The Gleick Tragedy

The original Gleick Confesses thread was getting unwieldy with almost 1000 comments, so this one will serve in its place and will continue to be updated.

New content on other topics will appear below. Satirical logo by our own charles the moderator.

UPDATE95: 10:45 AM 3/9 Peter Gleick gave the keynote address to a recent water conference. Yesterday, KQED Radio aired a snippet of his talk, the part in which he denigrates “deniers”.

UPDATE94: 8:50AM 3/7 Questions in the house about Gleick’s EPA grants, will his ethics violation mean he won’t be able to get EPA grants again?

UPDATE93: 9:25PM 3/6 Financial Post: ‘Fakegate’ latest climate clashDocument from skeptical think-tank turns out to have been forged

UPDATE92: 7:30PM 3/6 NYT’s Andy Revkin speaks of the fake memo issue, but basically tells people asking why he’s silent on the issue to go suck eggs (my interpretation). Harold Ambler has the details here.

UPDATE91: 7:45AM 3/6 The Sound of Silence  Harold Ambler asks:

I have asked him, twice now, if he bothered to ask Peter Gleick if he was the author of an internationally significant document that someone fraudulently produced two weeks ago.

And Revkin has gone silent.

UPDATE90: 7:30AM 3/6 Fakegate/Gleickgate – Global Warming’s Piltdown Man 

UPDATE89: 11AM 3/5 WaPo weighs in with In climate wars, radicalization of researchers brings risks – The Washington Post

UPDATE88: 11:30AM 3/4 At The Reference Frame: Selling your soul for a narrative: understanding the Gleick fraud

UPDATE87: 10:30AM 3/4 The Toronto Sun reports: Climate expert’s pants on fire. Loved this part:

Gleick’s other big “find”, according to Heartland’s critics, was a plan to infiltrate public schools with educational programs promoting climate denial.

But for heaven’s sake, if Al Gore and his minions are going to be welcomed into schools to scare the bejeebers out of children on climate change, what’s the big deal about Heartland sending in a few troops to say Gore’s full of hooey?

UPDATE86: 2PM 3/3 The Orange County Register has a strong opinion piece by Steven Greenhut who says: What’s a little fraud to save the Earth?If the theory of man-made global warming were such a self-obvious truth, the result of scientific consensus, then why do its advocates keep committing fraud to advance it?

UPDATE85: 10:37AM 3/3 The Chicago Tribune weighs in on Fakegate with Climate madness -Skulduggery undermines the case for global warming I missed this when it first came out, but still relevant today.

UPDATE84: 10:13AM 3/3 More Fakegate Fallout in the form of gotcha jounalism: Fake moral outrage translated to smear: media upset that students can choose to take an elective course on climate change at Carleton

UPDATE83: 10:00AM 3/2 In Heartland, Gleick, and Media Law, the Columbia Journalism review takes on Fakgate saying: “Gleick leaked information to the press, which puts him in league with figures like Daniel Ellsberg, the source of the Pentagon Papers, and Bradley Manning, the source of the Wikileaks cables, rather than with the muckraking journalists of yore.“.

UPDATE82: 9:45AM 3/2  Things About Peter Gleick That “Might Also Interest or Intrigue You”

UPDATE81: 8:00AM 3/2 Fakegate: The Obnoxious Fabrication of Global Warming – Forbes.  The stolen Heartland documents exonerated, rather than embarrassed, the skeptic movement.

UPDATE80: 7:60AM 3/2 From Master Resource – An appreciation for the Heartland Institute and Joe Bast Meanwhile, if you want to show appreciation while poking some fun, Heartland now offers Fakegate Gear 

UPDATE79: 12PM 3/1 In Politico’s Morning Energy, NCARS’s Kevin Trenberth excuses Gleick’s criminal behavior as “advocacy”, here’s what they say along with quote by Kevin Trenberth:

I’VE MADE A HUGE MISTAKE — Peter Gleick’s career isn’t over despite the big scar linked to his duping the Heartland Institute, says Kevin Trenberth, an atmospheric scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo. “I think this pushes Peter in the direction of getting even more involved on the side of being an advocate,” Trenberth told ME on Friday. “He’s had a strong science background, especially related to water. I don’t see this as the end of the road for Peter by any means.”

As Donna Laframboise says, what will it take? Where Do Gleick’s Apologists Draw the Line? Lying and stealing and misleading are OK so long as they help advance a good cause. What else is acceptable? Old fashioned burglary? Arson? Car bombs?

UPDATE78: 11AM 3/1 A new documentary about water by the makers of ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ features none other than Peter Gleick. h/t to the Daily Bayonet Weekly Roundup.

