BREAKING: Gleick Confesses

Since I have started updates here, I’ll keep this post as a “sticky” – new content will follow below it and linked within updates. – Anthony

UPDATE 71: 3:27PM In his latest post 18 U.S.C. 1343 Steve McIntyre demonstrates how Andrew Lacis of GISS, has no clue about law, and likely no clue about ethical behavior either. As Eli Rabbett would say Andrew, RTFM.

UPDATE70: 2:40PM 2/28 A very detailed Fakegate timeline has been prepared by WUWT reader A. Scott, which I have published complete with an Excel Spreadsheet. Notes made of the new Copner timeline also. Details here.

UPDATE69: 10:03AM 2/28 Mosher and Copner are following another trail over at Lucia’s in comments. It seems even Gleick’s associates were warning him against use of the phrase “anti-climate”. The response about “giving away the game” makes me wonder if there were others in on the phishing, but it could just be coincidental.

UPDATE68: 9:25AM 2/28 Walter Starck has a good comparison of Heartland/Fakegate -vs- Climategate at Quadrant Online

UPDATE67: 8:05AM 2/28 Ben Pile has an excellent summary of Fakegate

UPDATE66: 4:45PM 2/27 Yesterday it was “hordes” today it is “swarms”. The hilarity continues over at DeSmog Blog.

UPDATE65: 3:08PM 2/27 the AGU president issues a statement on Gleick and AGU’s involvement with Gleick’s AGU ethics committee. It is quite strong and condemns Gleick (though could be stronger).

UPDATE64: 1:00 and 1:18PM 2/27 In a press release, the Heartland Institute President Debunks Fakegate Memo Meanwhile, days later, the Pacific Institute Board of Directors catches up with a new statement citing what we all knew last Friday.

UPDATE63: 10:15AM 2/27 Lying and deception can be justified, says climate change ethics expert James Garvey, a philosopher and the author of The Ethics of Climate Change has written a defence of Peter Gleick at the Guardian.

UPDATE62: 10:10AM 2/27 Fakegate: DeSmogBlog’s epic fail – You almost have to feel sorry for the folks at DeSmogBlog.

UPDATE61: 2/26 Mr. Worthing on “Funding Imbalance” says: Note that the latest grant of $100 million was made on the day after the hippies got all hot under the collar about Heartland’s ‘huge’ annual budget of $4.4 million

UPDATE60: While “Fakegate” rages, which is a huge distraction from the science, this essay by Dr. David Evans The Skeptics Case is useful to consider and to cite in the thousands of online arguments now occurring. A PDF is provided for emailing also.

UPDATE59: I no more than post QOTW (bonus edition), and Steve McIntyre provides yet another quote for serious consideration. Uncharacteristically, he has disabled comments. But when you see his quote, you’ll understand why.

UPDATE58: 5:15AM 2/26 Dr. Judith Curry has a relevant QOTW (bonus edition).  My earlier QOTW choice has apparently terrorized the twits with WUWT “hordes”.

UPDATE57: 8:00PM Christopher Booker in the Telegraph says: The Gleick affair is further proof of the warmists’ endless credulity – Dr Peter Gleick provides more evidence that the supporters of the Cause will stop at nothing.

UPDATE56: 3:02PM 2/25 Peter Gleick lecturing the U.S. Senate on “deceitful tactics”

UPDATE55: 1:50PM 2/25 The Weekly Standard has a great story up – Why the Climate Skeptics Are Winning – Too many of their opponents are intellectual thugs.

Loved this part:

Finally, “coordinated”? Few public policy efforts have ever had the massive institutional and financial coordination that the climate change cause enjoys. That tiny Heartland, with but a single annual conference and a few phone-book-sized reports summarizing the skeptical case, can derange the climate campaign so thoroughly is an indicator of the weakness and thorough politicization of climate alarmism.

