the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

What’s to Say

Posted by Jeff Id on June 18, 2009

Well I learned another lesson in global warming today. Again, it’s become an effort of know your enemy, I didn’t even know I had so many enemies. I put some reasonable statements up on a pro-AGW blog and found the first comment I made was clipped. Don’t they think of the best names, Real Climate, Open Mind, Climate Progress, it all sounds like clean green earth. As stated here many times, there is no denial of climate change by myself only questions. However, my questions are apparently far too dangerous to publish.

I did my usual and began reading the background of the guy in charge of the blog.

As resume’s go, his isn’t too bad ..

After all, phd’s MIT and all that. Not to mention Clinton’s deputy energy secretary, ah yes now I remember! I suppose we should all give up and bow to his holiness, well except for one little detail. He’s a socialist nut being paid to pretend to be a scientist while advocating global warming. Why did a little post by me (a fringe blogger) need to be clipped? My post discussed the recent Global Climate Change Impacts Report -no cussing, no swearing and on topic. The report is nothing more than propaganda about science hurled at congress and America and that wasn’t discussed by me.

The blog article is HERE I saved the attempted posts because after the first one was clipped, I realized this site was apparently another leftist site like Tamino where scientists pretend to be open minded, yet are nothing more than political hacks pushing their views of governance. The difference is that this guy is supposed to be non-partisan to keep his tax-free status.

At the top of Romm’s page is a link to his funding source – only leftist blogs need funding. Joseph is a paid blogger – sounds like a good gig. The source is the Center for American Progress Fund– again pretty words which really mean ‘turn America into Venezuela fund’.

Well American progress apparently means, taking secret ballot rights from unions, promoting illegal aliens in America(a topic which needs to get addressed), socialized medicine, pull out of Iraq and of course global warming. They fund several blogs currently – ClimateProgress, the Wonk Room, Yglesias, and Think progress. In addition, they fund several groups directly including an organization which is dedicated to cutting poverty in half in ten years – sounds good until you realize that their policies do the opposite but the ignorant don’t know that.

Let’s just say they stand for everything America has proven wrong over the last 200 years. This little gem is from their site.

Founded on the ideals of the progressive movement at the turn of the century, today’s progressive movement believes that an open and effective government can improve the lives of everyday Americans by playing an active role in solving social and economic problems.

I have to tell you, the government in the US is already far too active in my life. I can’t believe fools are stupid enough to want more. Right after this beautiful paragraph above is an example of how the government doesn’t work.

The Center for American Progress Action Fund is a non-profit, non-partisan organization under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue code. Donations are not tax deductible and may be disclosed to the IRS.

NON-PARTISAN tax free organization! Do you understand this?!! I think America is sleeping, pretending that everything is reasonable. Does anyone believe that this group actively promoting leftist agenda policies is somehow non-partisan. Why doesn’t the government tax them? Now ask yourself, who benefits from this clear abuse of section 501 code? Wake up people, everything is not reasonable in America and you’re loosing your country right before your eyes.

Here’s a link to the – NON PARTISAN policies of CAP – I strongly recommend you at least skim this article.

Click to access annual_report_2004-2005.pdf

And then we need to follow the money- the board of directors.

Carol Browner, Principle, The Albright Group

Richard Leone, President, The Century Foundation

Peter Lewis, Chairman, The Progressive Corporation

Cheryl Mills, SVP for Operations and Administration, New York University

Aryeh Neier, President, Open Society Institute

John Podesta, President and CEO, Center for American Progress

Marion Sandler, Co-Chair of the Board and Co-CEO, Golden West Financial

Hansjörg Wyss, Chairman and CEO, Synthes-Stratec

I wonder if anyone on that list has similar political bias. These groups are all interlinked and serve a single purpose. Socialism for America in exchange for our freedom. Some other related groups.

Add to the collective genius at

You do have to love self proclaimed genius. Those are the best kind.

This is a disgusting and huge network of tax free funding distributed to and spent by politicians pushing left wing policies. Just like Cuba, North Korea and Russia, censorship of dissent is a standard policy on leftist blogs like RealClimate, OpenMind, Climate Progress, DeepClimate and others.

