« [email protected] with Ronald Bailey | Main | The Gleick Scandal 2 »

Tuesday, February 21, 2012


Stan Gibilisco

Welcome to the twenty-first century, the age of enlightenment. We have Republican science and Democrat science; we have Christian science and Hindu science and Atheist science and Muslim science. We have real science and fake science, and the theory of relativity, which says that they can all be true, or all be false, or all be anything in between, depending on factors that no one can identify.

Even if the worst turns out true -- humans are destroying the planet -- how can we stop it without the cooperation of everyone in the world? Why should we Americans drive ourselves into an economic depression while the Chinese rape the earth with greater ferocity than we could ever do even if we dedicated ourselves to global suicide -- and laugh at us to boot?

larry kurtz

The burn index for the north central chemical toilet will reach the extreme category today:


Donald Pay

In order to take people's eyes off the Heartland Institute's climate fraud they have to accuse others of fraud. They know they have gullible echochamber that will magnify their subterfuge. This has the earmarks of typical rightwing fake victimhood.


Speaking of "shenanigans", here are some excerpts from a 2009 NY Times article posted at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/science/earth/21climate.html:

"Officials at the University of East Anglia confirmed in a statement on Friday that files had been stolen from a university server and that the police had been brought in to investigate the breach. They added, however, that they could not confirm that all the material circulating on the Internet was authentic."

"But several scientists and others contacted by The New York Times confirmed that they were the authors or recipients of specific e-mail messages included in the file. The revelations are bound to inflame the public debate as hundreds of negotiators prepare to negotiate an international climate accord at meetings in Copenhagen next month, and at least one scientist speculated that the timing was not coincidental."

Pot calling the kettle black KB?

larry kurtz

KQED: mega-fires pending. ip: eastern New Mexico under fire Wx warning.


Ken Blanchard

A.I.: I am not sure who the pots and kettles are here, but I am sure it works both ways. If a credentialed critic of AGW were found to have stolen the East Anglia files, that would be a deep wound to his or her reputation.

However, the political weight is not quite the same both ways. Those who fly jumbo jets around the world to tell us all that we have to cut back on carbon emissions are constantly appealing to the authority of climate scientists. If the latter are found to be activists first and honest scientists second, that authority collapses.

Ken Blanchard

Donald: others WERE guilty of fraud, if McArdle's judgment is correct. Your seething prejudice notwithstanding.

larry kurtz

"The Arctic has become the frontline for observing the effects of anthropogenic climate change, from rising ocean temperatures to shrinking sea ice cover. These changes have greatly impacted the traditional practices of indigenous Arctic communities, which rely on sea ice for hunting and travel."


Bill Fleming

I agree with KB's post here if I understand what he's saying correctly. Integrity is essential in this debate. Positively essential from those who wish to affect change in our energy practices. And further, they need to convince the world, not just the Republicans. It's time to be impeccable. It could be past time.


"As environmental science has advanced, it has become apparent that the human appetite for animal flesh is a driving force behind virtually every major category of environmental damage now threatening the human future: deforestation, erosion, fresh water scarcity, air and water pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, social injustice, the destabilization of communities, and the spread of disease." Worldwatch Institute, "Is Meat Sustainable?"

There are many reasons why the number of vegans has doubled in the US in less than 3 years. Here are two uplifting videos to help everyone understand why so many people are making this life affirming choice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKr4HZ7ukSE and http://www.veganvideo.org


The pot would be the climate change skeptics and deniers that have their undies in a bunch over alleged "fraud" in the kettle outing possibly forged documents from the Heartland Institute. They/you seem to be forgetting their/your total lack of outrage at the way information was obtained by HACKING emails in the episode I reference while gleefully distorting the contents of those emails in an effort to discredit the findings of climate scientists.

larry kurtz

This has been making the rounds in the twitterness:


larry kurtz

cross-pollination: http://mtcowgirl.com/2012/02/18/desperate-denny/#comment-43190

larry kurtz

Now red state collapse comes home:


we are legion; expect us.


There was global warming and cooling long before man appeared on the earth. Maybe man is helping the process along now, maybe not. But, for example, Gore living in huge mansions and flying private jets all over the place, while at the same time decrying carbon emissions, makes a joke of the whole argument he is trying to make. Carbon credits are a scam. As the poster above said, punishing Americans while China does nothing and actually increases carbon emissions and pollution is ridiculous, unless the whole aim is to destroy our economy. I just drove across the state today and observed the results of the glacial age in our state, and unless I'm mistaken, man wasn't alive then and there was evidently a bit of global cooling then!

Donald Pay

You are very mistaken, lynn, in just about about half of what you have written. Half right is what you get from flipping coins, and indicates that your understanding of what you write is essentially random.

Humans were very much alive during glaciation. Carbon credits are a market-based approach to reducing greenhouse gasses, and while carbon credits are a Republican idea, it is not a scam. Yes, global warming and cooling occurred on earth before humans. Greenhouse gasses played a part in those global changes, too. China has done far more than America to reduce greenhouse gasses, and currently produce far less greenhouse gas on a per capita basis.

KB apparently thinks the fraudulent pettyfoggers running the Heartland Institute ought to be able to perpetuate their anti-science scam without being exposed for the liars they are. I think Gleick and whoever leaked these documents are heros.