UPDATE54: 12:20PM some interesting essays by Donna Laframboise here entitled: Peter Gleick – Then and Now and another by Hilary Ostrov entitled: From the ashes of Gleickgate: a new mantra is born h/t to Dr. Judith Curry from her Week in Review

UPDATE53: 10:45AM 2/25 Steve McIntyre has a humorous piece entitled Gleick and America’s Dumbest Criminals

UPDATE52: 10:20 AM 2/25 Nicola Scaffeta has contributed a guest essay – What triggered Dr. Peter Gleick to do identity fraud on Jan 27th?

UPDATE51: 7:15PM 2/24 According to the San Jose Mercury News, Dr. Gleick has requested a leave of absence from the Pacific Institute – details here

UPDATE50: 5:00PM 2/24 Quote of the week – from Scientific American, a comment on “The Cause” as we saw in CG2 emails

UPDATE49: 3:23PM 2/24 Dr. Judith Curry posts a “bombshell” on her website saying: With virtually no effort on my part (beyond reading an email, cutting and pasting into the blog post), I have uncovered “juicier stuff” about Heartland than anything Gleick uncovered.

Oh, the ironing.

UPDATE48: 3:00PM 2/24 Rep Ed Markey, probably still upset that Waxman-Markey cap and trade didn’t go anywhere, is sticking his nose into the Fakgate affair.

UPDATE47: 10:10AM 2/24 Fraudulent emails to Heartland from Gleick have been released. See details here.

UPDATE46: 10:00AM 2/24 The EPA was shown yesterday to “disappear” $468,000 in Federal grants to Gleick’s Pacific Institute. Now even more grants to Gleick have been scrubbed from EPA Grants Database. Steve Milloy at reports:

EPA, do you know where your grants are?

Additional grants (possibly as much $647,000) to Peter Gleick’s Pacific Institute seem to have disappeared from the EPA Grants Database.

The purpose of the grants on the screencap he has is a hoot.

UPDATE45: 8:00 AM 2/24 I’ve known this for several days, but now it is in the press. The gloves are off and The FBI has been called in.

UPDATE44: 11:00PM 2/23 Here is a special news report from KUSI-TV in San Diego on Fakegate – John Coleman reports.

UPDATE 43: 10:45PM 2/23 Here is a video “self-interview” from Dec 2011 by Peter Gleick from his PI office where he talks about people having a “fundamental trust in scientists”.

UPDATE42: 8:20PM 2/23 It appears that Gleick’s cyber impersonation to Heartland may have run afoul of a new law in California.

UPDATE41: 4:32 PM 2/23 The story on yours truly in the local alternate weekly “Leaked Documents Hit Home

UPDATE40: 10:55AM 2/23 Heartland publishes the email thread with Dr. Gleick where he was invited to Heartland’s annual dinner as a speaker (with a speaking fee), and then declined after consideration.

UPDATE39: 10:09AM 2/23 Junkscience reports: Breaking: EPA scrubs web site of Gleick grants?

UPDATE38: 9:45AM 2/23 What do you do when you are a climate skeptic and have access to sensitive private documents? The answer is here.

UPDATE37: 7:30AM 2/23 Monckton writes an opinion on why the perpetrators(s) should be prosecuted.

UPDATE36: 12AM 2/23 You can participate in a crowdsourcing experiment using free open source stylometry/textometry software to determine the true authorship of the “faked” Heartland Climate Strategy memo. Details here.

UPDATE 35: 11:45 PM 2/22 Steve McIntyre has some interesting posts on the Gleick affair. Gleick and the NCSE and also Gleick’s AGU Resignation.

UPDATE34: 10:20PM 2/22 AP/WaPo: Ethicists blast chair of science ethics panel for taking global warming skeptic group’s papers

UPDATE 33: 10:00PM 2/22 The Guardian reports: Scientist who lied to obtain Heartland documents faces fight to save job. It seems the Pacific Institute Board of directors isn’t very happy. Their recent statement contrasts with Update 19 below. And he’s been dropped as a columnist by the SFO Chronicle.

