The Gleick effect – proving there is no bad publicity

gleick_tragedy

Guest Post by Joe Bast

In a December 28 post, blogger Greg Laden, a self-described “biological anthropologist and science communicator,” ranked The Heartland Institute’s efforts to expose global warming alarmism as one of the “top climate stories of 2012”. I suppose we should be flattered, but his error-filled explanation for including us in the list requires some corrections:

  • Heartland isn’t a “climate denial ‘think’ tank.” Last time I checked, no Heartland spokesperson ever denied the existence of the climate, or even climate change.
  • Heartland didn’t “implode” or “suffer major damage” in 2012. In fact, we increased receipts by about 15% from 2011, increased the number of donors nearly four-fold, more than doubled the number of policy advisors (to 237), and set records for press attention and online traffic for our sites. 2012 was a breakthrough year for us, thanks in no small part to the attention generated by our work on global warming/cooling.
  • We have never tried to “prove that cigarette smoking was not bad for you.” We do argue that taxes on smokers are too high and second-hand smoke is not the public health threat that anti-smoking zealots claim.
  • We were not “caught red handed trying to fund an effort explicitly (but secretly) designed to damage science education in public schools.” That description is based on a fake memo circulated by disgraced water scientist Peter Gleick. We announced the curriculum project in our members newsletter and explained there that our intent is to help de-politicize the issue. How is that a bad thing?
  • We did run a billboard about global warming, but it did not “equat[e] people who thought the climate science on global warming is based on facts and is not a fraud with well-known serial killers.” The billboard simply pointed out that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, still believes in global warming, and asked viewers if they do, too. We know why lefties went nuts over it – Kaczynski, after all, is one of their own – but it wasn’t inaccurate or offensive.
  • We lost a few corporate donors who couldn’t stand the heat when liberal advocacy groups, using a donor list stolen by the aforementioned Peter Gleick, circulated online petitions demanding that they stop funding us. But as already mentioned, we gained many more donors than we lost and had an exceptionally good fundraising year.
  • Laden ends by saying The Heartland Institute, “which never was really that big, is now no longer a factor in the climate change.” He’s right that we aren’t very big – about $6 million a year – but he’s wrong about the role we continue to play in the international debate. Our Eighth International Conference on Climate Change, held in Munich on November 31-December 1, 2012, was a huge success. We’ve got projects on climate already lined up for 2013 that make 2012 look like a dress rehearsal.

In short, Heartland played a major role in shaping the debate over global warming in 2012, and we expect to play an even larger role in 2013. Sometimes it takes a little controversy to break through media bias and public indifference. Heartland achieved this in 2012.

Joe Bast is the president of the Heartland Institute

==============================================================

Note to get a window into the strange and hateful mind of Greg Laden, all you need to do is read his about page here and scroll down. Pity the soul that lives in Texas or West Virginia.

– Anthony

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

185 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
nzrobin
December 30, 2012 4:29 pm

Joe,
I found great value in down loading the mp3s and power points of the presentations at the conferences. I’ve done this since NY May 2009. You could say I’m a fan! Thanks heaps for all you and Heartland do.
All the very best wishes for 2013.
Robin (New Zealand)

Baa Humbug
December 30, 2012 4:33 pm

Ladens blog laden with self importance and hate.
Laden by name, laden by nature.

Don Worley
December 30, 2012 4:38 pm

Another fool who knows what’s best for everyone else, and seeks to have us conform to his superior view.

stephen
December 30, 2012 4:39 pm

nice bloke

Henry Galt
December 30, 2012 4:42 pm

I do so wish you would drag Gleick’s sorry ass through the courts Joe.
And…
Wow. The Laden creature is living proof that one can be educated, pig ignorant and stoopid all at the same time. I need to wash.

Balazs
December 30, 2012 4:46 pm

“Disgraced” Peter Gleick is still the president of the Pacific Institute (after a short leave of absence). He is still member of the National Academy of Science and was fairly active at the last AGU meeting in San Francisco. The disastrous billboard ad pretty much turned the table and vindicated Peter Gleick.

Roger Knights
December 30, 2012 4:48 pm

Heartland isn’t a “climate denial ‘think’ tank.” Last time I checked, no Heartland spokesperson ever denied the existence of the climate, or even climate change.

That bullet point should also have added that Heartland devotes only 10% (or whatever) of its spending to climate issues.

AnonyMoose
December 30, 2012 4:48 pm

Found another error of his… on his About page. I don’t think I’ll bother trying to correct his facts, as he has enough other errors around.

December 30, 2012 4:54 pm

Gee, what a nice guy. So humble,too. Glad I don’t have to worry about him moving to Texas.

MattN
December 30, 2012 4:56 pm

They could have really capitalized with positive public opinion following Gleickgate if they hadn’t done the stupid billboard. That was an opportunity they’ll never get again.

December 30, 2012 4:58 pm

Joe, is Heartland going to file charges against Peter Gleick? Or does he skate free?

trafamadore
December 30, 2012 4:59 pm

[snip. Invalid email address. — mod.]

