BREAKING: Gleick Confesses

Wow. Just wow.
(and kudos to Mosh)

Gleick denies being the faker, though he admits pretexting Heartland to get the real documents. Gleick wrote: “I do not know the source of that original document…”

So Lucy Ramirez now anonymously forwards incriminating documents to innocent climate bloggers?
I’m supposed to believe this? After he confesses that he impersonated a Heartland Institute board member in order to steal material?
I do not believe this statement. I think he stole the board packet and, since he didn’t find the incriminating material he wanted, he made it up! It’s a lot simpler as an explanation, and it accounts for all the known facts. I love Occam’s razor.

Anthony, your post might reasonably have included Andrew Revkin’s harsh-yet-correct judgment:

“Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing … Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others. … That is his personal tragedy and shame.

For skeptics and non-skeptics alike there is one clear lesson-learned: “Be First with the Truth” … because the story of Peter Gleick shows the sad fate that awaits all who ignore this bedrock principle of science and of skepticism.
[REPLY: No, he might not have. -REP]

Well, well, well. Looks like Mr Gleick wishes to make a name for himself. Hmm I smell a rat in the room!

Well at least he fessed up. Where do that leave the fake document?

What a tool, he basically says wah wah the deniers made me do it! Hopefully Heartland and their legal folks will make his life interesting.

So he is trying to become a martyr for the cause? The ends justify the means?

The honorable thing for Gleick to do would be to disappear entirely. Even in his confession he is misrepresenting HI; you can’t get much lower.

jthomas2 says:
February 20, 2012 at 6:30 pm
“What led you to suspect Gleick to begin with?”
Ahem… “Efforts…have begun to allow high-profile climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter or own.” (from the Gleickenstein / Frankengleick memo)
Why should Heartland think that Gleick, of all people, is important? Warmists had free access to Op-Eds in the NYT and many other papers for ages; why should they care about a Forbes blog?

Remember that Steven Mosher felt that the FORGERY was written in Gleick’s voice, so the “some anonymous somebody sent it to me” is not very credible.

This sounds like a case of “got hand caught in the cookie jar, damn it” confession time. The tone just doesn’t come across as being a “it’s midnight and I can’t sleep so I guess I should confess and get it off my chest” kind of thing. Especially the part about “they made me do it”. Apology, maybe. Sincere, definitely not.

Oh, this is beyond embarrassing. This guy is an elected member of the National Academy of Sciences.

Well, I fail to see why he and his ilk are so convinced that they are right that they feel they must shut down debate with those who disagree. If their data and conclusions are as conclusive as they claim they should welcome the impotent attempts to demonstrate otherwise, but they don’t. If nothing else that would make me question the whole boondoggle.
We’ll see where this goes from here…I can only hope some eyes are opened regarding the kind of science that supports climate doomsday scenarios.
So…Is he in legal hot water?

And yet the statement once again lays out more non facts
“My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated — to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.”
‘prevent debate’?
And once again the ‘sin’ its all couched in the all too familiar, ‘but the Devil made me do it’ excuse.
All the parties involved should be utterly ashamed of themselves. Any claim they thought they had to the ‘moral high ground’ should be silenced forever after this debacle.
Oh and can Anthony and others now have an apology for their reasoned and logical arguments that the (a) documents were faked and (b) the excellent investigation work that pointed the finger straight at the person who has now confessed.
This is more than an own goal or shooting oneself in the foot.
Perhaps a new phrase for hari-kari. “To Gleick”?!

Mosher you are bloody brilliant!!

So he says he did not leak? Or he’s sorry for everything but does not admit leaking?
I never gave my view on this Hearltand thing; It’s that both sides should show transparency, and the only agenda on both sides should be the truth instead of working up ways to influence the public’s opinion on this debate through anything else but science.
It doesn’t take a genius that “our” side needs money as much as “theirs”, if we are to counter their arguements scientifically, but keeping the paper trail hidden from the public opens us up to such attacks like “anti-science founding”, etc etc.
I hope both sides learn from this – keep sources of funding open and don’t fake, lie, or sex up the truth.

