Some notes on the Heartland Leak

Heartland has yet to produce a press release, but I thought in the meantime I’d share some behind the scenes. If/when they do, I’ll add it to this post.

UPDATE: 11:45AM -The press release has been added below. One of the key documents is a fabrication

UPDATE2: 2:30PM The BBC’s Richard Black slimes me, without so much as asking me a single question (he has my email, I’ve corresponded with him previously) or even understanding what the project is about Hint: Richard, it’s about HIGHS and LOWS, not trends. No journalistic integrity with this one. – Anthony

I’m surprised at the number of articles out there on this where journalists have not bothered to ask me for a statement, but rather rely on their own opinion. To date, only Suzanne Goldenberg of the Guardian has asked for a statement, and she used very little of it in her article. Her colleague, Leo Hickman asked me no questions at all for his article, but instead relied on a comment I sent to Bishop Hill. So much for journalism. (Update: In response to Hickman, Lucia asks What’s horrible about this?)

(Update: 10:45AM Seth Borenstein of the AP has contacted me and I note that has waited until he can get some kind of confirmation that these documents are real. The Heartland press release is something he’s waiting for. Contacting involved parties is the right way to investigate this story.)

Here’s the query from Goldenberg:

Name: Suzanne Goldenberg

Email: suzanne.goldenberg@xxx.xxx

Website: http://www.guardian.co.uk

Message: Hello, I am seeking comment on the leak of the Heartland

documents by Desmogblog which appear to suggest you are funded by them. Is

this accurate? Thanks

MY REPLY:

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

Heartland simply helped me find a donor for funding a special project having to do with presenting some new NOAA surface data in a public friendly graphical form, something NOAA themselves is not doing, but should be. I approached them in the fall of 2011 asking for help, on this project not the other way around.

They do not regularly fund me nor my WUWT website, I take no salary from them of any kind.

It is simply for this special project requiring specialized servers, ingest systems, and plotting systems. They also don’t tell me what the project should look like, I came up with the idea and the design. The NOAA data will be displayed without any adjustments to allow easy side-by-side comparisons  of stations, plus other graphical representations output 24/7/365. Doing this requires programming, system design, and bandwidth, which isn’t free and I could not do on my own.  Compare the funding I asked for initially to

get it started to the millions some other outfits (such as CRU) get in the UK for studies that then end up as a science paper behind a publishers paywall, making the public pay again. My project will be a free public service when finished.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Description from the same (Heartland) documents:

Weather Stations Project

Every few months, weathermen report that a temperature record – either high

or low – has been broken somewhere in the U.S. This is not surprising, since weather is highly variable and reliable instrument records date back less than 100 years old. Regrettably, news of these broken records is often used by environmental extremists as evidence that human emissions are causing either global warming or the more ambiguous “climate change.”

Anthony Watts, a meteorologist who hosts WattsUpwithThat.com, one of the

most popular and influential science blogs in the world, has documented that many of the

temperature stations relied on by weathermen are compromised by heat radiating from nearby buildings, machines, or paved surfaces. It is not uncommon for these stations to over-state temperatures by 3 or 4 degrees or more, enough to set spurious records.

Because of Watts’ past work exposing flaws in the current network of temperature stations (work that The Heartland Institute supported and promoted), the National Aeronautics and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the government agency responsible for maintaining temperature stations in the U.S., has designated a new network of higher-quality temperature stations that meet its citing specifications. Unfortunately, NOAA doesn’t widely publicize data from this new network, and puts raw data in spreadsheets buried on one of its Web sites.

Anthony Watts proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new

temperature data from NOAA’s web site and converting them into easy-to-understand graphs that can be easily found and understood by weathermen and the general interested public. Watts has deep expertise in Web site design generally and is well-known and highly regarded by  weathermen and meteorologists everywhere. The new site will be promoted heavily at  WattsUpwithThat.com. Heartland has agreed to help Anthony raise $88,000 for the project in 2011.  The Anonymous Donor has already pledged $44,000. We’ll seek to raise the balance.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

DeSmog, as part of their public relations for hire methodology to demonize skeptics, will of course try to find nefarious motives for this project. But there simply are none here. It’s something that needs doing because NOAA hasn’t made this new data available in a user friendly visual format. For example, here’s a private company website that tracks highs and low  records using NOAA data:

http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/yesterday/us.html

NOAA doesn’t make any kind of presentation like that either, which is why such things are often done by private ventures.

