Warmist Journalist Worries About The Emotional Toll Of Covering Climate In Age Of Trump

Andrew Freedman is Very Concerned. This follows on the heals of the meltdown by leading member of the Cult of Climastrology Eric Holthaus (who’s a pretty nice guy, from my interactions on Twitter), who has been driven to therapy.

The emotional toll of covering climate change in the Trump era

I never found covering climate change to be difficult on an emotional level until two years ago. When I became a father.

Suddenly, projections of temperature changes in 2050 were more real. Where I used to be able to dismiss them as time periods when I wouldn’t be around anymore, or be old enough not to care so much, now, those years were a pertinent reality.

Wait, I thought kids were Bad for ‘climate change”, and no one should have them? Oh, right, the Warmist meme is about stopping Black people in Africa from having kids.

Since then, I’ve doubled down on the beat, with grit and determination. But then came November. The election of Donald J. Trump sent me into a temporary tailspin.

What does this mean for my son’s future, and what does this mean for my profession right now?

In short: Nothing good.

So, if being a journalist sucks right now in general, being a climate reporter doubly sucks.

What changed in November wasn’t just the way in which vitriolic comments on Twitter and elsewhere got even more personal and menacing. It’s that there’s also, now, a sense of hopelessness that’s crept into my emotional core, and that of many of the sources that I talk to over the course of my reporting.

Man, if only there was something he could do, like, say, beat the drum for Warmists to practice what they preach.

This creeping sense of dread—which makes me prone to gallows humor when not simply looking at the floor, after someone asks me how climate programs will fare under Trump—makes the job that much more challenging.

There’s only so much I can excerpt of this essay of doom. Read the whole thing.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

17 Responses to “Warmist Journalist Worries About The Emotional Toll Of Covering Climate In Age Of Trump”

  1. drowningpuppies says:

    Another tale of aleftist having a meltdown over Trump.
    Good! Fuck’em.

    Here’s another…

    “While I had him in the apartment, I couldn’t stop thinking about whether he had voted for Trump, whether he knew my last name is Jewish, and how that knowledge might change the interaction we were having inside my own home,” he said.
    The “uncertainty” of the situation left Resnikoff “rattled for some time.”

    http://freebeacon.com/politics/thinkprogress-senior-editor-is-scared-of-his-plumber/

  2. drowningpuppies says:

    A few others who should be “concerned” after Jan. 20.


    Two USGS scientists manipulated data at a Lakewood, Colo., lab for nearly its entire existence from 1996 to 2014. Managers willfully neglected the falsification, and the agency learned how to prevent future manipulation as early as 2008, but the issue still isn’t fixed,…

    Two USGS scientists manipulated data at a Lakewood, Colo., lab for nearly its entire existence from 1996 to 2014. Managers willfully neglected the falsification, and the agency learned how to prevent future manipulation as early as 2008, but the issue still isn’t fixed…

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/09/exclusive-18-years-of-energy-data-manipulation-entirely-unacceptable-no-proof-doctoring-has-ended/#ixzz4VNfBiaXq

  3. Hank_M says:

    That linked article made my day. We’re talking laugh-out-loud funny. He even refers to a friend who had to get counseling to deal with it.

    I’d suggest the author, Andrew Freedman grab a thumb and a blanket.

  4. Jeffery says:

    The misconduct, which was discovered by USGS management in 2014, involves analyses performed using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry by the Inorganic Section of the USGS Energy Geochemistry Laboratory in Lakewood, Colo.

    “Some data were manipulated both to correct for calibration failures and to improve results of standard reference materials and unknowns” and raw data were not retained, USGS says.

    ICP MS is used to assay parts per quadrillion of substances, e.g., metals, in environmental samples. How bad is the Daily Caller when it takes WUWT to get the story right? Unlike most business activities, scientists have specific policies and regulations to obey. Let’s not excuse the scientists for cheating, but it’s only fair that we point out that the story has nothing to do with global warming. The lab has been shut down.

  5. drowningpuppies says:

    Let’s not excuse the scientists for cheating, but it’s only fair that we point out that the story has nothing to do with global warming.

    Yep, but it has everything to do with manipulation of data for 18 years under the auspices of the U.S. government, managers covering it up and no one being held accountable.

    Sound familiar?

  6. Jl says:

    “Sense of dread….” About what? The effects of more CO2 has been positive-a greening of the earth. The dire predictions are ten years away, and have always been ten years away.

  7. Jeffery says:

    There was no evidence of a cover up only that the data were so irrelevant that no one cared to check. Perhaps they need more oversight, more regulations to assure that techs follow the regulations.

    It sounds as if the sloppy and lazy techs cheated on their internal standards, where some may have fallen outside of specs, and rather than repeat the assay they lied. So the real values may have been 0.0000000000000000000000016 ng/L of manganese in the effluent instead of what they reported as 0.0000000000000000000000015 ng/L manganese in the effluent. Do you know how many other scientists independently checked their work? None. Did ICP MS “skeptics” find them out, LOL? But right is right and they shouldn’t have cheated.