“I made no changes or alterations of any kind to any of the Heartland Institute documents or to the original anonymous communication.”
Doesn’t answer everything. Who authored the fake Strategy document? Funnily enough Gleick was suspected because it looked like, based on the contents, that HE authored it, but here he claims to be the leaker and phisher though not the author.
And which document was the first to appear to Gleick? The Strategy document is the odd one out so it would seem that one. If it wasn’t that one then Heartland sent that to him (the phish) which doesn’t seem likely.
If the Strategy document was sent to Gleick then it’s possible Gleick was played as a dupe by someone else: the conspiracy theory.
Or Gleick’s confession might just be laced with more porkies.
No doubt he’s engaging in forward thinking damage control after realising the legal implications of his deed.

Peter could have mailed the fake document to his own self, anonymously.

Sorry I got caught. That’s pretty much the substance of his “apology”.

In a contentous issue like AGW and all the “right stuff” people on the science side like the ones here at wuwt, the truth will prevail. If the other side had good science and right minds they would win. But that’s not what’s going to happen. Piece by piece, little by little the facts and the truth will prevail.
I’m reminded of the time our little college in this little town lined up to debate the Harvard debate team. We won the debate. Never should have happened. This was the case largely because we got to choose what side of the debate we argued. Our side of the arguement could not be lost because we had the side with all the supporting truths. Same thing holds true here. The warmers are on the wrong side of the debate and wer’re and the right side. Its only a matter of time until the whole rotten ass bunch of them will fold but not until we give em the medicine they deserve.
Well done Anthony and all those other supporters who carry on the good fight.

Now on to illuminating the involvement of DeSmog, ThinkProgess etc.
Plenty of evidence points to a pre-planned, well coordinated scheme, by several long time critic’s and enemies, to attack and disseminate knowingly false information for the sole reason to damage Heartland in the process.
More peer to peer review work on the way I imagine ….

Wow! I tried to leave global warming scam debating but couldn’t. So worth my time.

Ric Werme says:
Wow, just wow. So this makes the “faked” document more interesting – Gleick says he got it first, so whoever wrote it is either at Heartland or had copies of the documents it quoted from.
That could possibly be so if we accept Gleick’s word that he received the faked memo originally and then solicited by fraud the other documents.
But given the similarity of the language and writing style in the faked memo to much of that on record by Gleick and given the times in the metadata of the faked memo, when added to the knowledge we have that the man is not above lying ( in order to obtain the other material ) I think any rational man could quite easily draw the conclusions that, as was originally believed, Gleick could easily have prepared the memo in order to make the other documents, which are innocuous in and of themselves, seem something more.

Well-funded? Where’s my check? Must be coming from the Koch (because Halliburton is too hard to spell) Brothers.

Gleick failed to read the instructions clearly visible on the explosive device: (http://contrary2belief.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/294/)
He’s confessed to the wire fraud. As well as being gullible and stupid.
But not to the drafting of the fake document.
I suspect that it won’t take long until the originator(s) of the fake document is identified.

TanGeng says:
February 20, 2012 at 6:49 pm
“We’d have to see the mail package to get to the bottom of this. I hope Gleick saved all the evidence.”
Gleick wouldn’t even know how to delete the evidence.

A thought – if the “Strategy memo” was physically mailed to him, can we see the envelope and postmark?
If it were emailed, may we see the headers and so on?

Peter Gleick is a liar and a thief. Now he will rat out others to save himself. Be afraid AGW crowd, be very afraid. When’s the victory dance?

folks, re: the creator of the fake “strategy” doc, don’t accuse yet but don’t assume for a moment that Gleick’s tale is credible….. I for one am highly skeptical about his current story….
We’ll have to see conclusive evidence of a kind that could not be faked to establish that Gleick received the fake strategy doc in early Jan. from another source. I’m not expecting that kind of evidence to exist because I don’t believe this story, but I’m quite willing and eager to be shown the evidence.
Your move, Peter Gleick.
oh, and your move, Heartland Institute….. they may have a variety of high cards to play if Gleick felt compelled to issue a public mea culpa (however misleading it might be).

