This essay is from the National Center for Science Education at: http://ncse.com/news/2012/02/source-heartland-leak-steps-forward-007220
==========================================================
Source of Heartland leak steps forward
Peter Gleick
The source of the documents revealing the strategy of the Heartland Institute’s campaign to undermine the public’s understanding of climate science — including by producing and distributing K-12 curriculum materials propounding climate change denial — revealed himself to be Dr. Peter Gleick, the hydroclimatologist who heads the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment, and Security.
In a February 20, 2012, statement posted at the Huffington Post, Gleick explained that at the beginning of the year, he received a document “describing what appeared to be details of the Heartland Institute’s climate program strategy.” Attempting to confirm the accuracy of the information, he continued, “I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else’s name.”
Gleick expressed regret for his actions, writing, “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.”
As part of NCSE’s expansion to defend the teaching of climate science, 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, on which he was scheduled to begin serving as of February 25, 2012. His offer was accepted.
“Gleick obtained and disseminated these documents without the knowledge of anyone here,” NCSE’s executive director Eugenie C. Scott commented, “and we do not condone his doing so.” But, she added, “they show that NCSE was right to broaden its scope to include the teaching of climate science. There really are coordinated attempts to undermine the teaching of climate science, and NCSE is needed to help to thwart them.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Note: the above linked program doesn’t seem to load properly when clicking to play, so just click around on the timer bar which corrects it.
Eugenie Scott and I used to see eye-to-eye on many things back in the day when I worked with her, despite her veiled contempt for my irrational belief in God, which she used to her benefit. I doubt we would get along so well now.
Until today I had never heard of the NCSE. It struck me as rather bizarre. An entire organization devoted to teaching two unproven (and unprovable) theories – evolution and “climate science”. I was already in my 50s when when one day it occurred to me that I had been indoctrinated with the theory of evolution since I was a child. To this day I still believe in evolution because I’ve yet to encounter a persuasive alternative theory. But today I have a much more open mind for the theories offered by adherents of Intelligent Design. There are gaping holes in the theory of evolution and many mysteries unexplained by the fossil record or modern biology. Adaptation does not adequately explain with biologic specificity how one species transforms into another entirely different species. Still, I’m an evolution “believer” rather than a “denier”. I think it’s fine to teach the theory of evolution in schools provided it is taught as an unproven THEORY. It’s important to realize that the theory of evolution is “pretty new”…it’s only been around about 150 years (compare this to Newton). But the theory of evolution really doesn’t affect global economies, governments or standards of living. What’s more, evolution has much more convincing evidence to support it than AGW.
I find the teaching of “climate science” to kids in grades K-12 rather disturbing. I mostly ignored the AGW issue for a lot of years. I started out as a “believer”. Hell, it was a seemingly plausible theory (and at the time I didn’t listen to any talk radio). In 2005 I became interested in the subject of AGW and started buying and reading a lot of books on the subject. Obviously I became extremely skeptical but more importantly, by the time I started my own investigation I had already taken classes in college chemistry, organic chemistry, physical chemistry, biochemistry, physics, math (up to the calculus and differential equations), etc. I had a rather thorough background in basic sciences before I embarked on my own journey of discovery. How much “climate science” can you teach a kid in grades K-12? Probably none. But you CAN indoctrinate. And it’s not just the AGW nonsense, it’s the religion of environmentalism that’s being taught…and it’s being taught as absolute fact. That’s disturbing. Children should be taught biology, chemistry, physics and math in grades K-12. Couple this with critical thinking skills and they will be prepared to consider AGW and rabid environmentalism all on their own as young adults.
The fact that some particularly odious activist such as Gleick should involved with such an organization as NCES speaks volumes.
Bust a Gut and LOL
Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.
*****************************************************************************************************
Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy.
There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness. – **DeSmogBlog.com**
Richard Littermore (Littlemore) Doesn’t know the meaning of integrity/honesty /truth or morality the above statement proves it.
well, well, well another martyr of Gaia and true believer of the Church of AGW!
Olavi says:
February 21, 2012 at 11:26 am
Gleick is dummy. LOL. Destroyig his own career for nothing.
=====================================================
sorta…….
Why did a global warming insider, and one of the most famous, and one with the most to lose….
…take this big of a chance
He had to know, going in, he’s not computer savvy enough to pull it off
Leaves you with two choices…
One of the most famous global warming advocates and scientists…is dumb as a bag of rocks
….or he’s desperate
…possibly three choices…. 😉
As less and less people believe….
…you’ll be left with the lowest common denominator
@Ecotretas – “Having read it again, it would not surprise me that NCSE is involved in this”
I think you’re spot on. Food for thought….