Rather than put up my attempted posts, I’ll put up the last one and Romm’s reply.

JR are you going to let the posts through or keep them in limbo. What is the big deal?

[JR: The big deal is that I have a long-standing policy of not publishing long-debunked denier talking points, since they force me and everyone who comes here to waste time. One quick look at your blog makes clear that your only contribution to the environment is your mastery at recycling the garbage Pielke and his ilk put out.]

The ‘garbage’ by Pielke. Consider that!  Pielke’s latest post was only mentioned briefly and I assure you that I made no long-debunked points in my comments but that’s not what the point was, censorship was the point.

We are in big trouble America this is what progressives really stand for; censorship, control, private jets and tax free money for themselves. All that and the illegal aliens don’t know any better.

I’m more afraid of publishing this article than anything else I’ve written. These people are dangerous, they are the same kinds of people who threatened banks with audits to force them to take federal money. Don’t worry about me guys, I’m just a fringe blogger.



The Center for American Progress is a liberal political policy research and advocacy organization. Its website describes it as “… a nonpartisan research and educational institute dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all.”[1]

Its President and Chief Executive Officer is former lobbyist[2] John Podesta, who served as chief of staff to then U.S. President Bill Clinton. Located in Washington, D.C., the Center for American Progress has a campus outreach group, Campus Progress, and a sister advocacy organization, the Center for American Progress Action Fund. Citing the significant number of its staff and former staff that have been appointed to positions in the Obama Administration, Time magazine recently declared that there is “no group in Washington with more influence at this moment in history.”[3]

On a hunch, I searched under Soros and sure enough, he was one of three cofounders of this non-partisan group.

47 Responses to “What’s to Say”

  1. You almost sound surprised at the blatant propagandist agenda of a website that ties to an organisation which in turn ties back to George Soros. There’s absolutely no surprise there. George Soros is a a one-man wrecking crew for the American way of life, and by that I mean a way of life in which our individual opinions are accorded roughly equal weight. Mr. Soros has very successfully used his billions to impose his world view and his opinions onto various nations around the world, especially the US. While you an I may be entitled to our opinions, behaviourally, Mr. Soros doesn’t agree that our opinions should carry the same clout as his opinion.

    He is the very definition of a class-warfare elitist.

  2. pyromancer76 said

    Great expose of the interconnectedness of those in opposition to science and a representative democracy. Do your readers who appreciate your clarity of thought and documentation (and “cool” mind) know about the website

  3. timetochooseagain said

    Let’s take a moment to remember some of the great progressive accomplishments of the turn of the century. Like locking up people opposed to the first world war. Or creating a tax system which punishes success. How about Eugenics? Centrally Planned Parenthood? Really great, eh? Heil Woodrow! Heil Teddy!

    Joe Rommel is nothing but a Mussolinian hack, just like all these damn fascists punks in charge of the country at present…

    If you haven’t read Liberal Fascism, you badly need to.

  4. cogito said

    I like that phrase: today’s progressive movement believes that an open and effective government can improve the lives of everyday Americans by playing an active role in solving social and economic problems.

    I’d rather say that in many cases, the government is the prblem, not the solution. “Open and effective” … show us where.

  5. TAG said

    It would be nice if the hyper-partisanship about this issue was ended. it would be very nice if AGW would be a scientific hypothesis rather than a slogan for partisan political positions on both sides.

    What I rally see from Steve McIntyre’s work is that we facing a major problem. There is a scientific hypothesis that there could be significant environmental problems that could seriously affect the word economy. There have been two major means identified to investigate this hypothesis – paleoclimate reconstructions and climate modelling. However, from McIntyre’s investigations, the reconstrcution of paleoclimates seems to be infeasible. There are no proxies which are adequate to the task. Useful climate modelling seems to be beyond the capabilities of current mathematics and technology and may be shown to be theoretically impossible.

    So there we are. There is a frightening possibility but we have no adequate science or technology to resolve it. This is an issue that goes beyond politics. It cannot be solved by partisanship. Appeals to Gaia or appeals to Hayek are not going to solve anything.