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

That above is what I sent to the Guardian, and also in a comment to Bishop Hill.

The reaction has been interesting, particularly since the David-Goliath nature of funding is laid bare here. For example, Al Gore says he started a 300 million dollar advertising campaign. The Daily Bayonet sums it up pretty well:

Hippies hate Heartland « The Daily Bayonet

What the Heartland document show is how badly warmists have been beaten by those with a fraction of the resources they’ve enjoyed.

Al Gore spent $300 million advertising the global warming hoax. Greenpeace, the WWF, the Sierra Club, The Natural Resources Defense Council, NASA, NOAA, the UN and nation states have collectively poured billions into climate research, alternative energies and propaganda, supported along the way by most of the broadcast and print media.

Yet they’ve been thwarted by a few honest scientists, a number of blogs and a small pile of cash from Heartland.

Here’s a clue for DeSmog, Joe Romm and other warmists enjoying a little schadenfreude today. It’s not the money that’s beating you, it’s the message.

Your climate fear-mongering backfired. You cried wolf so often the villagers stopped listening. Then Climategate I & II gave the world a peek behind the curtain into the shady practices, petty-feuding and data-manipulation that seems to pass for routine in climate ‘science’.

So enjoy the moment, warmists, because what this episode really demonstrates to the world is how little money was needed to bring the greatest scam in history to its knees. That’s not something I’d think you’d want to advertise, but knock yourselves out. It’s what you do best.

I see none of the same people at the Guardian or the blogs complaining about this:

Dr. James Hansen’s growing financial scandal, now over a million dollars of outside income

NASA records released to resolve litigation filed by the American Tradition Institute reveal that Dr. James E. Hansen, an astronomer, received approximately $1.6 million in outside, direct cash income in the past five years for work related to — and, according to his benefactors, often expressly for — his public service as a global warming activist within NASA.

This does not include six-figure income over that period in travel expenses to fly around the world to receive money from outside interests. As specifically detailed below, Hansen failed to report tens of thousands of dollars in global travel provided to him by outside parties — including to London, Paris, Rome, Oslo, Tokyo, the Austrian Alps, Bilbao, California, Australia and elsewhere, often business or first-class and also often paying for his wife as well — to receive honoraria to speak about the topic of his taxpayer-funded employment, or get cash awards for his activism and even for his past testimony and other work for NASA.

(Update: Dr. Hansen responds here)

Or the NGO’s and their budgets (thanks Tom Nelson)

With tiny budgets like $310 million, $100 million, and $95 million respectively, how can lovable underdogs like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, and NRDC *ever* hope to compete with mighty Heartland’s $6.5 million?

Heartland Institute budget and strategy revealed | Deep Climate

Heartland is projecting a boost in revenues from $4.6 million in 2011, to $7.7 million in 2012. That will enable an operating budget of $6.5 million, as well as topping up the fund balance a further $1.2 million.

[Sept 2011]:  Greenpeace Environmental Group Turns 40

Greenpeace International, based in Amsterdam, now has offices in more than 40 countries and claims some 2.8 million supporters. Its 1,200-strong staff ranges from “direct action” activists to scientific researchers.

Last year, its budget reached $310 million.

[Nov 2011]: Sierra Club Leader Will Step Down – NYTimes.com

He said the Sierra Club had just approved the organization’s largest annual budget ever, about $100 million for 2012, up from $88 million this year.

[Oct 2011]:  Do green groups need to get religion?

That’s Peter Lehner talking. Peter, a 52-year-old environmental lawyer, is executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of America’s most important environmental groups. The NRDC has a $95 million budget, about 400 employees and about 1.3 million members. They’re big and they represent a lot of people.

But me and my little temperature web project to provide a public service are the real baddies here apparently. The dichotomy is stunning.

