THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Another Climate Scandal
The Purloined Climate Papers
2/21/2012 6:48:27 PM WSJ.com
[8-minute video] Heartland Institute President Joe Bast on why global warming activist Peter Gleick stole and forged documents from his organization
[Bast, at the 50-second mark: "About three weeks ago, somebody named Peter Gleick, as it turns out, impersonated a board member of the Heartland Institute, stole his identity by creating a fake email address, and proceeded to use that fake email address to steal documents that were prepared for a board meeting. He read those documents, concluded that there was no smoking gun in them, and then forged a two-page memo in order to make it look like we were conspiring to discourage teachers from teaching science in classrooms and in other ways doing this nefarious stuff, and then leaked all of those documents, or passed all those documents to his friends at DeSmogBlog, and ThinkProgress, the Huffington Post, and some of the other liberal websites. It was an amazing thing, and then all the mainstream media then piled on, and for the last week you've seen literally thousands of articles and blog postings all quoting a forged memo claiming that the Heartland Institute had some sort of conspiracy on confusing people about global warming."]
The Whole Problem with Climate, via Fox News on Gasoline | Planet3.0
is that people seem to think that what happened last week is the new normal.
Hansen mentioned this at the AAAS panel last Saturday, as well. This cuts both ways. Bad weather, climate concerns up. Good weather, climate concerns down.
On a related note I am happy (sort of) to report that climate concerns are down in Central Texas for this very reason. The drought is still abating, flowers and (surviving) trees are happily budding, lawns are greening, the hipsters are packing their bags for SXSW, and everything is glorious again.
Thank You Peter Gleick | Digging in the Clay
So I will keep on trying to understand and debate new evidence that arises on both sides of the climate debate. It amazes me that you can see that somehow as ‘antiscience’. If you see that as undermining climate science, I can only say your hypotheses must be built on very shaky foundations and I must add a vote of thanks that you have revealed now by your actions the desperation of those losing the battle for hearts and minds.
Documents strike at heart of denial machine | rabble.ca
[David Suzuki] If these groups were truly engaged in questioning the science, using valid scientific methods and principles, it wouldn’t be a problem. Science is strengthened through scrutiny and challenges; that’s how it works, and that’s what the peer-review process is about. But these organizations are engaged in secretive and dishonest lobbying and public-relations efforts aimed at stalling measures to protect the environment and health.
Post a Comment