smackdown.jpgWow, two Republicans representing two very different groups have been going after each other on the blogosphere with words and phrases like, “It is my intention to destroy your career as a liar” and “nasty-gram” — OK, nasty-gram isn’t a word, but what do you expect from CEI?

It’s Michael Eckhart, head of the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE) versus Marlo Lewis a senior fellow in environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). You can read Lewis’s side at Planet Gore (where else?) and Eckhart’s side at ACORE’s blog.

I know Eckhart and he’s a solid guy — plus I’m not a big fan of 1) people who post private emails on the internet and 2) professional global warming denyers — so I’ll take ACORE over CEI/PG any day. Also, this paragraph on PG is illuminating:

Eckhart’s so-called apology claims that I “knowingly mount a false prosecution” against global warming. Upon what evidence does he base this accusation? Eckhart claims that on first meeting him, minutes prior to a debate in which we were opponents, I confided to him that I don’t really believe what I say; I just say it as a “tactic” to advance my agenda. How plausible is that?

Note Lewis makes no denial — he just asks, “How plausible is that?” I personally find it very plausible.

Lewis is smart and well-informed, so he has to know just how solid the scientific evidence is for human-cause global warming, and he has to know that all of the denyer arguments he keeps repeating have long been disproved.

Let’s call this ACORE 1, CEI/PG 0.