View Full Version : Exposing Climate Science Deniers

02-15-2012, 02:24 AM

Leak exposes how Heartland Institute works to undermine climate science (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/15/leak-exposes-heartland-institute-climate)

The inner workings of a libertarian thinktank working to discredit the established science on climate change have been exposed by a leak of confidential documents detailing its strategy and fundraising networks.

DeSmogBlog, which broke the story, said it had received the confidential documents from an "insider" at the Heartland Institute, which is based in Chicago. The blog monitors industry efforts to discredit climate science.

The scheme includes spending $100,000 on commissioning an alternative curriculum for schoolchildren that will cast doubt on global warming.

It was not possible to immediately verify the authenticity of the documents. "There is nothing I can tell you," Jim Lakely, Heartland's communications director, said in a telephone interview. "We are investigating what we have seen on the internet and we will have more to say in the morning." Lakely made no attempt to deny the veracity of information contained in the documents.

The Heartland Institute, founded in 1984, has built a reputation over the years for providing a forum for climate change deniers. But it is especially known for hosting a series of lavish conferences of climate science doubters at expensive hotels at New York's Time Square as well as in Washington DC. >>> More ...


So ... somebody introduces curriculum to expose or discredit fraud. That is to counter the global warming propaganda. So.... whats the big deal? Are they lying, like the global warmers do?

No. I didnt think so. And nothing in the article even suggests it. So ... wheres the beef? :rolleyes:

02-19-2012, 10:24 PM
February 19, 2012
Joseph Bast

FEBRUARY 19 — The Heartland Institute has sent legal notices to numerous Web sites, blogs, and publications asking them to take down the stolen and forged documents and what it views as malicious and false commentary based on them.

The following statement by Heartland Institute President Joseph L. Bast may be used for attribution. For more information, contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or 312-377-4000. (NOTE: The Heartland Institute's first response to the posting of stolen and faked documents can be found here.)

“We realize this will be portrayed by some as a heavy-handed threat to free speech. But the First Amendment doesn’t protect Internet fraud, and there is no right to defamatory speech.

“For 28 years, The Heartland Institute has engaged in fierce debates over a wide range of public policies – school reform, health care, telecommunications policy, corporate subsidies, and government waste and fraud, as well as environmental policy. We frequently and happily engage in vigorous, robust debate with those who disagree with our views.

“We have resorted in the past to legal means only in a very few cases involving outright fraud and defamation. The current situation clearly fits that description, and our legal counsel has advised that the first step in defending ourselves should be to ask the blogs to take down the stolen and forged documents.”

Joseph L. Bast
The Heartland Institute

Even Cheeto Chucky Johnson at LGF got one of these letters.


02-21-2012, 02:53 AM
Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute is the Heartland document leaker. (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/)

02-21-2012, 05:18 PM
More on the apology here

...The Heartland Institute is unimpressed (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/statement-by-the-heartland-institute-on-gleick-confession/)by this classic, even-though-I-did-wrong-my-cause-was-just-so-I'm-right-really non-apology.

A mere apology is not enough to undo the damage.
In his statement, Gleick claims he committed this crime because he believed The Heartland Institute was preventing a “rational debate” from taking place over global warming. This is unbelievable. Heartland has repeatedly asked for real debate on this important topic. Gleick himself was specifically invited to attend a Heartland event to debate global warming just days before he stole the documents. He turned down the invitation.
Gleick also claims he did not write the forged memo, but only stole the documents to confirm the content of the memo he received from an anonymous source. This too is unbelievable. Many independent commentators already have concluded the memo was most likely written by Gleick.
We hope Gleick will make a more complete confession in the next few days.
We are consulting with legal counsel to determine our next steps and plan to release a more complete statement about the situation tomorrow. In the meantime, we ask again that publishers, bloggers, and Web site hosts take the stolen and fraudulent documents off their sites, remove defamatory commentary based on them, and issue retractions.
Oh dear. This is starting to look very expensive for Peter Gleick. And very embarrassing for those in the alarmist industry who have spent the last few days desperately trying to big up what turned out to be not just a non-story but a faked non-story. More on this later.