UPDATE32: 9:45PM 2/22 Megan McArdle of The Atlantic has her third article in a series on this affair. She writes:

And ethics aside, what Gleick did is insane for someone in his position–so crazy that I confess to wondering whether he doesn’t have some sort of underlying medical condition that requires urgent treatment.  The reason he did it was even crazier.

UPDATE31 9:15PM 2/22 The Daily Mail gives WUWT props in this affair, here:–new-nadir-climate-change-swindle.html

UPDATE30: 6:30PM 2/22 “So, Peter Gleick: if I am wrong, sue me.” says Maggie’s Farm on the fake document. Meanwhile, in a desperate attempt at self vindication, the paid propagandists at DeSmog blog have become their own “verification bureau” for a document they have no way to properly verify. The source says it isn’t verified but that’s not good enough for them so they spin it. They didn’t even bother to get an independent opinion. Get this: Evaluation shows “Faked” Heartland Climate Strategy Memo is Authentic. It seems to be just climate news porn for the weak minded Susuki followers upon which their blog is founded. As one WUWT commenter (Copner) put it – “triple face palm”.

UPDATE29: 5:00 PM 2/22 Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. weighs in saying:

On September 4 2011 I posted

Hatchet Job On John Christy and Roy Spencer By Kevin Trenberth, John Abraham and Peter Gleick

I have reposted below since the recent behavior (e.g. see) of Peter Gleick, co-founder and president of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security in Oakland, California,  involving the Heartland Institute is just another example of the often vitriolic and unseemly behavior by some to discredit what are appropriate alternative viewpoints on the climate issue.  Unfortunately, the action towards the Heartland Institute displayed by Peter Gleick is just another example of an attitude of a significant number of individuals in the leadership of the climate science community.

UPDATE28: 11:40AM James Evans in comments reports that “the BBC has finally weighed in, and it’s lame”. It only took Richard Black 36 hours to be convinced by an onslaught of emails. Whatta guy! The article makeup leaves no question now that Black is biased beyond all hope.

UPDATE27: 11:25 AM 2/22 Marlo Lewis at summarizes in From Climategate to Fakegate

UPDATE26: 8:25AM 2/22 Time Magazine has a feature story by Bryan Walsh: The Heartland Affair: A Climate Champion Cheats — and We All Lose

Read more:,8599,2107364,00.html#ixzz1n825Q9Gm

UPDATE25: 8:18PM 2/21 Willis Eschenbach writes An Open Letter to Dr. Linda Gundersen asking et tu AGU?

UPDATE24: 8:10 PM 2/21 Joe Bast of the Heartland Institute gives a video interview with the Wall Street Journal. He accuses Gleick directly, saying:

Gleick “impersonated a board member of the Heartland Institute, stole his identity by creating a fake email address, and proceeded to use that fake email address to steal documents that were prepared for a board meeting. He read those documents, concluded that there was no smoking gun in them, and then forged a two-page memo”

UPDATE23: 7:30PM 2/21 Megan McArdle of The Atlantic gives Mosher and the blogosphere props for the takedown, and some jeers for others.

UPDATE22: 3:30PM 2/21 The AGU weighs in on Gleick with “disappointment”  Gleick resigned on Feb 16th, but apparently didn’t tell them the full story of why.

UPDATE21: 2:55PM 2/21  Fakegate – It’s What They Do by Chris Horner

UPDATE20: 2:30PM 2/21 Warning Signs: “Fakegate” Blows Up in Warmist Faces

UPDATE19: 2:12PM 2/21 For now, Dr. Gleick still has an office, though I’m not sure that will true in the future. The Pacific Institute made an announcement on their web page that Dr. Gleick has been and continues to be an integral part of our team. 

UPDATE18: 1:55 PM 2/21 Josh designs the new spring line of Climate Churnalism’s New Clothes

UPDATE17: 1:30 PM 2/21 With resignations happening already, and AGU removing him from his webpage, (Update11) The question out there is now about the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Gleick signed an “integrity” document “Climate Change and the Integrity of Science,” was published in the journal Science on May 7th, 2010 as the “Lead Letter”, plus  a supporting editorial.  Will the co-signers defend the tarnished integrity of climate science now? Will Dr. Gleick continue on the NAS as a member?

UPDATE16: 1:05PM 2/21 The Union of Credit Card Holding Concerned Scientists weighs in with a “devil made me do it” excuse.

Gleick’s Actions Don’t Excuse Heartland’s Anti-Science Campaign

Lame-o-meter pegged, Kenji is displeased.

UPDATE15: 11:08AM 2/21 Unbelievable. Daily Kos elevates Gleick to hero status (via Tom Nelson):

Daily Kos: Hero Scientist responsible for Heartland Expose

Hero scientist, Peter Gleick, a water and climate analyst is the one responsible for exposing the Heartland agenda to spread misinformation and lies and subvert any real action for the climate change crisis.  He did so at considerable risk to his career and personal reputation.

UPDATE14: 9:40AM Daily Climate article cites “criminal act” and “steel cage death match” here

UPDATE13: 9:30AM 2/21 NCSE posts a story about Gleick on their news page, they mention his resignation from NCSE’s board.

On the same day as he posted his statement, however, he apologized to NCSE for his behavior with regard to the Heartland Institute documents and offered to withdraw from the board, on which he was scheduled to begin serving as of February 25, 2012. His offer was accepted.

UPDATE12: 8:10AM 2/21 Delingpole on integrity here

UPDATE11: 8AM 2/21 Gleick removed from AGU Task Force on Scientific Ethics page

UPDATE10: 7:45AM 2/21 Dr. Judith Curry tries to reconcile Gleick’s essays on “integrity” with his actions. It is a fascinating read.

UPDATE9: 7:20AM 2/21 Josh has a cartoon out on it, I don’t agree with it. Time magazine calls out Gleick.

UPDATE8: 11:20PM Over at DeSmog Blog they are praising Gleick and spinning his confession so fast that it has created its own localized climate distortion. They are labeling him as a whistleblower: Whistleblower Authenticates Heartland Documents

For his courage, his honor, and for performing a selfless act of public service, he deserves our gratitude and applause.

These paid propagandists are shameless, they are labeling him as a martyr for the cause. The Noble Cause Corruption is thick there.

UPDATE7: 9:32 PM Politico writes:

Two sources in California — longtime Democratic operative Chris Lehane and Corey Goodman, a member of the Pacific Institute board of directors — confirmed to POLITICO that Gleick authored the Huffington Post blog confessing to be the source of the leak.

Lehane, Al Gore’s 2000 presidential campaign press secretary, is helping Gleick pro bono with communications issues. Gleick is represented by John Keker, a prominent San Francisco-based white collar criminal defense attorney.

UPDATE6: 9:25 PM Steve McIntyre writes:

No one should feel any satisfaction in these events, which have been highly damaging to everyone touched by them, including both Heartland and Gleick.

I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately, the damage will continue until such time legal redress is made, which appears to be the next step. Steve also has a good timeline analysis here.

UPDATE5: 8:40PM commenter “Skiphill” writes:

Many will also be heartened to know that Gleick’s Pacific Institute has a special initiative in “Integrity in Science” (I know that his apologists will claim that this episode is not about integrity “in” scientific research etc. but still…..):

Integrity of Science

The Pacific Institute’s Integrity of Science Initiative responds to and counters the assault on science and scientific integrity in the public policy arena, especially on issues related to water, climate change, and security.

UPDATE4: 8:35PM Dr. Judith Curry notes the irony about Dr. Gleick lecturing her on integrity here

UPDATE3: 8:15PM I have received the Heartland statement, it will be posted under a separate post here. 8:23 PM It is posted here

UPDATE2: 725PM PST This post will likely go through many revisions as we learn more, I’ll timestamp each.- Anthony

UPDATE: 715PM PST Heartland advises me they will issue a statement soon. Stay tuned.


As many of us had surmised, Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute is the Heartland document leaker. He has issued this statement:

Since the release in mid-February of a series of documents related to the internal strategy of the Heartland Institute to cast doubt on climate science, there has been extensive speculation about the origin of the documents and intense discussion about what they reveal. Given the need for reliance on facts in the public climate debate, I am issuing the following statement.

At the beginning of 2012, I received an anonymous document in the mail describing what appeared to be details of the Heartland Institute’s climate program strategy. It contained information about their funders and the Institute’s apparent efforts to muddy public understanding about climate science and policy. I do not know the source of that original document but assumed it was sent to me because of my past exchanges with Heartland and because I was named in it.

Given the potential impact however, I attempted to confirm the accuracy of the information in this document. In an effort to do so, and in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else’s name. The materials the Heartland Institute sent to me confirmed many of the facts in the original document, including especially their 2012 fundraising strategy and budget. I forwarded, anonymously, the documents I had received to a set of journalists and experts working on climate issues. 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. I made no changes or alterations of any kind to any of the Heartland Institute documents or to the original anonymous communication.

I will not comment on the substance or implications of the materials; others have and are doing so. 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 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. Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected.

Peter Gleick

See also Andy Revkin’s DotEarth here. Revkin writes:

Now, Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing. His summary, just published on his blog at Huffington Post,

(Added 7:25PM PST) One way or the other, Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others. (Some of the released documents contain information about Heartland employees that has no bearing on the climate fight.) That is his personal tragedy and shame (and I’m sure devastating for his colleagues, friends and family).

Peter Gleick’s HuffPo blog here.

For the record Dr. Gleick, I am not “anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated” as you suggest. And you have damaged me and my business. I suspect I’ll be seeing you in court to protect my rights, along with many others, sir.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of
David Jay

Wow. Just wow.
(and kudos to Mosh)


Popcorn, Popcorn, getcha Popcorn here!


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…”

Confessions of a Real Weasel. This does not divorce him from the fraudulent ones, only the original stolen ones. SO, we have receipt of stolen goods —Gleick Pleads Guilty!. Second and more serious count of libel and fraud—yet to be decided

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.

What led you to suspect Gleick to begin with?


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.

Aussie Luke Warm

his mea culpa is not very convincing.

A physicist

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]


Ric Werme says:
February 20, 2012 at 6:29 pm
“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.”
I bet he wrote it himself and left traces big enough to drive a truck over. Gleick doesn’t know anything about IT.

jonathan frodsham

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

Ben Wilson

“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…”. . . . . . which was dated February 13, well after the time that Gleick supposedly got the original documents in January.
How long until he resigns from every last organization he is associated with. . . . .or will he?


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

Fake but accurate…..


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.

Hey, the comments option is not available on Geick’s confession on HuffPo Green.
More transparency from the extremist warmist faction, eh?
Well, we always have this forum, I suppose.
So I say, fraud, fraud, fraud, fraud, house of cards, lies, lies, lies, “hoax-y stick”, etc.
Good grief, these AGW fraudsters can’t get out of their own way.
How many decades, do you think, before science generally regains its reputation from this worldwide multi-billion dollar perversion?


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

So Gleick admits to the leak and the deceptive method by which he obtained the material from HI, but does not acknowledge the faking of the document? Reminds me of the Andrew Wiener “modified, limited hangout” strategy.

Dave N

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.


So, he got the document in early 2012, but it was copied using an Epson copier on Feb 13. So, he is saying that he scanned the document in and included it in the release?


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?


“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.”
What an utterly mind numbing lack of self awareness these people have.

David Jay

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.

As I posted in the other thread, that “admission” reads very much like the sort of carefully crafted admission a lawyer would tell someone to write to limit exposure. It shifts blame to an unnamed anonymous source and admits what was widely suspected and probably easily proven if he was in fact the source, do to electronic tracks his action would have left behind.
On one hand I feel sorry for the man he obviously lost touch with reality and has now destroyed his credibility as a responsible journalist, and will be followed by that shadow for the rest of his professional life.
On the other hand is shows that the crowd source suspicions were dead on the money, and proves that the CAGW groups engage in exactly the sort of “dirty tricks” they often accuse the skeptics of. It also proves that many of the hangers on who have defended this were hung out to dry by those they trusted.
Perhaps they should re-think who is telling them the truth?

Pamela Gray

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.

Ric Werme,
Or, Peter Gleick is just lying again. At this point, I think that has to be considered as a possibility. I don’t see anywhere in his statement that he says he can prove his assertion about the mailing.


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

It seems congratulations to Steve Mosher is in order. And The Git was wrong. What a silly faker!

Jenn Oates

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?


Not buying that he’s not the fabricator. He did everythign else, but that? Yeah, right…


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”?!

Richard Sharpe

And I suppose he deleted the first, fake, document?

Mike Mangan

Mosher you are bloody brilliant!!


Tom Nelson beat you by a few minutes but now everyone knows. BTY, as of now (21:38 EST, 2/20/2012) Huffpo is taking no comments on the post by Gleick.

BWAAA!!! Peter Gleick is the same pompous jerk that wrote the fake book review on The Delinquent Teenager.
This twit sure does get around. He personifies what’s wrong with CAGW warmunists: inadequate research, fabricated data, erroneous conclusions, corruption, deceit, collusion and arrogance; all perpetuated on the false pretense of saving humanity from itself.
The irony is so thick, you can choke on it.

John S

So let me get this in my head…. He says: I lied about this, I lied to get information, but you can believe me now. Is that it?
By the way, if the sums involved from heartlad are considered in the ballpark of ‘well funded’ count me out of the skeptic mercenary guild. I could make more at Mcdonalds


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.


Is there a single truthful statement in his closing paragraph?


“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.


Cornered, with no way out. It looks like he is attempting to cover one lie (the faked document) with another lie: that the faked document was created prior to the receipt of the board documents from Heartland.

Third Party

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

Chris D.

Is any of this an arrest-able offense?


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

Doctor K

Haters gonna Hate, Liars gonna Lie.
I feel sorry for this guy and his family. His belief system sent him down this path and he will likely be held accountable for his actions. He’s also going to be held under deep suspicion for the original faked article. Hopefully he kept the hard copy that he said was sent to him which will help prove his story. But having a rational debate with this type of believer was a no win situation for those with open minds. Perhaps something good will result and we will actually get to have a proper discussion over CAGW. Gleick confessing today and, yesterday, Weaver stating oilsands are not the big bad boys of CO2 emissions after all….its been a wild 24 hours!


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.

Bill Parsons

Deniers won’t go away, though a measure of their diminished influence can be seen in their increasingly desperate ad hominem attacks on scientists rather than attacks on the science (see, for example, virulent personal attacks on IPCC scientists or individuals such as Drs. Michael Mann and James Hansen). But it is time for policymakers and the media to stop taking deniers seriously until they do what real scientists do: provide testable scientific theories, observations, or evidence that hasn’t already been decisively debunked and that proves to be better than the current theories and hypotheses at explaining what we see happening around us. Not only have deniers failed to do this, the evidence for human-caused climate change has continued to deepen and strengthen for decades. There’s no denying that.
— Peter Gleick, from his blog

A cult of victimhood?

A. Scott

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 ….

Sometime in the not-too-distant future, when someone else attempts something like this, it will be known as pulling a Gleick.


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


My guess is that the strategy memo was the document that Gleick received in the mail. It makes sense then that Gleick had to scan it to get it on the internet. He solicited the other documents. The only problem is that the controversial document is still unacknowledged by the Heartland institute despite Gleick’s unlawful solicitation of “confirming” documents.
We’d have to see the mail package to get to the bottom of this. I hope Gleick saved all the evidence.