Some additional added notes:

“Because of Watts’ past work exposing flaws in the current network of temperature stations (work that The Heartland Institute supported and promoted), the National Aeronautics and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the government agency responsible for maintaining temperature stations in the U.S., has designated a new network of higher-quality temperature stations that meet its citing specifications.”

For the record, and as previously cited on WUWT, NCDC started on the new network in 2003 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/crn/annual-reports.html Heartland may have confused the Climate Reference Network with the updated COOP/USHCN modernization network which did indeed start after my surfacestations project: What the modernized USHCN will look like (April 29, 2008)

They then asked for 100 million to update it NOAA/NCDC – USHCN is broken please send 100 million dollars (Sept 21, 2010)

###

Moderators, do your best to keep the sort of hateful messages I’ve been getting in the past 18 hours in check in comments below. Please direct related comments from other threads to this one. Commenters please note the site policy.

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

PRESS RELEASE 11:45 AM – source http://heartland.org/press-releases/2012/02/15/heartland-institute-responds-stolen-and-fake-documents

FEBRUARY 15, 2012 – The following statement from The Heartland Institute – a free-market think tank – may be used for attribution. For more information, contact Communications Director Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org and 312/377-4000.


Yesterday afternoon, two advocacy groups posted online several documents they claimed were The Heartland Institute’s 2012 budget, fundraising, and strategy plans. Some of these documents were stolen from Heartland, at least one is a fake, and some may have been altered.

The stolen documents appear to have been written by Heartland’s president for a board meeting that took place on January 17. He was traveling at the time this story broke yesterday afternoon and still has not had the opportunity to read them all to see if they were altered. Therefore, the authenticity of those documents has not been confirmed.

Since then, the documents have been widely reposted on the Internet, again with no effort to confirm their authenticity.

One document, titled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy,” is a total fake apparently intended to defame and discredit The Heartland Institute. It was not written by anyone associated with The Heartland Institute. It does not express Heartland’s goals, plans, or tactics. It contains several obvious and gross misstatements of fact.

We respectfully ask all activists, bloggers, and other journalists to immediately remove all of these documents and any quotations taken from them, especially the fake “climate strategy” memo and any quotations from the same, from their blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.

The individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation. We ask them in particular to immediately remove these documents and all statements about them from the blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.

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.

Apologies: The Heartland Institute apologizes to the donors whose identities were revealed by this theft. We promise anonymity to many of our donors, and we realize that the major reason these documents were stolen and faked was to make it more difficult for donors to support our work. We also apologize to Heartland staff, directors, and our allies in the fight to bring sound science to the global warming debate, who have had their privacy violated and their integrity impugned.

Lessons: Disagreement over the causes, consequences, and best policy responses to climate change runs deep. We understand that.

But honest disagreement should never be used to justify the criminal acts and fraud that occurred in the past 24 hours. As a matter of common decency and journalistic ethics, we ask everyone in the climate change debate to sit back and think about what just happened.

Those persons who posted these documents and wrote about them before we had a chance to comment on their authenticity should be ashamed of their deeds, and their bad behavior should be taken into account when judging their credibility now and in the future.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
631 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
cui bono
February 15, 2012 6:17 pm

Anthony, I’ve registered an official complaint with the BBC over Mr. Black’s journalistic integrity (ho ho!).
Sorry you have to put up with this trash from Britland, as well as from your own side of the pond.
REPLY: thanks, I was already researching it myself, but it appears since I’m not a British citizen paying a license, I have no recourse. Or, am I in error? – Anthony

eyesonu
February 15, 2012 6:18 pm

Anthony, when the smoke clears, I think that the funding differences between the climate realists vs the CAGW brigade will be embarrassing for the alarmists. The more the issue of funding is brought to light to the general public, the better.