02-21-2012, 06:00 PM
Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute is the Heartland document leaker. (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/)

He's not a leaker, he's a thief and a forger. The documents were obtained by Gleick when he claimed to be a director of Heartland in order to trick a secretary there into sending board meeting documents to a spoofed email address. He then wrote a forged memo that exaggerated and misrepresented Heartland's conduct, expenditures and policies:

On or before Feb 13, the “unknown person” or an associate (who subsequently called himself Heartland Insider), fabricated a document entitled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy Memo”. Its pdf version was created on Feb 13 at 12:41 Pacific time.

Although media that were duped by the fake memo have tried to argue that its contents are fully supported by the board documents, in my opinion, numerous claims in the fake memo, including the money quotes that animated so many articles, are readily seen to be unsupported by the unfabricated documents, as well as being untrue.

1. The fake memo stated that Heartland planned to develop a Global Warming curriculum aimed at “dissuading teachers from teaching science”. This damning phrase occurs nowhere in the board documents or elsewhere.

2. The fake memo put the Koch foundation, prominent in climate activist demonology, in a place of particular prominence and stated that it was funding Heartland’s climate programs to the tune of $200,000 in 2011 and that greater contributions were being sought in 2012. In fact, Koch had contributed only $25,000 to Heartland’s Health Care (HCN) program in 2011 and $200,000 was being sought for this program in 2012. (Quite aside from other marks of forgery, it is inconceivable to me that Bast would make this sort of error in a board memo.)

3. The fake memo stated that Heartland was seeking contributions for their climate programs “especially from corporations whose interests are threatened by climate policies”. There is no support for this in the document and it appears to be untrue: the board documents show that Heartland’s climate activities were almost entirely financed by an individual.

4. The fake memo exaggerated the scale of Heartland’s climate programs. It said that they sponsored NIPCC to “undermine” the IPCC (a term not used in the actual documents and a word more characteristic of activist than skeptical literature) and that, additionally, it “paid a team of writers” to produce editions of Climate Change Reconsidered (actual documents – team 0f “scientists”, double-counting the expenditures.

5. The fake memo said that it was “important to keep opposing voices out” of Forbes, which was characterized as having previously been “reliably anti-climate”, but which had now begun “to allow high-profile climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own”. There is nothing remotely supporting this assertion in board documents or elsewhere. The anomalous prominence of Gleick (as opposed to the more logical Hansen, Gore or Mann, Jones and the Climategaters) attracted attention in later commentary.

6. The fake memo said that Heartland was coordinating “with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts”, a sort of skeptic answer to the Climate Rapid Response Team of Scott Mandia, John Abraham and Peter Gleick. There is nothing in the actual documents to support this.

7. The fake memo proposed the cultivation of “more neutral voices” such as Revkin and Curry, an idea that surprised both Revkin and Curry and which is not supported in the actual documents.

8. The fake memo gave the impression of “increased” activity in 2012, describing Heartland as “part of a growing network of groups working the climate issues, some of which [they] support financially”, whereas the actual documents showed reduced activity in 2012, as a result of declining funding, with no plans to hold the climate conference that they had sponsored for the previous few years.

Oddly enough, Gleick is the author of a number of articles on integrity in science. Judith Curry provided the list below. Oh, the irony...

Gleick on integrity:

A brief lesson in the integrity of science (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/a-brief-lesson-in-the-int_b_811295.html)

Climate Change and the Integrity of Science, Again (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/climate-change-and-the-in_b_770658.html)

AGU’s new task force on scientific integrity and ethics begins (http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2011/2011EO470009.shtml)

Threats to the integrity of science: congressional testimony (http://www.pacinst.org/publications/testimony/Gleick_Senate_Commerce_2-7-07.pdf)