Commenter FP writes:
Hmm, they’ve removed Peter Gleick’s name from this page:
http://www.agu.org/about/governance/committees_boards/scientific_ethics.shtml
It was there four days ago, according to google’s cache. Has he resigned/been fired already?
It had read as the page screencap shows:
(from Google cache here)
Chair
Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute, Oakland, California
Now reads:
Sad to see how fanatically people are acting for a ’cause’ they believe in.
The originally honorable objective to protect the environment has been hijacked and perverted for long now. Didn’t we have enough bad examples in present and past, what fanatism and dogmatism will cause?
Such behaviour of the climate alarmists will certainly make more people become sensitive and open their eyes about what’s really going on here.
Maybe Penn State can do the investigation, or maybe Muir Russell isn’t busy…..
…if he had been better at it
There would have been no confession
Gras Albert says, February 21, 2012 at 7:52 am
Try here … http://ncse.com/news/2012/02/source-heartland-leak-steps-forward-007220
“What ultimately makes Gleick a truly pathetic figure is that what he did, even if it had been successful, would have had no discernible effect on the final outcome of the war, except possibly hastening it. There’s simply no way that a vitriolic squabble between a cabal of activists and an institute the ordinary person had never heard of, was going to reverse the declining belief in the threat of global warming. The Heartland Institute extracting huge sums of money in punitive damages from prominent media outlets will however, have a huge propaganda impact.”
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/fakegate-claims-its-first-scalp/
Pointman
You couldn’t make it up… Oh, hang on.
Well, de ja vu! I do so hate to be such a bore, but I’ll say it yet again. Lying, even if for a noble cause, is still…………………………………………..LYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Copner says:
February 21, 2012 at 8:19 am
Don’t worry, I’m sure Gleick will be cleared of any ethical violation by multiple independent inquiries, and reinstated. It may even have already happened. /sarc
Yep. Can I recommend Muir Russell? He is a good safe pair of hands.
Well, in AGW-land time will cure almost anything, remember Phil Jones? He resigned but is back at his desk. Unless Cleick is found guilty in a court of law, he will be back as well. It is up to HI what happens next (and maybe the FBI, if they can be bothered)
Gleick will be regarded as a martyr for the cause and celebrated in an increasingly small band of like minded zealots. Groups like this do not play well with others.
JonasM – Looks like some webmaster’s phone went off full-blast sometime 0-dark-thirty with a command to Get Him Out Of There Now.
Will this finally, FINALLY be the last nail in the coffin of the myth of Honorable, Infallible Climate Scientists? This guy’s crawled to public prominence by being the mouthpiece for what all these other political pseudoscientists wanted to say but didn’t dare.
They have, in various letters and papers and through supporting his appointments, hitched themselves to him – let us hope that he’s finally the anchor that drags them all under.
JonasM says on February 21, 2012 at 8:21 am
It is interesting that they seem to have hand-edited the HTML to comment him out.
Seems they intend to reinstate him when this all blows over.
Speaks volumes to “scientific integrity.”
Amazingly I’ve been extremely vociferous about AGW and all the obvious lies an manipulations of data for the past 4 years, but I say, lets all cool down. Nearly ALL the AGW believers and “climate scientists” we are talking about here, are at my guess about 30’ish, a time when your fanaticism is at its peak especially over politics, social issues which AGW has become.. Let us remember in the 70 80s when a HUGE crowd of youngish people everywhere though socialism was great!. Most of them now probably think it was a bad joke! I say continue to hound them currently for their mistakes, but by my guess, by the time the AGWers are 40-60yrs old, most of them including Gleick will admit it was all a bad joke that they themselves fell for. BTW I was a fervent believer up to 5 years ago when i saw that famous hadcrut graph lol. Im proudly a 100% denier now being a 100% scientist statistics etc… NO AGW due to Co2 Zilch nada from my view of the temperature data to date AMSU. Lets all get a life and tone down the Climate sickness we all suffer from hahahah Just a final I don’t acknowledge ‘climate science” as science per se whereas meteorology or atmospheric physics is climate science cheers
Note that there is no indication that Dr. Gleick is not still the Chair nor that someone else is in the seat (even provisionally).
Ideology or religion? It is also ironic that the AGU chooses to call there newsletter Eos after the Greek goddess of dawn. Idol worship under the guise of science is truly pathetic.
Remember how hard the warmers struggled to pin a charge of plagiarism on Ed Wegman after his report poked serious holes in the AGW arguments? Let’s not get too cocky over this because that same crowd is now going to redouble efforts to discredit a prominent figure in the skeptical community. And this will doubtless increase pressure to identify FOIA and reverse the damage done by the Climategate e-mails. Despite the hollow bravery of the DeSmogBlog and the like, the warmers are on the ropes and they’re going to try their best to hit back hard now. It won’t be pretty, it won’t be fair, and it won’t be anything but dirty, but this fight is far from over.
Rogelio – nah, Hansen, Trenberth, Jones, and quite a few others. are older than I am, and I’m looking backward on my thirtieth birthday from some distance. Mann, Santer, etc. are younger, but one might argue they’ve achieved their prominence more through advocacy than accuracy.
It should be interesting to see whom else gets roped into this morass once Gleick’s lawyers start looking for ways to spread the liability. My guess is that “anonymous” bites the dust first followed closely by several of the approved propaganda blogs (DeSmog, Hoggan, etc).
You and many others are directly responsible for this prompt and correct action. Timely emails can be devastating. The trick, of course, is in the timing of the “quick, short, shock”. The warmists have given us another opportunity, to make a difference. Thanks GK
with this administration I expect him to be hired as Energy Department consultant on ethics.
They lie and they know that they lie, and we know it too.
Only 131 edits to go…
Google: “Peter Gleick” site:agu.org
… Page 14 of 132 results
Confirmation, and another “Poor Peter!” piece for the pile:
http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2012/02/gleickgate-climate-change-activism-takes-a-big-step-backward/
“Perhaps most damning, Gleick was (until this morning) chairman of the American Geophysical Union’s Task Force on Scientific Ethics.”
The end of the piece could be a runner-up for a “Most Incredulous Spin” award:
The “scientists” held the high ground? And what the heck is a “climate advocacy” organization? They advocate for the rights of the climate, starting with the right of the climate to exist?
Oh well, at least it was nice of them to show how terribly outspent we skeptics are, without even one use of any variation of “the D word”.
BTW, they’re now calling this “GleickGate”? WUWT?
It seems quite the personal tragedy for Peter Gleick…
…but, I’m very sure his friends will look after him and find him a cozy job somewhere.
Glieck offered his resignation to National Center for Science Education. They accepted.
“Gleick had agreed to join NCSE’s board of directors. 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 … His offer was accepted.”
Gleick went way too far with this. According to Wikipedia: “In the United States, mail and wire fraud is any fraudulent scheme to intentionally deprive another of property or honest services via mail or wire communication.” The elements of the crime include, (1) Intent, (2) a scheme or artifice to defraud or the obtaining of property by fraud, and (3) A mail or wire communication.
Gleick has publicly admitted to these three elements. Justice maybe too slow to matter. A civil case could easily take two years or more.