Notes on the faked Heartland document

Shall we start a fund to send Leo Hickman to some proper journalism classes?

Maurizio Morabito (omnologos) said @ur momisugly February 15, 2012 at 11:47 pm

Shall we start a fund to send Leo Hickman to some proper journalism classes?

The Git commenced Journalism at UTas back in 2004 and lasted all of two lectures and one tutorial. It was, being kind, useless. The only classes where critical thinking was taught and practiced were Philosophy, History and Geology.

I really, really would like to see the Guardian humbled.

Also:

His effort will focus on providing curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain – two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science.

Anyone who knows David Wojick’s writing would immediately know that there is no way he’d be involved in anything as silly as this.

Duke C. over at Lucia’s seems to have found a time stamp on the strategy memo showing a Pacific coast creation time for the scan. Comments 89887-89888.
Isn’t Heartland only located in D. C. and Chicago?

In recent news – – –
A bungling Iranian bomber blew off his own legs when he hurled a grenade at Thai police outside a Bangkok school – which bounced off a tree and then exploded at his feet.
A bungling climate alarmist tried to spice up boring stolen documents from the Heartland Institute, but had their amateurish fake exposed, blowing off the story’s legs.
– – –
I don’t think the fools involved in this sordid affair are going to get a big thank you from their former friends at the Biased Broadcasting Cabal or the Leftardian.

This from Heartland:
How did this happen? The stolen documents were obtained by an unknown person who fraudulently assumed the identity of a Heartland board member and persuaded a staff member here to “re-send” board materials to a new email address. Identity theft and computer fraud are criminal offenses subject to imprisonment. We intend to find this person and see him or her put in prison for these crimes
Indicates that they know exactly when the theft occured. The time stamp on the email from the duped staffer to the theif would establish that. If that time is prior to 12:41PM on Feb 13, then the Strategy document clearly didn’t originate at Heartland.
Also, check the PDF modified dates. They are all Feb 14, 2012. Span 3 hours from 11 am to 2 pm. What was changed vs. the originals as recieved?

It’s as authentic as the document purporting to show G. W. Bush shirked his Vietnam obligations,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bush-papers-were-faked-admits-cbs-6161169.html
and 0bama’s birth certificate (yeah, whatever, the one produced was a hastily re-issued copy).
and 0bama’s Nobel. Wait, that was authentic. But… as useless as (insert simile here)
Pretty much anyone can see the obvious things pointed out here (ie. different fonts, different style, different everything), and the “smoking gun” of “dissuading teachers from teaching science” is something that only exists in the warmists wettest of wet dreams.
“WE” (ie. skeptics) actually WANT teachers to teach Science. Science is something completely different from anything to do with AGW doctrine, so fittingly championed by a divinity school dropout and his favorite hockey team.
Science teaches us to question things, to adjust a hypothesis when observation no longer matches, that correlation is NOT causation, that an average is supposed to include current data, not just ideal data from some arbitrarily defined past dataset, that messing with real-world data to create a predetermined result is wrong, that adjusting historical data to match a hypothesis is criminal, and on and on.

Question: are there any facts in the faked memo which could not have been extracted from the other documents or otherwise publicly known?

“The ”2012 Climate Strategy” is the purported “smoking gun” that provides commentary and context missing from the other factual documents.” – just like the “45 minutes” dossier issued by the Labour government here in the UK. They never learn. The poor writing also suggests a younger person, a result of the drop in educational standards in recent years.

I agree that this is a fake. Leaving aside the technical stuff, it just doesn’t have the ‘look and feel’ that such a real document on such a topic would have, The other exhibits show that Heartland’s internal workings are pretty professional, that they have a house style, that they are used to being exact in their work and run their office in an organised way.
It is (to me at least) inonceivable that a senior staff member would write such an important document (for if real it would be the strategic plan) for internal consumption in a style so far removed from the norm.
But we must assume that the faker believed that their rather inept attempt at a forgery would be taken at face value. What can this tell us about his/her identity?
1. They are not at all familiar with the ways, habits and mindset of senior staff in any institution. The ‘ambience’ is wrong, the phrasing is wrong, the general tone of the document is wrong for the way those guys work. Compare and contrast the fake with the thoroughly researched and argued real ‘Fundraising Plan’ to see the difference.
2. We can rule out any of the established pro-AGW groups like Greenpeace or WWF or those sort of guys. They may be very misguided, but they are not naive. They would do a professional job that would last more than 24 hours of scrutiny.
3. There is (I think) no factual detail in the fake that cannot be gleaned from the other released documents. No further supporting detail, no ‘mood music’. It is, in essence, just a rehash of the other documents with a supposedly disobliging commentary added to it. We can conclude that this is unlikely to come from a Heartland insider or disgruntled employee – unless at a very junior level like security staff, cleaner or janitor.
4. The faker is familiar with the ‘Climate Wars’. And some of the phrasing betrays their own position ‘We pay to undermine the official UN IPCC reports’ is a tell. As is ‘other contributions….from corporations whose interests are threatened by climate policies’. And of course ‘two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science’.
I’d guess (no surprises here) that the faker is to the far side of the pro green, anti corporation side of the debate.
5. The wording and phrasing seems to be (though wrong for the supposed purpose) consistent throughout. This is not a document that has had multiple editors, or at least had had one overriding editor to impose the uniform style. But my feeling is that it was done by one individual
6. The faker must have assumed that he would get away with it – that his fake would be accepted. He has a high regard for his own abilities, and probably little regard for those of others.
7. This was an opportunistic fake, not a planned scam. Once he/she had obtained the real Heartland documents and found them to be thoroughly dull, they needed something to spice their adventure up a bit. And this is the result. I doubt that they spent more than a few hours constructing it, and the timeline shows that they were keen to get rid of the evidence asap. Not for them the patience of a two-year wait for Climategate 2.
My best guess is that this was done by a bright individual working alone, with no actual experience in large institutions. A ‘greenie’ with a computer and a scanner. Not an insider. One with a high regard for himself, but not a mastermind planning their every move ten years ahead.
I’ll leave others to consider what ‘profile’ this may fit, but my personal view is tending to the spotty youth working away alone in his bedroom. Or a disgruntled middle-aged loner.
Time will tell.

Hi Anthony,
Since the Heartland Institute emailed the documents to the false email-account, please try the HI to forward that email to you so you can compare the original documents with the published ones. The truth will come out very quickly!