– NCSE’s forray into “Climate Change” was just launched last month. Prior to that they were prettymuch a one trick pony dealing exclusively with “creationism” in the classroom. What better way to draw attention (and stimulate $$$ contributions) than to have an evil, conservative opponent.
– Chris Mooney at DeSmogBlog was one of the first (if not the first) to publicise NCSE’s climate education initiative launch, with a blog post and interview with Eugenie Scott of NCSE. http://www.desmogblog.com/classroom-climate-battle-new-heavy-hitter-joins-fray.
– In his January post, Mooney notes “There Is No Clear “Opponent.” In the evolution fight, there was the Institute for Creation Research, and then the “intelligent design” promoting Discovery Institute. In the climate education battle, there is no central clearinghouse organization on the political right that is pushing global warming denial in schools. …”
– Mooney also wonders “…So how can she and her organization manage climate education conflicts profitably …”
– Now we have Gleick, the newly appointed member of NCSE’s board, (appointed specifically because of their new climate initiatives) at the center of a fraud to create a “clear opponent” and provide a wondefull springboard for NCSE’s climate launch.
I don’t know but it all seems more than a bit suspicious to me. Or maybe it’s just some kind of a 3 Stooges remake.
Rich
Joe says:
February 21, 2012 at 10:03 am
…
It’s a Gleick Tragedy.
—————————
Groan!
TIME TO ADD ANOTHER SUSPECT TO THE INVESTIGATION?
from NCSE,
“…Gleick obtained and disseminated these documents without the knowledge of anyone here,” NCSE’s executive director Eugenie C. Scott commented, “and we do not condone his doing so.” But,….”
Gleick is clearly, at minimum, a liar. IMO he is also probably a crook and any organisation he is, or was intending to be, associated with is clearly untrustworthy.
We need to know no more about them!
Zeke says:
February 21, 2012 at 10:20 am
That is a good point. Who anointed guys like Gleick and NSCE as the sole arbiters of what should go into the science curricula of public elementary, middle, and high schools in this country? It is that arrogance more than anything that frosts me. It has led to a serious ethical and legal breach, which must somehow be addressed in the civil, if not criminal, courts.
Please extract my post from the limbo. I guess it got there because I used some “inappropriate” word.
UnfrozenCavemanMD says:
February 21, 2012 at 11:33 am
NCSE accepts Gleick’s resignation, but they also accept a blatant forgery intended to smear Heartland as fact.
=============================
Gleik is too valuable an asset to the cause. His legal costs till be covered by the cause and he’ll lay low for a little while, until the smoke clears, Shortly thereafter he will start making noises again, after all is forgotten and forgiven by the green side.
I doubt that any legal action brought by any parties damaged by his actions will amount to much.
He’ll be back.
Greg, please take into account that each month the wind will blow stiffer against the
Warmists…. they are loosing support on all fronts……lets uncover 3 or 4 more of
Gleick warmists (there is plenty around today)…. plus….2 or 3 stiff winter colds to come…. and
the media will sense that AGW is down on the floor and the media will do the counting
1 to 10 for us…. lean back and observe….there will be no comeback of Gleick, you will
see: Soon the Warmists will jump ship ….. and all the Gleicks will belong to history….
JS
If the picture of this guy is a good representation of what he actually looks like, then I would say he looks like his name would indicate and exactly what I would expect, a trust fund hippie? He most certainly did not get his job on his looks, nor, evidently, on his commitment to the scientific method or journalistic honesty.
I went at Amazon and read about Donna’s book all reviews remembering Peter Gleick gave there also a comment before reading her book – or so it looks.
Found his with some 60 answers on page 14. It is worth a recap. I felt much better after doing it.
Donna has 135 customer reviews!
http://www.amazon.com/Delinquent-Teenager-Mistaken-Worlds-Climate/product-reviews/1466453486/ref=cm_cr_pr_btm_link_14?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&pageNumber=14
Lars, congrats you found this
piece with original words of Gleick…..compulsory to read for everyone!…..
… everyone can easily see: This person deserves to be sent to the desert….
…..he himself admits that his “”judgments”” are bad, he is in a “”state of blindness”” in
science and full of “”frustration”” , needs to “”resign””….. maintains in his review of the
Framboise book that the “IPCC is full with good guys just like him”…..the IPCC is the place,
where all his PEERS congregate…. sitting on the same wire…..
……. let’s keep eyes and ears open so that no more of his frustrated, blinded PEERS
will not escape our attention….
Thinking about Fakegate plus Gleick’s dishonest smear job on Donna just motivated me to buy the book on my Kindle account. May she gain many more sales and readers!
What’s a hydroclimatologist ?