    The difference between arcane measurements of trace chemicals and measurements of atmospheric temperatures should be obvious. But your point was to smear all gov’t scientists right?

  8. drowningpuppies says:

    Read the OIG report, little guy.

  9. Liam Thomas says:

    The difference between arcane measurements of trace chemicals and measurements of atmospheric temperatures should be obvious. But your point was to smear all gov’t scientists right?

    What is the purpose of you defending them for their actions….Personally when your are dealing with scientific results the outcomes need to be considered valid if the science behind said results is sound…..

    One would have to question why they would alter Data and if it was insignificant as you claim Jeffery then WHY THE BIG DEAL?

    The facts are that its not insignificant and you merely trying to claim it is does not make it so.

  10. Jeffery says:

    I did read the report Puppy Who Licks His Balls…

    Here’s the sum total of the “damage”:

    o toxic trace metals analysis of water in the greater Everglades ecosystem in Florida;
    o assessment of uranium in the environment in and around Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona for possible groundwater restoration;
    o analysis of coal combustion byproducts relating to the nationwide Geochemistry of Solid Fuels project;
    o analysis of metals released into waters associated with coalbed natural gas production activities in Alaska.

    • At least seven reports have been delayed and, to date, one report has been retracted. The retracted report was on air quality studies relating to feed coals in South African boilers as part of a United Nations Environmental Program study

    Not global warming, even though that was what the Daily Caller implied.

    Laim: We were not defending the miscreant scientists, but were adding context. Jaywalking, shoplifting, forgery and murder all are criminal acts, but some are more serious than others. Within the scientific community intentionally “making up” data is the most serious of acts. But you also have to be aware of the impact of the act outside the purely scientific.

  11. Liam Thomas says:

    if it was insignificant as you claim Jeffery then WHY THE BIG DEAL?

  12. Jeffery says:

    Laim,

    Scientific misconduct should always be a big deal, but the impact of this perfidy on policy outcomes appears to be miniscule. But some big deals are bigger than other big deals. And this big deal has nothing to do with global warming.

    The implication from Rep Gomer is that all gov’t scientists are corrupt, which coincides with his Republican attempts to disparage climate science.

  13. Jeffery says:

    Laim,

    It’s a big deal because that’s the nature of science. It’s not like business or politics or blogging where a certain amount of “slop” is expected and forgiven. Trumpski illegally gave the FL AG $25,000, and his foundation paid a little fine and all was forgotten. Trumpski set up a phony “University” and screwed poor folks out of the their money – he paid a fine and all is forgotten.

    But science depends on the accuracy of its measurements, even if what they’re measuring is not very important in the grand scheme of things, so even the most trivial of intentional “cheating” is treated seriously. Cheating in science challenges the very foundation of the enterprise and can’t be tolerated.

  14. Liam Thomas says:

    So again why are you even trying to defend these guys……….

    I quote you……….There was no evidence of a cover up only that the data were so irrelevant that no one cared to check.

    So all is irrelevant but now your saying its not……so make up your mind either its irrelevant and not worth the hassle of reporting and SHUTTING DOWN THE DEPARTMENT or its highly relevant in which case your defense of the data being irrelevant is tied to trying to defend AGW and has nothing to do with what the USGS was doing….which as you say had very little if any relevance to AGW however if you look at the USGS you will find that they spend an inordinate amount of time conducting research into Co2, Global warming and things of this nature.

    Im fine with that….In fact the more genuine research the more that can be gleened in helping with what most certainly is a serious problem for hollywood……In fact the USGS was one of the first departments to make the claim and provide the proof that Coal can be sequestered and coal fired plants can be even more atmospherically friendly then gas or oil fired plants.

    So the reason this WAS a big deal is because of the other work that the USGS partakes in….I actually have friends that work for the USGS and they tell me it was a very, very big deal.

  15. Liam Thomas says:

    And actually FYI the USGS is probably one of the few scientific departments in the US Government that has attempted to remain true to the mission to which they were assigned.

    Who We Are

    Created by an act of Congress in 1879, the USGS has evolved over the ensuing 125 years, matching its talent and knowledge to the progress of science and technology. Today, the USGS stands as the sole science agency for the Department of the Interior. It is sought out by thousands of partners and customers for its natural science expertise and its vast earth and biological data holdings. The USGS is the science provider of choice in accessing the information and understanding to help resolve complex natural resource problems across the Nation and around the world.
    Mission

    The USGS serves the Nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life.
    Vision

    USGS is a world leader in the natural sciences through our scientific excellence and responsiveness to society’s needs.

  16. Jeffery says:

    Once more and finally. Scientific misconduct is always important, but the outcomes from these episodes appear to have little practical negative impact. It’s unclear (unlikely) if policy changes resulted from the flawed data. It’s unclear (unlikely) if the perpetrators had a political motive. Most likely they were taking lazy shortcuts.

Bad Behavior has blocked 6159 access attempts in the last 7 days.