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 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.
Ah, I just found the “donate” button over on the right side of the page. Here’s to your new temperature service!
William M. Connolley says:
February 16, 2012 at 1:51 am
> If you find it “exciting” to update an article…
> CO2… natural emissions are 20 times higher than human emissions”
And they want to teach children that? Oh dear.
———————–
Oh dear, you are back after your first inane comments. I went to my 10th grade son’s after school P.O.L.
There were several sadly misinformed presentations of CAGW. I talked to every one of these students. I decided against trashing their ignorance, and instead to ask them if they new of any benfits to increasing CO2. Not one of these kids could think of one. None of them understood the carbon cycle. They were, however, nicely dressed little CAGWbots, dutifully presenting the misinformation you have worked so hard to perserve.
Faked climate data, faked consensus, faked emails…..is there a trend developing here?
If Obama is so much for putting government data on the web….why not use MindGap…..
A wise friend of mine once told me: “No good deed goes unpunished!”
The fact this is in the MSM news shows it is as coordinated as press releases of alarmist papers in Nature or GRL…
Memo to R. Gates:
Now, R., do you have an honest, official reference (no Media Matters or their ilk is allowed) that states unequivocally that a crime was committed?
We’d all be pleased to see it. And if it isn’t forthcoming soon, consider yourself “spanked” on this “theft” issue, because as far as your constant yammering is concerned and displayed for everybody to see, we all “get it”.
(Your problem is you don’t like how this is all “coming down”, R., and I don’t blame you–there’s this little matter of retribution that the courts will take care of when they consider the gargantuan fraud that has been going on regarding CAGW, and I hope it starts with Michael Mann. Then we’ve got a whole cast of characters to go after in this tragedy.)
Shawn Halayka says:
February 15, 2012 at 10:51 am
It took me a day to write up the trend code for HadCRUT3, and another month of extremely part time work for the OpenGL visualizer. For free.
Perhaps you would like to help Anthony then?
As we all know, taking money from anyone is a corrupting process. Any good that happens is quickly clouded by entanglement. It should always be done visibly (with fanfare), from the beginning, to avoid covert corruption and subsequent need for cover-up and damage control. If ANYTHING must remain hidden… Can that “thing” be good? GK
“there’s this little matter of retribution that the courts will take care of when they consider the gargantuan fraud that has been going on regarding CAGW, and I hope it starts with Michael Mann. Then we’ve got a whole cast of characters to go after in this tragedy.)”
Ah yes, there’s the moderator stepping in to remove juvenile posts again…
Are you people sick, that you can’t see how you’ve become the mirror’s image of that which you say you abhor? Sickness is the only thing to describe what has been created at this site. But then, we get to see for ourselves exactly what the historical flat-Earthers were and how they operated. That will be your legacy, Anthony. But it will be recorded digitally for those in the future to know exactly who you were and what you did. Ironically, you will come to serve science in a way that you least expected!
Anthony,
You may not be a BBC licence-fee payer, but the BBC site posts adverts in the USA which are not shown in the UK. So the BBC may have advertisers who are not impressed by Richard Black’s treatment of you. I think the article also displayed some latent anti-American sentiments.
Being born in the USA, I have dual nationality, and the British part of me doesn’t feel very proud today.
There will be a good outcome. Look at all the nice folks who will be new here and discover some truth thanks to forgery from the ranks of CAGW’s ship is sinking desperation.
@Exp says:
February 16, 2012 at 6:51 am
Do you have a point or are you just an angry young man that’s been lied to for years.
I worked in customer service where angry people use to call up so let me try and help you out here, count backwards from 10 to zero and then before making another angry comment take a look aroiund Antonys blog and learn something, maybe there is a question on CAGW you would actualy like answered.
Or prove me and everyone else that sees such drivel on the internet daily right and carry on foaming.
David> There were several sadly misinformed presentations of CAGW
Without you saying what is wrong, it is hard to judge. Given that you react badly to my pointing out the problems with the natural-fluxes-are-greater-than-human statement, I’m not sure I’d trust your judgement.
> None of them understood the carbon cycle
It looks like you don’t, either.
Hello Anthony,
Please continue to stand tall and firm in your pursuit of the truth. Your enemies will aways hate you for your moral stands, but they were aways going to oppose any “heretic”. I know that these unwarranted attacks on you are painful to bear and I wish that you did not have to be subjected to them. However, all who expose falsehoods are hated by liars. Sunlight, however is the only disinfectant that can overpower their mendacity.