Hey, poster identifying as “William Connelley”, is this you?
“[Connelley’s] career as a global warming propagandist has now been stopped, following a unanimous verdict that came down today through an arbitration proceeding conducted by Wikipedia. Wikipedia barred him — again unanimously — from editing biographies of those in the climate change field.”
I guess William Connelley didn’t update Mr. Gleicks’ Wikipedia today then.

LMAO! So, the moron couldn’t confirm the accuracy of the faked document. Ok, I’m not buying it, but let’s say this is true. ……
He couldn’t confirm it. In other words, he had no idea if it was true or not, in what can only be described as warmist logic, he then sent it on as truth, to other like minded individuals, who in turn couldn’t discern fact from fiction either!!!!
And, then he states, “I only note that the scientific understanding of the reality and risks of climate change is strong, compelling, and increasingly disturbing,…….”
Peter, you haven’t learned anything. What you should have learned is that you, nor your colleagues know how to discern fact from fiction. But, I’m not convinced that was your aim to begin with.

They’re bitter and angry, dishonest, delusional and increasingly unhinged.
These people need to be sued into the ground.

He is lying like a rug.
He did it and he knows everybody knows it.
Too bad we don’t have duels.

no update or retraction yet on the Smog Blog…..
I wonder how many of the CAGW bloggers and journalists will be running for the hills now….
Even with only Gleick’s current statement (more revelations to come I’m hoping) how many blogs and media outlets will want to continue to incur legal exposure over ignoring the C&D letter etc.?
We’ll probably see some sniveling retreats and retractions soon, although in the spirit of Gleick’s “confession” there will be more statements blaming it all on their evil critics who made them go bad….

Glieck writes at his huffpost blog:

I only note that the scientific understanding of the reality and risks of climate change is strong, compelling, and increasingly disturbing, and a rational public debate is conspiracy to prevent scientific debate?desperately needed. My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated — to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.

Gleick pleads for debate now? Against forces that “prevent this debate….” Yet the original climategate emails reveal systematic effort by climate scientists to prevent genuine scientific debate about climate change….
organizations like HI, he implicitly alleges, “prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.” Yet the climategate emails indicate a conspiracy to defeat FOIA laws exercised to expand transparency needed to conduct science, hugely important to taxpayers and the public.
Clearly, Gleick is internally struggling with the enormous hypocrisies involved since climategate – and failing to cope well.

With a miniscule budget, Heartland tries to keep the flame of truth burning. With a vast budget, Gore and company keep trying to put it out.
I was at a wedding this weekend, where I saw an old family friend who retired from the oil industry ten years ago after making a fortune. He let me know that he would be using a considerable portion of his open-mindedness to even consider reading my book, which he indicated that he nonetheless planned to do. That’s how far this has gotten: An oil man stands shoulder to shoulder with Gore. That’s where we are, historically.
It’s been nearly a week since I plugged my book, which continues to do well on Kindle: http://amzn.to/w0Lj6H

Skiphil says:
February 20, 2012 at 7:03 pm
folks, re: the creator of the fake “strategy” doc, don’t accuse yet but don’t assume for a moment that Gleick’s tale is credible….. I for one am highly skeptical about his current story….
You have a point, and your skepticism is very well taken – because…well, look: the dates on the misdirected/stolen board packet are January 16; the board met on January 17. So I have to ask a couple questions – if Gleick received the “Strategy Memo” in early 2012, that has to mean between January 2 and 15. I’m not familiar enough with the Heartland Institute’s site to know when they announce their board meetings, but it makes my eyebrows crawl upwards contemplating the short time to discover who to impersonate and determine how.
It’s much easier to have stolen the documents and then created the “Strategy Memo” than to have received an anonymous mailing, attempt to verify it, then frantically determine how to scam the Heartland Institute out of its board packet.
Or, so I think. Others may, of course, think otherwise.

“…in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics…”
The first step is to admit you have a problem or, as in this case, a lack of ethics.