  6. TAG said

    Examine the current “long interviews” embarrassment on RealClimate. These people cultivate an image of omniscience on the issue of AGW. They could not even admit that there was disagreement about the findings of a preliminary paper. If paleoclimate and GCMs give differing results about wind speeds then the entire edifice of AGW would be in trouble. So they had to publish a story about a reporter misunderstanding their nuanced views. These people also want to be able to control the economic response to the possibility of AGW. It their theories are empty, then what reason do we have to believe that there remedies would be better that doing nothing and perhaps be much worse.

    I would hope that everyone on both sides would just call a ceasefire in this political culture war.

  7. TCO said

    Run some science to ground. This is just another example of how skeptic-land is a bunch of social networking and online dramah than real progress. If you play this like McI, you’ll be mouthing the same crap 4 years from now. What a waste.

  8. Jeff Id said

    #7 I will work at my own pace, if you don’t mind.

  9. kmye said

    Without seeing the comments you tried to post, it’s impossible to tell just how funny it is, but it’s at least a little funny Romm brought Pielke into a response to you. He seems to be oddly obsessed with RPJr; it’s been entertaining following their beef on Prometheus:

    btw – great blog here!

  10. Jeff Id said

    I decided to put up Dhog’s comment at the climate progress blog linked above just for kicks. I had to clip the f-bombs becasue TCO forced me to have a policy. It’s too funny to pass up.


    Dhog, that is why you are technically illiterate. – my comment from a previous post.

    And every f…ing person with any notion of how statistical reconstructions work.

    Except you, of course.

    You’re two orders of magnitude more brilliant than einstein, in your own mind.

    Hey, dude, if you’re so convinced that your analysis is right, and a mere dude with a degree in mathematics is wrong (that would be wrong), publish!

    Write it up!

    Submit it!

    You’ll be famous with your FULL F…ING NAME as being the guy who proved than Mann’s mathematics is so bad that it MUST BE INTENTIONAL, THUS FRAUD!

    (taken from your own statements)

    He was so wound up he did it twice–

    Dhog, that is why you are technically illiterate.

    One more point, if your “proof” had merit, it would be famous by now, at least in the denialsphere, and if at all technically literate, in the literature.

    The reality is that you’re a crank, convinced of your ability to bring down and entire field of science. You’re a perpetual-machine builder, an evolution-violates-SLOT “prover”, etc.

    A crank.

    (I’m not saying you hold those views, only that you’re a crank, as are those that do).

    Science will ignore you. Now that Ryan has teamed up with you, you may get more notice, but that’s only because Ryan works hard to be competently wrong, even if he is wrong.

    And is honest about it.

    Not you, though.


    I’m sure Ryan is happy to have you in his fan club.

  11. MikeN said

    Romm said the same ‘denialist talking points’ when I pointed out that the 2000 report had to have a warning label, then cut my comment that linked to that report so people could see the label.

  12. TCO said


    You can work at glacial paces and with low standards. And as long as my comments are getting through, I will point out how little science and logic there is and how much huffing and puffing and socializing.

    No final straw for you. No soup. No soup.

  13. jz said

    Interesting that Marion Sandler is still listed as Co-Chair of the Board and Co-CEO, Golden West Financial. The Sandlers of course sold Golden West to Wachovia for $24 billion – the reason why Wachovia no longer exists today. SNL produced a great skit on the Sandlers’ business practices that was available on the web until the the threat of a lawsuit made SNL edit and redact the more interesting parts. Just another data point as to the type of person who associates with Mr. Romm.

  14. John D said

    Re: TAG #5

    The real problem with paleoclimate reconstruction and the AGW hypothesis is that the available paleo-reconstructions in general do not support the catastrophic forecasts of AGW. On the longests scales the proxy evidence available indicates that for more half the preceding 500 million years, atmospheric CO2 has been several times the current levels without runaway anything. On shorter terms, ice core data (if one trusts it) clearly seems to indicate that warming CAUSES increases in CO2 (which is reasonable chemistry). On an even shorter time scale, since the end of the Pleistocene, the planet’s average temperature has varied significantly above and below the present mean. About 8,000 years ago evidence indicates a significantly warmer climate. Other evidence shows that marine highstands during the mid-Holocene (lots of data about this online) were as mush as 1.5 to 2 meters above current mean sea-level – no evidence of polar bear extinctions either. This evidence is globally distributed and comes from places as remote from each other as Tasmania, Brazil and Texas – showing that the effect must be a eustatic sea level change. On the shortest timescales the Medieval Climatic Anomaly will not go away and the Little Ice Age is far too well documented to ignore, and there are literally hundreds of glaciers distributed globally from the Andes and Alaska to the Himalayas that are advancing at the present (plenty of information about this on line as well).