Your friends and other truth seekers will stand with you and support you, even if all they can provide is moral support.
Sincerely and most respectfully,
wermet
@Tucci78
I am not a “Warmista”.
peeke says: February 16, 2012 at 10:40 am
Then stop acting and pontificating like one!
“If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.”
Megan McArdle has what appears to be a smoking gun. See “Update” near the bottom:
And nor should you ever expect them to offer any donations to you because CAGW is as good for their bottom line as it is for the federal government’s revenue stream. Limiting fossil fuel use does not hurt big oil companies at all, it helps them. It hurts their competition – small oil companies and independent oil exploration companies. Restricting supply via CAGW increases the price which increases big oil profits. Increased big oil profits benefits them AND the federal government by way of increased tax revenue.
Every dime of that tax revenue comes from one place – our pockets at the pump.
Exp says:
February 16, 2012 at 9:07 am
That will be your legacy, Anthony. But it will be recorded digitally for those in the future to know exactly who you were and what you did.
You’re so naive you don’t realize the same applies to you – and you’ll have longer to regret it!
Just in from the Guardian.
And now they are eating from the trough spreading misinformation, adjusted data, fake documents and brazen lies
Interesting!?
Anthony posted many of the inaccuracies that were slimed around the net eagerly by the warmistas AND in the process he voluntarily corrects them with facts where applicable.
Heartland issued a press release that clearly identifies at least one document as a forgery and alerts us to some of the other documents may be “modified” or perhaps in CAGW speak, “adjusted”; in either case, documents that are wholly forged or partially forged are still criminal offenses.
References using or based upon forgeries or fraudulent information, especially those that were identified as forgeries constitutes libel.
I rather think it quaint that all of these trolls have congregated here to knowingly bandy or imply false information or premises; and that many are doing so after being publicly informed of the corrections.
Beginning with the thief, proceeding with the forger, then the CAGW mulge column writers, (I refuse to use the respectable word journalist for them) and now the rallying cry of the trolls, especially those posts after 11:45AM. Maybe you won’t need outside funding Anthony?
I’m not big on suing, but this is a case where it needs to happen. Most major news outlets are reporting on this now – and it’s a complete retread of the Rather/Bush forgeries in the past – they’re so happy to have their ideas ‘vindicated’ they don’t even care if it might be a forgery. Heritage & Anthony need to push the libel angle HARD and PUBLICLY. It’s very possible this act could provide a major tipping point.
Since I have not looked at the documents I can be accused of flying blind, but I do note the mention of “Heartland Insider” which is meant to give the impression that the documents are leaked. I am going to contend that “Heartland Insider” does not exist.
Let me explain: Ulsterman who now has his own blog site, talks to someone known as White House Insider. Many people have assumed that Ulsterman was making the whole thing up… in my view, maybe, but then again maybe not…. because there are some things that point to inside information. Ulsterman also reports on Wall Street Insider and this man is completely different to his other contact. Then there is someone who attempts to imitate Ulsterman but who writes in a nasty snarky manner and whose writings lack total coherence and they are never worth reading. That person who writes as “And another thing”, also write “Palin Insider”, which is again something that is completely made up and full of falsehood… some of the false stuff is patently obvious.
It would seem to me that this release of “documents” fits the category of the writer who writes as “And Another Thing”, probably being someone associated with a George Soros think tank or similar front. I am not saying that it is the same person, but that the category is the same.
What has given this away is the attempt to slime Heartland with the falsehood about the education program. Yes, thinking about it, I am convinced that this is the real evidence that he document is a fake because it actually sounds like a leftist’s idea of the libertarian think tank… especially with the jibe about being anti-science.
As I wrote last night, a quick check regarding what Heartland wrote about a possible causation between second hand smoke and lung cancer indicated that they were concerned about the junk science behind the push against cigarettes and the tobacco companies. Note: it is the JUNK SCIENCE. What I noted was that the research was quite paltry and that there is the same issue regarding consensus meaning that no other point of view or alternate research will be accepted. I indicated that yes there is a problem with second hand smoke because too much can and does cause respiratory illness. The problem with the cancer claim is that the research findings is based upon very small samples and extrapolated out to being 5000 deaths but without the supporting evidence. Hence, there is a link between the two issues based upon the way in which debate is shut down!! I will need to do more research and blog at my own site on the subject because those who claim that Heartland have done anything dishonest etc. certainly need to eat crow or humble pie.
In the large number of comments, it’s probably already been mentioned, but to Anthony and others I say this: You know you’re over the target when you start taking flak!