Focus for a moment upon this sentence near the beginning of Gleick’s HuffPo statement:
“Given the need for reliance on facts in the public climate debate, I am issuing the following statement” [Peter Gleick]
Could there be anything much more nauseating in the current situation than such a smarmy smug self-satisfied pretense that it is a compelling “need for reliance on facts in the public climate debate” which is now prompting this statement from PG at this time???
Such “need for facts” did not prompt him to inform the public anytime in the past week, and one has to wonder how this careful limited statement is really fulfilling the public’s “need for facts”…

The young man seems to be such a creative writer, making up a story about Heartland after an earlier episode involving a book review for a book he never read …
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/10/16/donna-laframboises-new-book-causing-reviews-in-absentia-amongst-some-agw-advocates/
Honesty? Integrity? Such old-fashioned concepts.

re: evidence on the fake “strategy” doc
Since he claims to have received it “in the mail” from an anonymous source he is trying to show why there will not be an electronic trail (and presumably he will say he did not keep any envelope it came in).
YET, he will have to provide the forensic proof that he scanned the doc with an Epson scanner at the time shown in the meta data. How else will he explain both that Epson meta data for the scanned strategy doc and also that he claims to have emailed it to the various journalists and bloggers?

Add me to the list of those who think this is only the first half of Gleick’s confession – unless he has a very secret admirer whose sincerest form of flattery is also imitation.

As one of my attorney friends likes to say, “Sue the bastard[s].”
Go get ’em, Anthony!

The “Strategy” document forgery, in Gleick’s voice, terminology, and idiosyncratic style remains unaccounted for. I think this confession is proceeding in stages. The healing can only begin once all the pus is drained. I worry for this man, and take no satisfaction from his ruin.
I would also like to go on the record stating that Stephen Mosher is a super-genius. I’m glad he’s one of the good guys.

The old plea, the ends justify the means. Congratulations Anthony and investigators, especially Mosh, the Clint Eastwood of ‘The Smoking Gun’ saga.

Drag this out in court and keep it exposed to daylight, otherwise it will be just another AGW embarrassment to be swept under the carpet by our “establishment compliant” media.
The underfunded “bloggers” need to remain literally as “Nemisis” – the spirit that attacks the hubris of the powerful.
Our Media have abandoned that responsibility and their duty to tell the truth by selling their soul to the power of social advocacy, and a dishonest one at that.
The so called “progressive left” media believe in deceit as a legitimate tool to influence opinion.
I think the following best analyses why.
“We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -John F. Kennedy, 35th US president (1917-1963)

Gleick can’t help but put in his bit about AGW. The AGW conjecture is basd on the concept of “backradiation” from the atmosphere somehow increasing the rate of warming of the surface in the morning and decreasing the rate of cooling in the evening. Each would require the addition of thermal energy which would be the equivalent of a heat transfer from cold to hot.
Does the energy in radiation from a cooler layer of the atmosphere get converted to thermal energy when it strikes a warmer point on the surface which is already being warmed by the Sun at, say, 11am somewhere?
If it does, then this means there is a heat transfer from that cooler layer to that warmer point on the surface at that time, thus violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
If it doesn’t (as I say) then the Second Law is not violated and there is absolutely no radiative Greenhouse effect because there is no way in which such radiation can affect the temperature of the surface unless it is converted to thermal energy.
This really is fairly elementary physics well covered in upper levels of undergraduate courses throughout the world.
If you wish to discuss this point please respond to my posts on the Open thread.
.

Gleick has openly admitted to wire fraud and possibly identity theft.

Are there any links to CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC or PBS coverage of this news item?

Watching these fools ( warmers ) is like watching The Bad Lieutenant. Down and down they go into that self inflicted spiral of doom , kinda sad in a way. I LIKED the Bad Lieutenant , gone to get more popcorn!

I have a post on this at Climate Etc http://judithcurry.com/2012/02/20/breaking-news/
My post points out Gleick’s numerous writings on the topic of ethics and integrity in science, including his congressional testimony on this topic.

Unfortunately, I don’t think Gleick needs to worry about his reputation amoung the CAGW crowd. All he needed to do was repeat the montra the science is settled and the idiots (special interests) on the other side are hell bent on lining their pockets at the expence of the human race. Simple.

