism

In his seemingly endless assault on the reputations of the scientists who blog at RealClimate, Roger Pielke, Jr. is accusing some of them of plagiarism. This is a grave accusation, one that Roger does nothing more to substantiate than repost an email whose own author acknowledges that it does not itself offer solid evidence for such a claim. In a bit of delicious irony, Roger does all this while bemoaning RealClimate authors’ lack of “common decency”. We will recall that this is the same Roger Pielke, Jr. who:

  • accused RealClimate authors and others of censoring debate by “seek[ing] to shut down… discussion with intimidation, bluster, and name-calling” because they were so unkind as to point out Roger’s numerous errors regarding temperature trends (of course Roger’s grandiose and unsubstantiated persecution claims also extend to answering bloggers’ questions)
  • accused RealClimate of being on par with paid denialist shills like Pat Michaels in pushing a political agenda, merely for debunking denialists’ claims
  • accused RealClimate of not making falsifiable predictions, and upon being presented with one, falsely accused RealClimate of reversing themselves on the relative importance of multi-year “trends”, and accused RealClimate of “looking for suckers”, playing with a “stacked deck”, etc. for simply offering odds to a team on their published forecast
  • accused Gavin Schmidt of RealClimate of being a thief by falsely claiming Schmidt had “admit{ted} to stealing”

Etc. I’m all for a little more “common decency” in these discussions.

After you, Roger.


9 responses to ““Honest Broker” bemoans lack of “common decency” and in the same breath accuses others of plagiarism

  1. Good grief. Steig’s last post was from the airport, on his way to the icebreaker for his trip with Peter Ward (and I wonder when we’ll hear back about that? I recall it takes a year in the lab to analyze the samples from that site, or did last time they visited it). And so the guy emailed MM, and posted an automated reply from MM saying he’d be out of the office for weeks and mail should be resent if important.


    So what exactly is that little character in the illustration hauling around in that cart? Does he really need a cart to haul them?

  2. He also called Gavin’s statement that he had been suppressed in presenting climate change information by the Bush administration “Laughable”, so apparently Roger has more insight into what happened there than Gavin does.

    Has anyone figured out what actually drives Pielke jr? Someone once said he’s best understood as seeking to maximize his own profile. I see no good evidence that this is not in fact accurate. He portrays himself as a neutral party but there’s a difference between being neutral and speaking out of both sides of one’s mouth. Not too long ago, he criticized the Waxman-Markey bill as a “stinker” etc (stinker because he said it wasn’t nearly strong enough to solve the problem mind you), and then immediately proceeded to take apart Paul Krugman for lambasting those who’s propaganda campaign influenced some in the House to vote no on it!! And he had no apparent recognition of the self-contradiction he had just imposed on himself.

    There was also the comment he put up at RealClimate some time ago that, very honestly, could easily have been taken as a satire on post-modern deconstructionism, ala the piece that Sokal got published in the 90s. I must’ve read that thing 5 times trying to figure out what he was saying, before I finally concluded “nothing really”

  3. Even if the email was delivered and read, and even if that email was the first indication to the authors that the uncertainty bounds should be recalculated, at most the issue is lack of acknowledgment of a notification of error.

    Surely that’s not plagiarism in of itself. And it’s not even clear that there was an improper lack of acknowledgment as such.

  4. Pielke is very easy to understand. He wants to own the policy issues. If Eli were to look at bloodlines here, remember that S. Fred, Pat and RPS all come from UVa

  5. Well, sure, RPjr wants to “own policy issues”. And keep the policy choice as close as possible to “do nothing” (e.g. $5 per tonne carbon tax). That’s why TAR must be set in amber forever as the last word on climate science, other than Pielke’s own weird updates, plus those of his favourite bloggers.

    “remember that S. Fred, Pat and RPS all come from UVa”

    UVa … hmmm. Isn’t there coal around there somewhere?

  6. Joseph O'Sullivan

    Roger Pielke Jr has an interesting history to say the least.

    I personally have run afoul of him a few times. He took a comment I made on RealClimate praising the Q&A section of the Environmental Defense Fund’s climate change site, and Roger attributed it to Dr Judith Curry. He was trying show that Dr Curry approved of EDF’s politics.

    I submitted multiple comments trying to clear up the mistake, and all but one was rejected. He never tried to correct the misquote. He denied any of it even happened. A simple ‘sorry about that’ from him would have been sufficient to put it to rest.

    When I made a comment about this on RealClimate RPjr seemed to get irritated, both at me and at RealClimate for allowing the comment.

    Maybe RPjr is looking for some payback against the authors of RealClimate.

  7. Pingback: Dropping the P-Bomb « Deep Climate

  8. Pingback: Nate Silver falls off | The Way Things Break

  9. Pingback: Hooray! How To Talk To A Climate Contrarian (If You Must) » Pirate's Cove

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s