    The short of it is that empirical data on paleoclimate supports no aspect of the AGW hypothesis. Even the current – 1850 to present – associatiion of CO2 increase and warming may be due to a statistical correlation rather than a causal linkage, or the CO2 increase may be caused BY the warming trend subsequent to the Little Ice Age for reasons that may include geographic factors (warmer oceans release CO2) and cultural factors – the human race has benefited from increasing biological productivity and has expanded population and industry BECAUSE of the warmer conditions. That is, the AGW hypothesis may have the causal linkage precisely backward.

  15. dhogaza said

    So why don’t you publish your earthshaking “findings”, if they’re so obviously correct?

    I’m sure E&E will accept a paper trumpeting your jeffian statistics.

  16. dhogaza said

    Or are E&E’s standards too high for you?

  17. Jeff Id said

    I had multiple invitations from PhD’s to co-publish this and I still might but I found that

    1 – it’s already been published by 3 german phd’s – I don’t have the paper here.
    2 – It’s so biased a method, I don’t believe that Mann doesn’t know exactly what he did.

    The only difference in my finding was the distortion of the historic signal as well. If I ever get to the weightings in M08 I will be able to correct the distortions and achieve a proper ‘undistorted’ temperature curve.

    It’s really simple stuff guys, read the math and you might get it. If this paper wasn’t so bad the Air Vent might just be about politics or technology. I just got pissed off when I read this crap.

  18. timetochooseagain said

    I have to wonder why the vitriolic reaction to “crap”…Its so obvious that “critics” like these have left-wing political axes to grind one wonders what the point of letting through their rude, inflammatory posts is…

  19. Billy Ruff'n said


    I too was snipped recently at Climate Progress for no apparent reason. His comment on your post, like his comment on one of mine (see ) suggests to me that he’s more interested in a blog-echo chamber that a debate regardless of how civil it might be.

    Here’s part of what he said:

    “JR: ….But a central point of this blog has been to clearly show that the climate is MORE sensitive to external forcings then the models have been assuming, which is why the climate has been changing faster than the models had predicted.”

    To dedicate your blog to showing that “the cimate is more sensitve to external forcings then (sic) the models have been assuming” indicates to me that he’s decided to ignore even the IPCC’s “settled science”.

    He closed his comment to my post with the following: “People who are driven by ideology to reject science cannot legitimately be called skeptics.”

    To which I replied: People who are driven by ideology cannot legitimately be called scientists. Perhaps that’s what caused him to get snippy.

  20. Jeff Id said

    #19 great reply.

    I enjoyed defining ‘rife’ to Morris.

  21. CoRev said

    Jeff et. al. you and the team are doing great work. thanks

    I stopped going to his site, no reason to add to his hit count, and I just do not reference any of his articles on my site. He is one of the most abusive individuals I have run across, and there are many on both sides. I choose to not subject the unknowing to his antics.

    CoRev, editor

  22. rephelan said

    Jeff…. can you spell “naive” (I can’t and had to check two or three dictionaries before getting it right…) but really, expecting Joe Romm to be interested in factual discussion is a prime example of that word, however it is spelled.

    I didn’t know Romm was financed by Soros. Nice work. I’ve been following Soros (not literally!) for some time and am convinced that whichever Commissar dispatched the family to America was a genius.

  23. Jeff Id said

    #22, As I said at the beginning, I learned another lesson. He is another of Soros’s minions and I didn’t know it when I first posted. I am very aware of Soros, as every American should be. If you like conspiracies Soros is basically a dictator. Everything he wants is being done and every democrat seems to be on the payroll. He’s got people in every branch of government and may be the most powerful man on earth.