My comment at Dot Earth:
There remains the serious difficulty here with Mr. Gleick’s cause — and Andy’s. While I sincerely respect the depths of their convictions, it is still true that after two decades and hundreds of billions of dollars in research, there is absolutely no genuine scientific evidence that CO2 has contributed even a jot to the mild warming of the two decades from the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s — a warming which has, by all accounts, remained dormant for the last 15 years.
Mr. Gleick is to be admired for his honesty and frankness. But not for his scientific sophistication, nor for his knowledge of the actual literature on climate change which, we learn from the most superficial perusal of the subject, has been going on for the last several billion years.

btw, to be bi-partisan or non-partisan about it, can we agree that Gleick’s statement is both “Nixon-esque” and “Clinton-esque”??
Talk about an artfully crafted statement that leaves vital questions unanswered, evaded, and obfuscated?

hmmm. so he says he got the first one by email from an anonymouse………. ok, let’s see the details of said email……
does it still exist, or do Jones’s deletion instructions apply here also. 😉

Is Gleick taking one for the team? Sounds like he’s trying to assert the fake document is real which would give his teammates the ability to continue to attack HI.
Hard to say….I think desmog started the cover for him in this blog
http://www.desmogblog.com/it-s-bird-it-s-hockey-stick-it-s-faked-document
He basically is saying quit looking at the fake and look at the other stuff. That had to be a salvo for PG to start conversation away from the most damning documnet.

Heartland and the board member need to file criminal complaints. He shouldn’t be allowed to ‘apologize’ his way out of Identity Theft, and Identity Fraud.
And Mr. Gleick should REALLY hope I don’t make the jury pool.

Anthony,
while I respect the rights of you and the others directly affected by Gleicks actions to seek redress, the continued public pursuit of someone who may be in a vulnerable state of mind does not appear to be in the spirit of this blog. Could I suggest an appeal to reason for the contributors of this blog to leave further judgement of Mr Gleick to the authorities and history.

McKiitrick’s comment at Climate Audit is worth a read:
http://climateaudit.org/2012/02/20/peter-gleick-confesses/#comment-324812

This confession reeks of damage control. I would imagine Gleick realized that with so many fingers pointing at him that it was only a matter of time before the law tracked this back to him. The hard part of a criminal investigation isn’t finding the clues, it’s finding were to LOOK for the clues.
Once He realized ‘Heartland Gate’ was falling on it’s face after less then a week, with himself as the prime suspect, He Most have known that the Phishing would eventually lead the cops to himself.
At this point there is no longer any reason for him to plead innocent to the theft. but there is still a chance that the fraud charge can be avoided. by Confessing he has a (slim) chance of creating reasonable doubt. without the confession his chances are far weaker.
Personally I have little doubt that he was the forger, for all the reasons that Mosher and others have posted… but I’m looking forward to a few weeks of Gleick arguing that someone out their just guessed he was so amoral, dishonest and Ideologically blind that they could send him an obvious fake document and he’d run with it.

What an idiot! lol

Skiphil says:
February 20, 2012 at 7:30 pm
re: evidence on the fake “strategy” doc
Since he claims to have received it “in the mail” from an anonymous source he is trying to show why there will not be an electronic trail (and presumably he will say he did not keep any envelope it came in).

and in doing so, he has opened himself up to an investigation by the postal inspectors service who have a reputation of being very very thorough in their investigations. He may have jumped from the pan into the fire, now he has both the Secret Service to worry about (computer crimes are investigated by the Treasury Department Secret Service :
http://www.secretservice.gov/ectf.shtml
and the postal inspector service:
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/aboutus/mission.aspx
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/forms/mailfraudcomplaint.aspx
Hmmm might not have been a good idea?
Larry

Does the U.S have a statute covering the obtaining of private property by deception or does it just come under Fraud?
Given Gleicks ‘mea culpa’, which clearly demonstrates his inability to maintain rational legal and ethical standards in pursuit of his public advocacy position, I presume he’ll be standing down from all publicly held positions?
Ones such as his recently (17th. Jan 2012), announced board appointment to the National Center for Science Education. http://www.pacinst.org/press_center//press_releases/gleick_NCSE_board.html
For he is most certainly *not* “the right man for the job”!