DirkH
February 15, 2012 6:21 pm

Steve in SC says:
February 15, 2012 at 6:08 pm
“I guarantee you have made the George Soros/moveon.org enemies list. Be careful my friend.
There is nothing they will not stoop ”
During COP15 George Soros suggested to “finance” the envisioned 100bn USD yearly redistribution by using the “Special Drawing Rights” of the IMF; basically that’s a kind of paper currency that the IMF can create out of thin air (but has to back with some collateral, i.e. money that the member states loan to the IMF, as far as I understood it). He made it sound like this way, the money would just be there. You could see the dollar signs in his eyes as you watched him explain it.
He is SO behind CAGW. Well at least he was, I don’t know if it’s still high up on his todo list. Everything to wreck nations – he always makes fortunes when a nation’s currency fails.

Beth Cooper
February 15, 2012 6:22 pm

We know your record, Anthony, integrity of data and honest dealing.

Bill H
February 15, 2012 6:32 pm

Its rather odd that they are trying to kill the data being available to the general public. what is so damming about the real data that they must stop its dissemination?
The truth in plain sight must scare them to death…
Continue the good fight Anthony!!!

pat
February 15, 2012 6:32 pm

$54 billion of taxpayers’ subsidies for nuclear is surely something to throw back at the antinuclear Greenies, who conveniently ignored Monbiot and Hansen’s nuclear advocacy. this appears to be a taboo subject on warmist AND sceptic sites.
16 Feb: WSJ: Obama Unveils Loan Guarantees for Nuclear Plant
By HENRY J. PULIZZI And CHRISTINE BUURMA
Under the loan-guarantee program, the government promises to assume a company’s debt obligations if it defaults on debt incurred for the projects. Because new nuclear reactors cost billions of dollars to develop, the loan guarantees can be a key step for energy companies that plan to undertake such projects…
The U.S. Department of Energy has the authority for $18.5 billion in loan guarantees. The administration’s fiscal-2011 budget request seeks to triple that amount to more than $54 billion.
Energy Secretary Steven Chu, speaking at a press briefing Tuesday, declined to say when the second nuclear loan guarantee might be issued. Along with Southern Co., Scana Corp., Constellation Energy Group Inc. and NRG Energy Inc. were on a short list of companies with projects still in the running for federal loan backing as of May.
“We’re working with the applicants as fast as we can to get through these processes,” Mr. Chu said.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704804204575069301926799046.html

February 15, 2012 6:32 pm

John Billings said February 15, 2012 at 4:39 pm

However, if you want me to apologise for somethng that I don’t see as a wrongdoing, then the result will be that I will no longer enter posts on your website.

I wish…

KarlL
February 15, 2012 6:34 pm

@Watts
OK. I’ll assume from your evasion of answering straight questions that you have not read the leaked documents. I’ll help you. Those documents contain:
“We have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in 2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature station data.”
The documents also contain evidence that shows Heartland is funded by fossil industry money (amongst others). Do you need a diagram drawn for you to understand how your claim that you do not received dirty fossil industry money is false?
> “..why it is OK for the CRU..”
If you want to talk about CRU funding, start another thread. Don’t try and distract from the subject of this thread: you receiving money from the fossil industry contrary to your denial of the same.
Further, if you were genuine in your claims about wanting open and honest dialog, you would be condemning Heartland’s agenda to “keep opposing voices out” and “dissuading teachers from teaching science”. But you are doing nothing but conducting a weak personal damage limitation exercise.

Jeremy
February 15, 2012 6:37 pm

CONGRATULATIONS! I am breaking out the champagne and celebrating this news story.
The Heartland institute has been most obviously targeted and now you are being attacked also.
These attacks are merely ad hominem suggestions that your funding somehow taints all your work. The FACT is there is not a shred of credible scientific evidence for this smear campaign. There is no “smoking gun” as we have all seen countless examples of in the Climategate emails (where the Hockey Team pervert the peer review process and are seen to express doubts as to the “settled” man-made Global Warming meme).
To borrow and adapt a quote from Margaret Thatcher, “I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single scientific argument left.”
Cheer Up Anthony ! You and Heartland with your wretchedly miniscule budgets are having an enormous impact and the “Hockey Team” is scared witless and fighting like a cornered animal.
If Richard Black’s article is to be believed they are particularly scared by ONE DONOR to Heartland….unbelievable as it may seem the media mouthpieces for the Greens appear to believe that ONE DONOR could be impacting world opinion on CAGW in a nefarious undermining manner! YIKES! They are actually frightened by this ONE PERSON who might undermine all the “settled science”!