D Böehm
December 30, 2012 5:16 pm

trafamadore,
Stop being a Gleick apologist and read the article. There is no comparison between the odious, slimy Peter Gleick and the upstanding Heartland Institute, which fights the true evil of the climate alarmist movement on a shoestring budget — to which I gladly contribute. You would, too, if you cared about the country.

Brad R
December 30, 2012 5:16 pm

My goodness, for someone who gets bent out of shape when someone posts a racist remark on his blog, Harvard-PhD Laden displays his own form of prejudice towards the “slack jawed yokels” in Texas and Virginia. I’ve known a computer scientist and a philosopher from Texas, and an economist and a lawyer from Virginia, to name just a few of the charming and intelligent occupants of both states. It would appear that Dr. Laden is ignorant, arrogant, and bigoted.

Jeff Alberts
December 30, 2012 5:20 pm

You know, I dont mean to be critical of Watts Up, but don’t you think just being on the same page as Heartland is sort of slimy? I mean, these guys are simply in it for business profitability at the expense of human lives and the environment. They are not a kitten saving organization, not even close.

Do you think being on the same page as Gleick is sort of slimy? Heartland hasn’t done anything illegal, as far as we know. Gleick has. And yes, you DO mean to be critical of WUWT, that’s all you do.
FYI, there was no “Bin Laden” poster campaign. You need to think before you type. Maybe you were thinking of Greg Bin Laden?

pokerguy
December 30, 2012 5:22 pm

“. We know why lefties went nuts over it – Kaczynski, after all, is one of their own – but it wasn’t inaccurate or offensive.”
I’m on your side, and you can argue about whether it was offensive..but it was a colossal misjudgment in my opinion. At the moment in time things were going your way courtesy of the boneheaded Mr. Gleick, and that billboard changed the conversation, suddenly putting you guys on the offensive. I’d respect you more if you just admitted it was a mistake.

pokerguy
December 30, 2012 5:24 pm

Sorry, should be “put you guys on the defensive.”

Brad R
December 30, 2012 5:25 pm

Oops, my mistake: he said West Virginia, not Virginia.

December 30, 2012 5:26 pm

Greg (bin) Laden says “I am a blogger and writer and independent scholar who occasionally teaches”. I’d suggest he appears before students on more occasions than he actually teaches. Perhaps I’m being a bit hard on him, but then he says “Sometimes I’m hard on an entire state. Like Texas. Or, recently, West Virginia” so I’ll let my suggestion stand.
I’m not being a bit hard on him by calling him a “toxic little blogger” (remove/add letters in the last word to make it more appropriate) when he says “Or we could ignore you and wait for some major natural disaster to mostly wipe you out, like happened in Louisiana”.
What a piece of canine excrement he is.

Editor
December 30, 2012 5:27 pm

trafamadore says:
December 30, 2012 at 4:59 pm

Wiki says: “The advertising campaign led to the loss of substantial corporate funding, the resignation of Institute board members, and the resignation of almost the entire Heartland Washington D.C. office, taking the Institute’s biggest project (on insurance) with it.”
Which is what Laden said.

I don’t have time to check – What is Laden’s source? Wikipedia?
BTW, your conflation of smoking and second hand smoke implies I was a smoker. I generally view smokers as people who buy tobacco and set the stuff on fire. Please clarify what I was. (These days there are so few smokers on the loose I get next to no second hand smoke.)

December 30, 2012 5:33 pm

Who knew that wiki[pedia] (the first choice for illiterates & professional liars) was a reliable source?

Roger Knights
December 30, 2012 5:35 pm

trafamadore says:
December 30, 2012 at 4:59 pm

Joe Bast says: “We have never tried to “prove that cigarette smoking was not bad for you.”

Wiki says: “In the 1990s, the Heartland Institute worked with Philip Morris to question the link between secondhand smoke and health risks. Philip Morris used Heartland to distribute tobacco-industry material, and arranged for the Heartland Institute to publish “policy studies” which summarized Philip Morris reports.”

Where’s the contradiction? Joe Bast denied that Heartland questioned the dangers of first-hand smoke, so your quoting a statement that it questioned the dangers of second-hand smoke is irrelevant.

JohnB
December 30, 2012 5:35 pm

Mate, I’d rather side with WUWT than the murderous morons who keep calling for the death penalty.
Or overblown opinionated twits like Laden. Most historical misery was caused by people who “knew best” gainig power. They are always authoritarian and vindictive.

Roger Knights
December 30, 2012 5:45 pm

We did run a billboard about global warming, but it did not “equat[e] people who thought the climate science on global warming is based on facts and is not a fraud with well-known serial killers.” The billboard simply pointed out that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, still believes in global warming, and asked viewers if they do, too. We know why lefties went nuts over it – Kaczynski, after all, is one of their own – but it wasn’t inaccurate or offensive.

It would have been funny as a WUWT comment, or maybe as a Marc Morano comment, but it was a loser because it cost you the “high road” position in the debate in the eyes of others, no matter how defensible it looks to you. It was a sharp tactical zinger, but a strategic blunder. Wise men know when to hold their tongues–when they are most tempted to say something clever.

1 2 3 8