last post snagged by spam filter — I’m getting good at this.
Larry
[REPLY: Larry, your post was released before this arrived. Please give it a few minutes before signalling. When a moderator is on duty, he usually checks pretty often. We’re getting pretty good at this. -REP]

“Mr. Gleick is to be admired for his honesty and frankness.”
say WHAT??? Don’t you understand what sparked this confession? Heartland obviously was tracking the email address used to request the private documents, and the trail led straight to Gleick. They are in the process of both filing a civil lawsuit and possibly pursuing criminal charges. Gleick found this out, dropped a load in his pants, and after a brief talk with his legal counsel produced this statement, which I have no doubt was written by said legal counsel.
A perp that confesses AFTER he’s been shown the rock solid evidence against him deserves nothing but contempt and ridicule!!!

On the first Heartland documents thread, mikemUK said:

I suspect that the only reason that the genuine documents were stolen in the first place was to lend authenticity to the “package” containing the fake – including to ensure that the stationery format matched Heartland’s current usage.

And mikemUK is half-way to being vindicated, though it’s possible that Gleick did receive the faked document in the mail and that it was not still in the process of being polished up.

Too funny, all this. Gleick admits (partially and gracelessly) to being a now-certified and card-carrying dirtbag, Connolley is again barred from contributing to Wiki and A Physicist tries to recover faded dignity by lecturing skeptics with his “Be First with the Truth” line he’s been repeating in every post of his lately.
All in all a good couple of days. Congrats to WUWT for staying on top of this farce, and three loud cheers for Mr Mosher. Me, I’m getting up to celebrate with a neat shot of golden Glenfiddich.

The way he’s travelling forthcoming explanations will need to incorporate a time machine and/or worm hole to adequately account for events. I don’t put it past him.

Love the comment at LGF claiming he’s “taking one for the team” ha! I’m sure that’s why he’s coming clean now, yeah right.

Smart doesn’t prevent Stupid.

Translation of A Physicist’s comment:
“Quick, quick, we need something to divert attention. Let’s throw something…anything…out there!”

Varco says:
February 20, 2012 at 7:58 pm
Anthony,
while I respect the rights of you and the others directly affected by Gleicks actions to seek redress, the continued public pursuit of someone who may be in a vulnerable state of mind does not appear to be in the spirit of this blog. Could I suggest an appeal to reason for the contributors of this blog to leave further judgement of Mr Gleick to the authorities and history.
============================================
Varco, I understand what you are saying. And, you’re probably right. But, you must also understand some of the pain that this man and his ilk have caused. Not just by this momentous lack of judgement, but by his and his ilk’s lack of judgement throughout.
There’s no way this passes without comment. It’s an impossible thing to ask.

This is from J Currie from her blog
Comment #2 at dotearth:
“Peter Gleick is standing up for the nobility of science. He deserves support for doing so. It is the abject failure of many too many scientists to stand up for what they believe to be real and true about the global predicament facing humankind that is unacceptable and pernicious. The silence of so many scientists has allowed the ideological idiocy Peter has exposed to triumph over science for way too long. At this moment, I want to salute Peter Gleick. That scientists follow his example is long overdue. Peter, thanks for standing up and speaking out so loudly and clearly.”
Now we know how this will be spun, Gleick will become a hero or a martyr or something.

rk says:
February 20, 2012 at 8:20 pm
“That’s brutal…lots of past tense. ‘and other means’….ouch”
The NYT just says that this source has now been discredited and they will get their material from someone else in the future. Normal people would start to think when their trusted sources turn out to be forgers, but this is the NYT. Expect Revkin and the BBC’s Black to be undeterred.
The NYT lost 40mill USD last year but still has a whopping market cap of 1.5 bn. They surely see no immediate need to change their business model. Bleeding like that they can continue a few more decades.

Hoax-y Stick Gate
thanks, boston12gs.