February 15, 2012 6:37 pm

The greenhouse conjecture is a fraud – there are no two ways about it. Heartland and Watt need all the support they can get to continue their role in exposing it. I do so at my own cost – mostly time – because the errors are glaring when you know and think about the physics involved.
Sites like SkS and SoD continually block me because they have no answers. Under yet another new name I have just posted a copy of my most recent post on WUWT which you can see (or may be able to see) on their site with this link if they have not yet deleted it. If they don’t then watch the subsequent discussion if you want to see their arguments thrashed.
http://scienceofdoom.com/roadmap/atmospheric-radiation-and-the-greenhouse-effect/#comment-16066
If they have deleted it by the time you read this, then you may read it, along with many others previously deleted, at the foot of this page of my site: http://climate-change-theory.com/Science_of_Doom.html

Eric (skeptic)
February 15, 2012 6:41 pm

From Politico:
“Finally, I don’t know why they would think I’m neutral,” Revkin added. “I’m a passionate advocate, actually — for reality. By that I mean I try to keep in mind the full picture of greenhouse-driven climate change revealed by science, including aspects that are well understood and those that remain veiled by durable complexity and real uncertainty.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72919_Page3.html#ixzz1mVb5TSvU

JamesD
February 15, 2012 6:42 pm

EternalOptimist: “het Anthony. I dont know any of the facts.
what I do know is this – tell it straight. warts and all.
It’s always the coverup and the lies that get you, like it got them in climategate 1 and 2.
warts and all mate.”
Nice try. What exactly are you insinuating? Since you “don’t know any of the facts”, here they are. Watts wants to create a web-based service, free-of-charge, to allow citizens to easily access GOVERNMENT databases on temperature. He applied for funding to Heartland and they agreed to help find donors to meet his estimated budget of $88,000 to develop the web service. They have so far found a donor who provided half of that amount. The project has not been announced yet. It is typical and customary to acknowledge donations when the report (in this case probably a blog post announcing the new service) is presented.
Now one of the documents is an obvious forgery, and worth a good laugh if you want to waste time reading it. However, for the sake of argument, let us assume the budget document is legit. Guess what? Nothing is mentioned in the budget about funding WUWT or Mr. Anthony Watts. Not a cent. Period. No warts, no smoking gun. Period.

February 15, 2012 6:45 pm

KarlL,
Fossil fuel is good. It is the Gold Standard of fuels. And there is nothing whatever wrong with accepting a private grant. The hypocrisy comes in when people like you criticize fossil fuels, and private grants, while using fossil fuels, and never criticizing grants of taxpayer money that are misused, and where there is no accounting, and where the work product is kept hidden from those who paid for it. If you think I’m labeling you a hypocrite, you would be correct.
. . .
John Billings says:
“However, if you want me to apologise for somethng that I don’t see as a wrongdoing, then the result will be that I will no longer enter posts on your website.”
Interesting. So if Billings posts here again, he is admitting that he sees himself as a wrongdoer. Or, he stops posting. Win-win for the rest of us, either way.☺

JamesD
February 15, 2012 6:48 pm

KariL wrote: “Further, if you were genuine in your claims about wanting open and honest dialog, you would be condemning Heartland’s agenda to “keep opposing voices out” and “dissuading teachers from teaching science”. But you are doing nothing but conducting a weak personal damage limitation exercise.”
You are quoting a fabricated document. Honestly, do you really think directors of Heartland sit around talking about how to “dissuade teachers from teaching SCIENCE”? Did you really fall for that? And do you think that an institute whose sole purpose is to interject “opposing voices” into the AGW debate is really going to write in their document that they want to “keep opposing voices out.”? Did you really get duped by this? Actually, it doesn’t matter. The readers of this blog can spot this. And guess what, due to the actions of this Hoaxster, there are probably new readers at this blog now. And they will weigh this for themselves. There’s no such thing as bad publicity mate, and Anthony is cocked back laughing his butt off over this.