  24. thechuckr said

    I got “banned” at Climate Progress after the typical Joe Romm response “…more denier talking points…” I tried to post the Arctic ice area and extent figures from the Arctic-Roos website. I too, will no longer go there because I do not want to add to the hit count.

  25. Jeff Id said

    This may be the first consensus on noconsensus.

  26. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    I tried to communicate once with Joe Romm. It was hopeless. He repeated crazy AGW “talking points” like how the arctic would be ice free in 5 years. He is a left wing political hack who doesn’t give a hoot about science or (it seems) reality. He is 100% driven by his “progressive” political agenda.

  27. hunter said

    You are on the black list.
    I have had clients end business with me when I let them know my views on climate. And my industry has nothing to do with climate.
    There is an incredible, but apparently true, story out of Boston about insurance appraisers refusing to work with an academic who is an AGW skeptic due solely to his work on climate.
    Skeptics are having trouble getting movies printed to DVD, apparently due to Hollywood blacklisting.
    AGW, as totally separate from climate science, is a pernicious social movement as ugly as anything in our history. Intolerant, personal, vindictive, reactionary, and relentless.
    As the science supporting the apocalypse that is the basis of AGW continues to be absent, the anger of AGW true believers will not fade away quickly, but will in many instances increase.
    Romm, who worked with Dessler in the Clinton/Gore era, is not going to let go of his success in grasping social, monetary and academic power easily. He is not about to let someone who punches holes in his dogma have a seat at his table.

  28. Mark T said

    rephelan said

    Jeff…. can you spell “naive” (I can’t and had to check two or three dictionaries before getting it right…)

    Remember: “Evian is naive spelled backwards” next time you want to spend the extra bucks for tap water in a bottle. 😉


  29. Layman Lurker said


    Your Boston story is true…it was Lindzen. I heard Lindzen explain the incident on the radio today. He had a valuable exotic rug (can’t remember the ethnicity) that was burned in a fire. He was referred to an appraiser who e-mailed back to explain that he could not perform the service due to Lindzens views on climate change. Bizzare.

  30. TCO said

    27. Yes, but still despite the pernicious evil state of this climate of political-driven Orwellian right-think, the few remaining battlers for truth…can’t get their acts in gear to write publications…and spend time jerking off at Heartland, doing EnE, and having little kaffee klatschs on the internets.


  31. rephelan said

    Mark T said
    June 18, 2009 at 10:14 pm

    OUCH! I’m usually good at anagrams…. reading license plates is one of my minor specialties (666 = the devil among us… 333=only half bad, 665= one drop of goodness left, 777=one of the godly, 888= holier than God) but I don’t drink bottled water. Missed that one.

    Let’s get it right,though. Anyone accepting money from George Soros should have 666 on his license plate and 666 tatooed on his forehead.

  32. rephelan said

    uugh… Jeff, I’ve got a small issue I think maybe we should discuss off-line first. You’ve got my e-mail, I’d really like to chat.

  33. Carrick said

    Joe Romm is another in my list of people who have long ceased to be scientists and should not be taken seriously on anything.

    Like this comment of his:

    “JR: ….But a central point of this blog has been to clearly show that the climate is MORE sensitive to external forcings then the models have been assuming, which is why the climate has been changing faster than the models had predicted.”

    Translation, let’s not let the science get in front of our AGW chorus: The empirical data don’t exactly show that the climate is changing faster than the models predict…quite the opposite, or the models themselves don’t predict enough CO2 sensitivity for the fear crowd to thrive on.

  34. Nylo said

    One year ago or so I had a bet with Joe Romm about arctic sea ice extent by 2020, although already by then I knew it would be useless, as he is not the kind of person who allows himself to lose a bet. He would destroy all proofs of such a bet before losing it, and he has the means to do it as it was written in his blog. Actually his blog is probably going to stop existing in less than 5 years, when it is obvious that his forecasts are not happening. Anyway, it didn’t take long before I got banned from his site, so even if he were to admit defeat in the bet I would have no way to claim the money lol.