… I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else’s name.
Wire fraud. Identity theft. Good luck with that.
I can explicitly confirm, as can the Heartland Institute, that the documents they emailed to me are identical to the documents that have been made public.
No, you can’t confirm anything. You have nothing to offer by way of confirmation except your word. And that is worthless.
I made no changes or alterations of any kind to any of the Heartland Institute documents or to the original anonymous communication.
You give us your word on that? Oh, wait …
I will not comment on the substance or implications of the materials; others have and are doing so.
What gall, to go there in your “apology”. The fact that you just can’t let it go, even when your ass in on the line, bodes well for those that get to interrogate, depose, prosecute and sue you.
… and a rational public debate is desperately needed.
Perhaps if you had decided to read the *genuine* Climategate emails, you would have a clue as to who has been actively stifling the rational public debate.
My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated — to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.
I assume that what you are talking about are the ongoing efforts – often anonymous, well funded, and coordinated – to attack climate science (that disagrees with yours) and scientists (that disagree with you) and prevent this debate? What, exactly was your frustration with that?
That Mikey and Jimmy and Gavin and Kev weren’t giving you enough of the limelight? Is that why you felt the need to refer to yourself as a “high-profile climate scientist” in the faked memo?
BTW love the double dashes in your “apology”. They are diagnostic. And present in the faked memo.

OO.. I’m so looking forward to seeing what the resident artist does with this one !!! :-))

I looked up A Phraudicists source about some SuPeR SeKrIT funding source for Heartland about to be revealed. What I found was speculation with no evidence that some private businessman in Chicago that no one ever heard of, who has no business interests affected by this issue, may have donated some money to Heartland because he agrees with them philosophically.
and that’s it.
OH WOW IF THAT IS TRUE WHO COULD IMAGINE SUCH A THING???

American Geophysical Union
Task Force on Scientific Ethics
Chair
Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute, Oakland, California
http://www.agu.org/about/governance/committees_boards/scientific_ethics.shtml

I won’t hold my breath. Obama’s justice dept won’t press charges or criminal charges will be dismissed . The left will support him and they control the senate and the whitehouse and the msm etc. In their circles he will be even more elevated. As known by many on this site, it has never really been about science for the agw crowd, the only way to change this is to vote then out. Gleick will be portrayed as a hero that stops at nothing to save the day. Bottom line we have a long way to go before we can celebrate that science will win the day

And where would I find the confession of the Hacker that released those private emails!!
Hey Hey Where!!!
Hypocrasy so thick you could cut it.
The Denialist Watts false smugness should be regulated at this point.
REPLY: Your handle is “wheresmyak47”
Shall I assume that to be a death threat sir? – Anthony

JohnM,
And its getting funnier again. The tools are scrambling for damage control. Varco says:
(February 20, 2012 at 7:58 pm) says, “Anthony, while I respect the rights of you and the others directly affected by Gleicks actions to seek redress, the continued public pursuit of someone who may be in a vulnerable state of mind does not appear to be in the spirit of this blog. Could I suggest an appeal to reason for the contributors of this blog to leave further judgement of Mr Gleick to the authorities and history.” BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Could I in turn suggest…oh, never mind, the mods will snip that one for sure.
And then, my favourite addled windbag on this blog, A physicist, breathlessly annouces that an anonymous donor to Heartland is not a wino living in a dumpster and/or an OWS activist, but may…get this…actually be rich! Shocking, I say. I now understand that Smokey’s, “physicist, it’s been said before but bears repeating: you’re a friggin’ idiot” is not an insult, but a peer reviewed and verified clinical assessment .

By the way, Anthony, Scientific American has their original 2/15/2012 expose article on their site without even so much as an update to indicate that their story is based on a fraud. You may want to contact them and let them know that either the article will be coming down or their profits will.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=leaked-conservative-group

James Sexton says:
February 20, 2012 at 8:38 pm
I’ve one in the spam bucket……..
[REPLY: James, patience is a virtue. Your comment was back in the pending queu before this arrived. Give us a bit of….? -REP]
=====================================
My bust…. it’s just that usually when I push post and my comment isn’t stating “awaiting moderation”, then it’s lost. Apologies.
Italics are on……..

guys, guys! What was faked?
[Reply: If you still don’t know, you need to do a lot of reading to get up to speed. ~dbs, mod.]