Mark Bofill
February 15, 2012 6:49 pm

Mr. Watts,
After reading the DeSmogBlog entries, visiting other blog sites and reading the story and comments, I’ve come to realize I would never subject myself to the sort of abuse you do, not for any cause, no matter how strongly I felt about it. I therefore feel obligated to express my appreciation for your efforts, since I regularly read and enjoy your blog. Thank you so much for your work. I have no idea why it’s worth it to you, but I’m grateful regardless.

TomRude
February 15, 2012 6:51 pm

KarlL, the sums are staggering and the goals indeed subversive. A scandal indeed compared to the mundane, innocuous funding provided by the Rockefellers to kindly find gentle people defending their views in Canada. /sarc
Have a look at how it is done when one truly wants to subvert:
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1426148700001
http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/search/all/billionaire-boondoggle/1428210002001

February 15, 2012 6:51 pm

KarlL said February 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm
Watts

The documents also contain evidence that shows Heartland is funded by fossil industry money (amongst others).

I have evidence that the US government is funded by the fuel industry and the tobacco industry (among other). They pay taxes in case you hadn’t noticed.
You need to hone your logical skills and your reading skills. The project doesn’t exist yet! And you would presumably still be attacking Anthony if his funding source was the US government based on your own illogical criteria.

DirkH
February 15, 2012 6:52 pm

KarlL says:
February 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm
“@Watts
> “..why it is OK for the CRU..”
If you want to talk about CRU funding, start another thread. Don’t try and distract from the subject of this thread: you receiving money from the fossil industry contrary to your denial of the same.”
@L
You do realize that it’s Anthony’s blog, don’t you? BTW, what is “Fossil industry”? Furthermore, the subject of this thread is a document leak, identity theft/impersonation, a forgery and a blunder on the part of the ecolunatic brigade, not what you define.

Tsk Tsk
February 15, 2012 6:54 pm

KarlL says:
February 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm
@Watts
OK. I’ll assume from your evasion of answering straight questions that you have not read the leaked documents. I’ll help you. Those documents contain:
“We have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in 2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature station data.”
The documents also contain evidence that shows Heartland is funded by fossil industry money (amongst others). Do you need a diagram drawn for you to understand how your claim that you do not received dirty fossil industry money is false?
—–
You know what happens when you assume don’t you? Go back and read his posting. Carefully. Now carefully go back and look at the timing of the documents. Even better, go and read Lucia’s posting for which Anthony has thoughtfully provided a link. Finally, learn what tense means. I have not accepted or received funding is not the same as I will never accept or receive funding. I know warmists have trouble with causality, but seriously?

Gordon Ford
February 15, 2012 6:58 pm

Read Black! He can’t even get his facts straight! I wonder who is paying him? The poor english taxpayer, freezing in the dark?
i understand that it’s so bad there that seniors have resorted to burning books to keep warm. So much for CAGW!

EternalOptimist
February 15, 2012 6:59 pm

JamesD.
friendly fire mate.
I was speaking to Anthony as a friend would to a friend. offering friendly advice.
speak plain. speak clear. speak the truth.
I dont know the facts. I would be a liar if I claimed to.

Maus
February 15, 2012 7:00 pm

Shame on you Anthony. Shame on the rest of you deniers and baby-eaters as well. Don’t you all grasp the chaos that can occur from speech purchased on minimum wage? You should all be thrown in the Bastille for your attempt to disturb the peace on a pittance.

RobW
February 15, 2012 7:01 pm

Over at the BBC, poor Mr. Black is getting his head handed to him on a platter. 😉

u.k.(us)
February 15, 2012 7:02 pm

KarlL says:
February 15, 2012 at 6:34 pm
==============
I would suggest starting a blog.
Let everyone know your thoughts.
Or, one could start a blog, that appeals to human curiosity.
It’s your choice.

Mike
February 15, 2012 7:03 pm

What great WUWT is like 390 parts per billion of truth in an atmospheric sea of swirling lies, distortions, religious idology surrounding the mythic AGW ! No wonder they all fear the power of some CO2 molecules. God speed, Anthony, well done indeed!

1 16 17 18 19 20 25