    By the way, I got banned for breaking the Terms of Use, however I was respecting EVERY rule in the Terms of Use as they are written in the site, and I was behaving in an extremely polite way. At the same time I was being heavily insulted by a few of his fellow “dogs” in the site at every post, which actually IS against the published Terms of Use of the site, and nothing happened to them… Climate Progress is the closest thing to a dictatorship I have seen in any blog of any kind. Fellows get a free pass to write anything no matter how rude and impolite.

    (PS: Do not miss the following two statements in the policy rules of the site: “Respect other Members — please do not threaten, abuse, intimidate or harass other Site users” and “Do not post any content or provide links to any content that endorse or oppose a particular political party or candidate for office”. I lost track of the number of posts of the blog owner and his fellows which are clearly pro-Obama long ago…)

  35. Rich said

    It may be worse than you realise 🙂

    Hi I’m new to all this. First started by spending a lot of time at RealClimate trying to get a sense of the issues till I realized how much equivocating was happening. Now I see the fraud.

    Some may want to look at this interesting article:
    It’s about the institutionalized corruption of science to political effect.
    I have no info on the author other than he’s well published in philosophy and political science topics. Anyway its an eye opening read.

  36. Keith said

    Hi, Jeff.

    Like most, I have been banned from CP for spouting the “denialist dogma”. I will admit, I probably pushed the guy into banning me, because I more or less called him a hypocrite, though I did it as tactfully as I could. I did keep track of some of the exchange, writing it up as a forum post here.

  37. Fluffy Clouds (Tim L) said

    # Realist Says:
    June 17th, 2009 at 9:16 am

    Once again a laughably wrong, easily disprovable report surfaces as “proof.”

    Notice even the usually reliable, in the tank for Obama, news outlets are keeping their distance. They have been embarrassed by this sham long enough.

    It will take about two days for the huge holes and outright lies in this report to surface.
    # jeff Id Says:
    June 17th, 2009 at 9:19 am

    This report exaggerates nearly every detail. Am I allowed to say that?

    It is nothing but propaganda and misrepresents the scientific conclusions it purports to discuss scientifically. They have overstepped badly and it will backlash on them.
    # Joe Says:
    June 17th, 2009 at 9:31 am

    I can’t believe anyone is so gullible to believe this crap.

  38. hunter said

    If AGW was winning more beleivers, instead of losing more believers, then your spew might have a sting.

  39. Fluffy Clouds (Tim L) said

    LOL well I left a post but it may get cut; we shall see.

    Leland Palmer Says:
    June 17th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    believing in what they say is a survival strategy.

    If so, maybe we really are too stupid as a species to live.

    This is spot on!
    thank you for posting!

    P.S. I wish I could read Jeff ID response even though it maybe denial tripe.

    P.S. Even my woman said ” how come they let tthe dohg say F—ing and disrespect” ETC. and jeff can’t even respond?

    that hole thing will open eyes. Thank You Jeff for your honest polite try’s!!!! 🙂

  40. TCO said

    38. You might just think about the POINT of the sting, rather than the appearance or the stinginess.

  41. Page48 said

    RE: #27

    Well said, and too true

  42. Morris said

    RE: #20 Neat monologue!

  43. woodNfish said

    I don’t know where I first learned of Romm,it may have been WUWT, but he is nothing more than a leftwing hitman scumbag. You can’t be polite to these fascists they deserve nothing more than what they dish out.

  44. Joe Romm is one of the best things ever happened to non-AGWers…

    even Connolley can’t stand the guy

  45. woodNfish said

    Interesting point of view on Romm, Maurizio, and probably a correct one, but it doesn’t change what Romm really is as I stated in post 43.

    Connally completely dismisses Romm on his current page: and

  46. woodNfish said

    Sorry I didn’t do those links properly. Here they are again:

  47. 26south said

    The AGW crowd are so “religious” in their promotion of warming there is no point in discussing the issue. Like “true believers” of any cult, religious or political, deniers only “prove” they are right in their beliefs.
    Hysterical claims of what will happen are the main sign of a “cult” mentality. Like children who cover their ears and yell “I can’t hear you”, it is more important to them to lock-in the tenets of their religion than deal with the evidence of the “non-believers”.
    If there was no warming for the next 20 years (after we have already had 14 years of no warming) they would still say “that means it will be even worse when warming returns”.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: