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 Junkscience.com 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:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2104908/Fakegate–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 Globalwarming.org 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: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2107364,00.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”
h/t to THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Another Climate Scandal
See also this additional update: http://heartland.org/press-releases/statement-heartland-institute-president-joseph-bast-regarding-wall-street-journal-onl
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…..):
http://www.pacinst.org/topics/integrity_of_science/index.html
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.
I have been following this revelation about Dr. Gleick here at WUWT.
It seems open,fair, and clear.
Reading now in the MSM it’s a different story…
P. Gleick is represented in the MSM as:
“a man who has just saved climate change and even the whole world with his sacrifice.”
What delusional crock!! I want to throw up….
Clearly this clown has “friends” in high places.
It’s a sad scary spinning mess…
What a barf.
May I compare mr. Gleick with a virtual global warming suicide bomber, and in his case the bomb went off inside the Greens zone? Clearly a badly improvised memo by the looks of it.
“There’s not one thing fun about this. It’s a horrible mess on both sides. Train wrecks might be fun to watch on old film clips, but in real life train wrecks, people get hurt.” – Anthony
Anthony, regarding your admonition to billcapron, may I respectfully suggest that it’s a little “over the top,” as you like to often say? (Although not yet to me, as I’m a goody-goody who’s enjoyed a perfect “snip-less record”…well, up til now, that is).
Yes, I can barely imagine what it’s like being in the trenches as you are, I understand that you are affected by this scandal personally and yes, there are people hurting, many of whom had nothing to do with this battle, but it’s clear that billcapron, along with many of us, merely delight in the schandenfreude of seeing how the warmistas squirm and scream when their chestnuts are yet again in the fire. That part at least is indeed good, clean fun.
The 09:10 update says the NCSE statement does not mention wrongdoing, possibly leading to suspension from the board. In fact it says Dr Gleik offered to withdraw from the board and that his offer was accepted.
Does anyone know if the Bias Broadcasting Cabal is commenting on these latest developments ?
It is all about An apocalypse (Greek: ἀποκάλυψις apokálypsis; “lifting of the veil” or “revelation”) is a disclosure of something hidden from the majority of mankind in an era dominated by falsehood and misconception, i.e. the veil to be lifted. The Apocalypse of John (Greek Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰωάννου) is the Book of Revelation, the last book of the New Testament. By extension, apocalypse can refer to any End Time scenario, or to the end of the world in general.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse
From Climate Depot:
“Gleick blames skeptics for making him to commit criminal acts!? ‘My judgment was blinded by my frustration with ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, & coordinated — to attack climate science & scientists & prevent this debate, & by lack of transparency of orgs involved. Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected'”
So this liar and cheat, funded anonymously by Soros, was forced to destroy the reputation of a miniscule critic ? These people are nuts. Judith Curry said it just right. Their politics drive their science, science is used to drive their politics.
The question which needs to be pressed directly upon Peter Gleick in public until he gives a yes or no answer:
Mr. Gleick, did you write the “strategy” doc, yes or no?
His current statement appears to be just ink from a squid.
Gleick may very well be looking at a perjury charge. He was “mailed” that document right?
1. There were no fold marks on the “scanned” copy. While it is possible that someone used an 8 1/2 x 11 enevlope, who would do that for a 2 page document?
2. Whoever faked the document, had to have acces to the Board meeting papers, as some of the exact wording was on both.
billcapron says:
February 21, 2012 at 8:24 am
Worth the price of admission … haven’t had this much fun in a long time.
REPLY: There’s not one thing fun about this. It’s a horrible mess on both sides. Train wrecks might be fun to watch on old film clips, but in real life train wrecks, people get hurt. – Anthony
========================
Anthony, I hope that in the end this will be revealed as a microcosm of the entire CAGW movement (Refusing FOIA information on publicly funded studies, hiding data so that no one can prove them wrong, attempts to destroy careers and journals through political attacks, (this was just one more of those) wild advocate speculation on world ending disasters passed as peer reviiewed scientific studies, hiding of private scientific doubts about the science, while publicly persecuting sckeptics for expressing those same doubts, etc)
While none of the above is “fun”, there is a feeling of satisfaction and justice in seeing mendacious and evil actions revealed for what they are, and there is a decent chance this episode will, on balance, bring far more people to a better understanding of the issues involved. Thank you for all your hard work.
I wish to offer the blogosphere the following portmanteau: gleickswoggle
Gleickswoggle – to leverage the blogosphere and other written media dishonestly to defame or besmirch a person, idea, or organization using stolen or fabricated evidence.
To be gleickswoggled: To have been convinced to run with a fabricated story later shown to be fraudulent.
Gleickswogglespiel: The conversation that follows a gleickswoggling event intended to restore once’s self-respect for having failed to vet a gleickswoggle. See more at “self denial”.
Banned?
@Skiphil
“Mr. Gleick, did you write the “strategy” doc, yes or no?”
He already answered that. He didn’t. He received it in the mail, which then gave him the idea to try and verify the information by faking his identity.
