…continue to shred their credibility:
By saying that its investigation, carried out by unknown parties, confirmed Dr. Gleick’s account, the institute was implicitly backing the scientist’s claim that he was not responsible for cobbling together a document labeled a fake by Heartland, which he disseminated along with other genuine ones.
The bogus document spoke of effective ways for “dissuading science teachers from teaching science” and of “cultivating” respected writers on climate issues. Dr. Gleick said he had received it “in the mail.”
The Heartland Institute, which has a Web site related to the document release that Web site it calls “Fakegate,” responded scornfully to Dr. Gleick’s reinstatement. “As near as we can tell, this was not an investigation. It was a whitewash,” the institute’s president, Joseph Bast, said in a statement.
Reactions to the Gleick affair have varied widely. Some environmentalists have praised his actions, saying that the risks posed by climate change are so great that using misrepresentation to uncover details about a group like Heartland is justified. But many others in the environmental camp, including his own board, said that such conduct was unworthy of a scientist, particularly one of Dr. Gleick’s stature.
Not enough of them. Remember this the next time the Pacific Institute says anything about…anything.
Obviously Rand, you don’t understand how an advanced industrial society works. You should have Jim explain it to ya.
another warm monger tale worth noting …
Gergis et al put on hold
American Meteorological Society withdraws Gergis et al paper on proxy temperature reconstruction
Johnny, your links are blank.
Here is a good summary of the issue. Steve McIntyre (Climate Audit) and his readers are responsible for finding the flaws in the original paper.
Does anyone at the institute understand that what Dr. Gleick did is technically a form of wire fraud of the kind that got Keven Mitnick jail time? Does anyone at the institute understand that if Dr. Gleick were willing to commit a federal offense to get his way, he might just be willing to put together a fake document from the material in the other documents he received illegally? Does anyone at the institute understand that condoning wire fraud is not really an act that would improve its reputation?
That would be no, no and no. Next question?
Some environmentalists have praised his actions, saying that the risks posed by climate change are so great that using misrepresentation to uncover details about a group like Heartland is justified.
This is the same mentality (the ends justify the means) behind those “fake but accurate” forged national guard memos in 2004. Anyone who would accept that forged documents are acceptable because their cause is so important is too dense to realize that it completely destroys their credibility and their cause.
Except it doesn’t destroy their credibility (well, for any sane person.) That’s the problem today. Almost half the people in this country have no concept of credibility.
Pfft Rand you don’t have to worry about the Warm mongers or even climate changers , now there the “State-Shifters” Don’t have a nature subscription so can’t read the full article, but sounds like a bunch of fear mongering to the Nth degree with even less science behind it. Just at some magical point of shifting environment of places around world would cause a tipping point/snapping of the elastic band, and the only solution is population reduction and energy consumption reduction.