“Fakegate” A climate scam backfires
by Jonathan DuHamel on Feb. 22, 2012, under Climate change, PoliticsA few days ago the blogsphere was alive with a revelation that the Heartland Institute, a free-market think tank, was apparently planning to influence science education in America’s schools. The Arizona Daily Star reported: ”Leaked documents from a prominent conservative think tank show how it sought to teach schoolchildren skepticism about global warming and planned other behind-the-scenes tactics using millions of dollars in donations from big corporate names.”
It has now been revealed that the memo upon which this accusation was based was a fake (see here and here).
This incident was incited by Dr. Peter E. Gleick, a water and climate analyst, and founder of the Pacific Institute. He had received the faked memo anonymously and then obtained additional memos from Heartland under false pretenses. Once exposed, Gleick admitted his part in the “leak.” (see here). Ironically, Gleick lectures on scientific integrity. On Thursday, 16 February, Dr. Gleick resigned as chair of American Geophysical Union’s Task Force on Scientific Ethics.
The Daily Bayonet notes:
Gleick’s Heartland documents proved the so-called ‘well-funded denial machine’ is anything but well-funded, and destroyed what was a pretty handy warmist narrative about their opponents. He also showed that when it comes to climate ‘science’, feelings come before facts. Gleick claimed it was ‘frustration’ that drove him to either forget or forgo his own ethical standards. That’s not how a man of science thinks, that’s how a deeply invested activist thinks.
Some of his defenders suggest Gleick is guilty only of a ‘small’ breach of ethics, or perhaps deserves praise for whistleblowing heroics. They don’t realize it, but they are further damaging their cause. By making excuses for their friend and fellow-traveler Peter Gleick, they show that when it comes to keeping the global warming gravy train on the tracks, they’ll do and say anything.
For more on the story see here.
I wonder if the Arizona Daily Star will print a retraction.
UPDATE: The Arizona Daily Star prints followup story here.
