“The consolation prize for a lot of us is that Joe Romm is so extreme and unprofessional that his cause of “Hell and High Water” suffers. Climate change is exaggerated and nefarious, just like Joe Romm himself.

MasterResource has followed the mercurial climate alarmist/activist Joe Romm since its beginning (2007). Back in the late 1990s, I sparred with Romm while I was at Enron, (“a company I greatly respect,” said he) regarding what turned out to be its most deceitful business, one promising free-lunch energy efficiency. Enron Energy Services (EES) and Romm’s Center for Energy and Climate Solutions (CECS) both bit the dust. For-profit or non-profit, the “energy service company” (ESCO) was a mirage.

Romm has referred to me as a “sociopath” in a private email.…

“The phrase ‘non-alarmist’ suggests that climate science is exaggerated or hysterical, rather than rooted in rigorous research. You may also re-consider your brazen ‘comment flooding‘ strategy: I will block any of you adding your usual anti-science tirades & nonsense.” (- Zsolt Lengyel, February 14, 2025)

And he did just that, but not before I copied some things for the record. History matters, and the history of climate alarm is one of exaggeration and intolerance toward the loyal opposition.

Climate activist (zealot?) Zsolt Lengyel [profile now blocked to me] describes himself as:

Policy-focused climate action dinosaur – having worked on the World’s two pioneering Kyoto Protocol flexible mechanism JI/CDM programmes, the Prototype Carbon Fund of the World Bank and the Dutch Government’s Carboncredit.nl – ERUPT/CERUPT – but with a fresh mind assuming that the future is not what will happen, but what we will do.

“If you are so sure that your views are correct, why not have a robust climate debate at Harvard. You know and I know that such an event would not come off well for the alarmists/forced energy transformationists.”

Jody Freeman, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, posted on LinkedIn [she blocked me–maybe you can open her links]:

Sobering assessment of our climate risk trajectory and how rising temperatures could overtake insurance markets, and lead to a credit crunch, among a cascade of other financial consequences. Watch the insurance industry. It is serious about climate change. And the canary in the coal mine.

Her link was to Joe Romm’s report of a Guardian article, “Climate crisis on track to destroy capitalism, warns top insurer,” subtitled “Action urgently needed to save the conditions under which markets – and civilisation itself – can operate, says senior Allianz figure.”…

It is painfully obvious what has happened in the Green Energy State (and DEI State). The Wall Street Journal editorial, California’s Climate Time for Choosing (January 10, 2025), subtitled “Sacramento tilts at reducing temperatures while its cities burn from failure to adapt to a variable climate,” fairly described the quandary of the (now) Smoke State.

“Democrats blame the L.A. blazes on the changing climate, which is a convenient excuse as citizens rage against the failures of state and local government.” Continuing:

The evidence doesn’t support the climate explanation since (among other reasons) California has had a dry climate and Santa Ana winds, even with hurricane-force gusts on occasion, for centuries. If the Democrats who run the state believe their own advertising, why not spend money in useful ways rather than on a green-energy transition to nowhere?