Joachim Seifert says:
February 21, 2012 at 12:42 pm
Greg, please take into account that each month the wind will blow stiffer against the Warmists….
================
I agree, that’s why they’ll want/need to have Gleick back. Check this out from Dr. Curry’s blog, she’s quoting the warm side:
No, in their eyes he’s a hero and they aren’t going to let him go if they have anything to say about it.
Greg, this is possible, but since more of Gleicks peers, sitting on the same wire, will
fall within, lets say 3 years…..- I am sure, there is just too many climate villain peers
around – .. the IPCC will not give him support but would rather reject him, because he has a tainted shirt on, and figures like an uncovered spy in sleezy blackmail movies…..
The IPCC would rather look for PEER with a seemingly clean shirt on and who can hide, what is covered in his pants…..
…….Or else, the skeptics were in the position to constantly pick in the future….
…..
Joe says:
February 21, 2012 at 10:03 am
“So Gleick, in his hubris, attempted to prime the pump for a battle against Heartland that he intended to wage as a board member at NCSE by releasing a fake document that portrayed Heartland as an anti-science organization. This plan had the ultimate effect of undoing Gleick just when he should have been reaching the zenith of his career and casting him in the nadir of his career instead.”
VERY GOOD! You found the motive. So we KNOW now that
-this was not masterplanned to blow up in their faces like it did.
-the left/warm media are just winging it as good as they can
-it will keep blowing up the harder they try to spin it!
Zac says on February 21, 2012 at 12:59 pm
Perhaps it is someone who does a lot of p*ssing in the wind.
”He is the hero and Heartland remains the villain. He will have many people lining up to support him.”
He is guilty of Identity Theft and Identity Fraud, and needs to go to jail.
You can support him there with commissary donations.
Aww, he disembarks the AGW gravey train Took a bullet for the team.
He will be rewarded down the line with a Directorship of an Eco company or position within a University or Government.
Let’s consider for a moment, WWYD according to his version.
Let’s say one day I received an unsolicited e-mail about 350.org that summarized their program strategy (that oddly enough is written in a style very similar to my own). Do I: 1) Post on WUWT; 2) Attempt to verify the authenticity through criminal deception; 3) Notify 350.org that I’d received the email in error; 4) FW the email to Watts et al; 5) Delete the email; 6) Never see the email since it got caught in the spam filter; 7) Be converted to an alarmist upon reading the email; 8) Poke around the internet to see if it’s something that’s public or “secret” or 9) FW the email to Watts et al anonymously?
Well, if I got past #6, I think I would do #8 and then if I thought I had something 350.org didn’t want to be public knowledge I’d do #4 using my normal email for more thorough investigation.
So, if he’d just FW the e-mail he says he got to DeSmog would he be in anywhere near the predicament he’s in now? I say no, he wouldn’t. DeSmog might still be in a bit of predicament if they didn’t disclose the shaky source and published as authentic document, but Gleick would be hunky dory. This is not a hard one to figure out. Therefore, I strongly suspect his version is hogwash. This is glimpse into his fantasy world similar to the “No Pressure” video, he believes that skeptics really know better but are intentionally misleading people, so that’s the way he wrote it.
TheOldCrusader
February 21, 2012 at 9:36 am
I used to have some respect for NCSE for its work in rebutting some of the creationist blather.
###
Boy have you drank the cool-aid. NCSE is all about resisting the concept that the Bible and science do not conflict unless you take a very particular interpretation of each. They are very desires (along with the Center for Creation Studies working from the other end, but just as slimy) of keeping Christians on the Creationist( as defined by lefties) plantation. It ain’t working and the are getting desperate. They also push a version of evolution that has little to do with science. It is more of a Marxist fantasy as to what evolution is then anything that evolutionary biologist study. The teaching of evolution in HS for example, is little more then a platform for bashing Christianity.
And don’t get me started on “Intelligent Design”. This is another product of left propaganda that is fed to Christians who tend eat it because it sounds reasonable and they believe it is Christian. In reality it is a straw man heavily overloaded with meaning that is ignored by Christians but used by lefties to blow it down. Intelligent Design is not even a theory, most Christians who are not anti-evolution, don’t think its a theory, but the lefties go on about the latest Christian theory and how stupid it is. Just read the non-sense written by that looser at Skeptical SciFi.
polistra said @ur momisugly February 21, 2012 at 10:44 am
What evidence do you have that “all Climate Scientists have been frauds and criminals from the start”. Are Anthony Watts, Willis Eschenbach, Steve McIntyre, Richard Lindzen, Roger Pielke Sr, John Christy, Roy Spencer etc frauds and criminals? I think not. You sir are delusional.