Why would Dr. Gleick take the poorly written Summary document seriously? Surely, he must have questioned who penned it? This doesn’t make sense.
“Over at DeSmog Blog they are praising Gleick and spinning his confession so fast that it has created its own localized climate distortion.”
Which holds to character. Unethical behavior seems to be fine when it is done on behalf of “the cause”.
“they are labeling him as a martyr for the cause”
Something really weird about that.
Checking Daily Climate for their Gleick story, I’ve stumpled upon this gem:
“Climate change alters the environment in complex ways. The Andes, warming for decades, has seen three bitter winters that have left more than 400 dead and aid agencies scrambling. Experts see the fingerprints of global warming there, too.”
One really needs to be an expert of some sort to identify ‘global warming’ in three subsequent bitter winters. I am not.
My guess – and this is just a guess, personal opinion based on no facts whatsoever – is that upon pulling off his little deception to score the real docs he got a little too happy, and whether his choice of intoxicant was liquid or vaporous the muse took him while he was a bit too roasted.
Talleyrand, after having been fired as Napoleon’s foreign minister, noted that Bonaparte’s fall began when it became possible for him to do today what Talleyrand would have delayed until tomorrow. These days, of course, one has the ‘publish’ button for that.
yawn – Gleick’s proven just how trustworthy his public statements are. Let’s have some evidence.
Right now his own statements are best interpreted as “gentlemen, we’ve got to save our phoney-baloney jobs”.
Gleick is the Anti-FOIA.
1. Stole the documents whereas it looks like FOIA is a in-sider. A leaker. (burgler Vs. Leaker)
2. Possibly faked the original ‘Heartland Game Plan’. None of the emails leaked by FOIA have been claimed to be faked by any of the poetically licensed authors.
3. Alleged to be a whistle-blower whereas, he’s probably blowing his own (and last) whistle. FOIA blew the official whistle on what was already suspected and apparent about AGW
4. Alleged to be an insider of the Heartland whereas, he has nothing to do with them present and past. FOIA’s identity remains a mystery but is likely in the employ of CRU.
5. Feels the matter is so weighty and big, that his own sacrifice is worth it. FOIA has not revealed his identity.
6. Gleick’s call is likely the “charge!” signal to the AGW crowd to take back the offensive in the manner of the ‘Charge of the Light Brigade’. FOIA’s signals was to merely show that AGW is what it was revealing itself to be(see ‘Michael Mann, designer of the Hockey Stick….’ over at the Slate-The word ‘designer’ in the world of unbiased Science is the kiss of death).
7. FOIA showed the Science was standing up wheras Gleick’s mann-oeuver (sp?) is a ‘politics only’ ploy.
H/T to FOIA where ever you are !!!
Peter Gleick may be all kinds of things, but he is not “evil”, nor is he stupid. That’s ridiculous, and carries about as much weight as “he’s a martyr to the cause”. Both statements are tripe. He got caught doing something immensely stupid (and, I believe, illegal), and is now desperately trying to limit the damage to himself and those associated with him. He allowed his beliefs to cloud his judgment, and he will pay the price in court and professionally, and rightly so. Let’s leave it at that – crowing over his situation now is juvenile in the extreme.
However, on a juvenile note, it really is a pleasure to see the echo-chamber, DeSmog Blog (AKA a well-funded PR firm) making such delicious fools of themselves. It’s hard to imagine that people could make such a series of mistakes whilst awake and sober, but they keep doing it.
I would be willing to bet that the Gleick family home recently had a “crashed” hard drive that needed replacement a few days (or even hours) ago.
I look forward to Gleick answering questions about his statement, under oath, in court. He would be well advised to reveal everything he knows about this incident now, including about the alleged fake document. Common sense suggests that he should not use Gore’s 2000 election press secretary for any further communications. As to the publishers using the documents to try to discredit the Heartland Institute and others, they should start setting aside very large sums of money, particularly if they do not promptly act as the Heartland Institute’s lawyer has reasonably requested.
So according to the link
UPDATE14: 9:40AM Daily Climate article cites “criminal act” and “steel cage death match” here
He is really not such a bad guy. And really the science is settled.
If so then why commit a criminal act to discredit someone else s viewpoint. Unwilling to debate the facts but so sure that he is right. What is next physical force.
Ha ha, yaaaawnnn you are not a careful reader are you….. He most carefully did not specify what item he claims to have received in the mail. “It” might have been some other unspecified doc not released….although clearly he hopes that his fictional non-denial pseudo denial will fool enough people now…..
Oh it’s all ok because we have the “word” of a confessed liar, thief, and con artist for it.
Also, it is preposterous to pretend that the fake “strategy” doc was leaked to him without any supporting materials, but that he happened to be able to steal the supporting docs which would dovetail so nicely with the fake “strategy” doc. Gosh, it’s almost as though the “strategy” doc was written to be supported by the docs he managed to steal…..
Forgive Gleick only if he accepts the challenge to open and public debate. The debate will be enough to decide who has been honest and who has been deceptive.