Jon S.


The correct appellation for Gleick is "criminal" since he likely committed a crime in falsely obtaining these documents. And it appears as though the only document relevant to the climate issue was forged. John Hinderaker at Powerline has accused Gleick of being the author of the forged document and has dared Gleick to sue him if he is wrong. The ball is in Gleick's court. This is Ken's point. If Gleick has to resort to crimes and forgery to discredit Heartland, what does that say about the strength of his case?

Donald Pay

No charges have been filed against Gleick, yet you say he "likely committed a crime...." This is what passes for rightwing justice these days. We still have the Constitution, so your fascist attempts at convicting Gleick before any charges are filed won't be allowed. But what have you to say bout the anti-science frauds being perpetrated by Heartland Institute, which Gleick's leaked document exposed? Even if we assume the worst of Gleick, his "crimes" are misdemeanors compared to the Heartland Institute's.


But it appears we have a forged document and this forged document exposes Heartland Institute?

Mark Anderson

Gleick talked about fighting non-transparent agency's. That's the whole ball game.
When you have a very powerful industry that want's to sway people against the facts, it's relatively easy to do. Just trace the belief in global warming among Republicans.
Republicans are easier to train than dogs.


My last post was in response to you KB. Here's a little tidbit from Time that reenforces my point:

"The Heartland Institute seems to be mulling its legal options for now, though in the court of karma it may simply be getting its just due. Back in 2009, when a still unknown hacker stole and posted thousands of private e-mails from climate scientists in the controversy that became known as Climategate, Heartland didn't seem too worried about the provenance of the documents. "This is new and real evidence that [climate scientists] should examine and then comment on publicly," Heartland president Bast wrote after the e-mails surfaced in 2009. That the "new and real evidence" had been hacked didn't bother Heartland any more than the fact that many of the Heartland memos were obtained deceitfully has much bothered many climate activists even after Gleick's admission."

The rest of the article is here: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2107364,00.html

Jon S.


Do you think it likely that Jerry Sandusky has committed crimes against children? Do you oppose anyone publicly saying that? I am not the court. I am a private individual. I am not bound by the need for impartiality. Your "right-wing fascist" comment is pure jack assery.

The only evidence Heartland did anything "criminal" (oh, wait, Donald you fascist, are convicting them even before a trial?!) comes from what appears to be a forged document.

Let's be clear, as the president says. If, say, Steven Hayward or someone of that type known to be a skeptic about global warming had falsified his identity to obtain confidential documents from Sierra Club and then in addition, when those documents didn't provide the smoking gun he was looking for, proceeded to forge a document in order to make his political point, Donald would be screaming bloody murder. Donald thinks it is ok to commit fraud and forge documents...as long as it furthers his political interests. Crimes (perhaps) and unethical conduct (for sure) are acceptible if it advances the revolution. What high standards of justice. Justice means "reward your friends and punish your enemies."

larry kurtz

Update: http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/more-on-peter-gleick-and-the-heartland-files/?partner=rss&emc=rss%3f

Donald Pay

Let's look at what Gleick exposed. Some of Heartland Institute's funding sources and a slimy attempt to brainwash school children were finally made public. When real scientists write for publication they have to disclose funding sources and any conflicts of interest. But the deniers get to publish their forged and lying information as the truth and keep all conflicts of interest and funding secret. There is no "forged" information, unless it was forged by Heartland Institute. The document that Heartland says was forged was a draft document, but it was not forged.

D.E. Bishop

I haven't seen any Proof of forgery yet. Does it exist? I don't mean opinions or suggestions or insistences, or even, "Everybody knows... Proof. Is there any proof?

D.E. Bishop

Hit "Post" too soon.

Declaring the information a forgery is a well-established way to attempt to discredit the info.

Forgery, or denial?

Stan Gibilisco

The integrity of science demands not only a strict moral code, but a rigorous adherence to scientific method as well ...


Loose wire indeed.

Bill Fleming

Stan, was it a haywire?

Ken Blanchard

I replied to the many serious comments here in a subsequent post. I reply here to Donald. Telling lies is telling lies, whether they support your positions or mine. Would should want one's own side to be scrupulously honest, regardless of what the other side does. Gleick's behavior was scandalous. This is evident from his removal as chair of the AGU's Task Force on Scientific Ethics. Telling us how much you hate Heartland and others who disagree with you doesn't help your case.


It's unfortunate that the whole discussion about climate has devolved to a mud-wrestling political debate.

In fact, it's too an important a topic to ignore. I do agree with the first poster that we can't ignore China or other developing countries (e.g. India, Brazil) who have thus far gotten a free pass to emit as they wish, but that does not mean that the U.S should be aligning ourselves with them either. If we take a serious stand in favor of action on greenhouse gas emissions we might find that we are no longer the world pariah. A great example of that is in regard to the present situation in Syria. All of a sudden the United States is on the same page as the Arab league and the overwhelming majority of the U.N. general assembly while China is on the same page as Russia, Iran and a handful of other socially unwelcome nations.

We should have the courage to lead. Not accede, not let the Chinese go their separate ways, but there is a political price to be paid for thumbing your nose at the rest of the world and it's nice that that price is increasingly being paid by China, and less frequently by the U.S.

The comments to this entry are closed.