UPDATE77: 6:50PM SciBlogs resident crank Greg Laden has a wild conspiracy theory according to Mr. Worthing who writes: Meanwhile, on another planet…Greg Laden suffers from a shortage of oxygen to the brain… (worth a read, wow, just wow – A)

UPDATE76: 12:20PM 2/29 In a letter, Koch takes the NYT and Revkin to task

UPDATE75: 10:20AM 2/29 Heartland sends a letter to all board members of the Pacific Institute.

UPDATE74: 820AM 2/29 In more dysfunctional editorializing from the LA times, trying to prop up Michael Mann and push his book, we have this passage: “Peter Gleick, a MacArthur “genius” grant recipient for his work on global freshwater challenges and president of the Pacific Institute, admitted earlier this month to borrowing a page directly from the denialists’ playbook. Posing as someone else…” Playbook? OK geniuses, name ONE INCIDENT where a skeptic posed as somebody else to steal documents and commit wire fraud.

UPDATE73: 8:10AM 2/29 In a fit of angst titled Subterfuge vs. propaganda in global warming debate, LA Times writer Michael Hiltzik tries to equate CRU “Team” scientists illegally avoiding FOI requests and getting off on a FOIA statute of limitations technicality to hypocrisy on the part of Heartland for having a criminal wire fraud act made against them. The logic dysfunction by this reporter is stunning.

UPDATE72: 7:55AM 2/29 EENews Climatewire has a timeline narrative of the affair in A scientist’s fraudulent peek into Heartland’s files began with a modest request.

UPDATE 71: 3:27PM 2/28 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.

NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory recorded the extreme UV flash:

This eruption hurled a bright CME into space. First-look data from STEREO-B are not sufficient to determine if the cloud is heading for Earth. Our best guess is “probably, yes, but not directly toward Earth.” A glancing blow to our planet’s magnetosphere is possible on March 8th or 9th.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

What a fantastic effort Anthony and Charles. Thank you.


To anyone aware of classic genres, the Gleick affair is not tragedy, but farce.

Richard Sharpe

Said this before, but someone needs to create a genuine Evil Anti-Climate institute board meeting template so that those AGW fanatics won’t get embarrassed again.

I just remember a fragmentary line from a childhood favourite of mine, music with the sung lines, when the baddie is finally brought to justice:
“Hooray the bad old glockenspiel is dead! Boom-diddly-ai-dee boom diddly-ai-dee boom diddly-ai-dee boom”… or some such words. Anyone remember?
Of course, now it’s the “bad old gleickenspiel”.


Lets hope the FBI hands this off to the local Federal Prosecutor…
It could be a Merry Fitzmas every day of the year…for the next few years, perhaps.

John Whitman

The authorities should be all over the email Gleick alleges to have anonymously sent to 15 people on or about Feb 14 which he also alleges contained only HI sourced docs. Let me explain why.
To me Gleick appears to be an extremely active and zealously enthusiastic member of the small group of ‘cause’ activists who are well known from CG1/CG2 and well know from other advocating activities for anti-skeptic PR campaigns. He appears to me by nature to be intrinsically a group player in the ’cause’ over an extended period of time (since AR4).
Gleick alleges to have sent an anonymous email (?on Feb 14, at 9:13 a.m. Pacific?) to ‘15’ ‘friends’ that were ‘ journalists and experts working on climate issues’. The alleged ‘15’ have not been identified. That email, Gleick also alleges, contained what he said at that time were all docs from HI. Gleick, contrary to his past active close collaborative behavior for ‘cause’ advocacy, subtly and without actually saying so in his confession on Feb 20 leaves the reader feeling that he was the sole perpetrator of the fraud. Read his confession. That is a subtle piece of lawyer handiwork. He does not say he was alone in the perpetration.
My impression of ‘cause’ behavior, based on my observations of public dialog during several years before the start of the Gleick affair in early Jan 2012, is of an extraordinarily tight nexus centered on the small group of activist ‘cause’ centric climate scientists; see, among other things, the CG1/CG2 docs. That was all before the beginning of Jan 2012.
NOTE: I leave aside for the time being another interesting emphasis which is whether PI staff and clerical members could have known of Gleick’s perpetration while it was in progress.

I understand how this story about Gleick is important. He was/is unethical. But 71 posts on the same subject seems like riot mentality or similar to who police have been caught on tape kicking and beating some cockaroach gang member until he is bloodied.
There are OTHER issues with the global warming debate which are not appearing in this blog as of late because everyone is going after Gleick with vengence.
Please, let’s get back to the science. I have been a skeptic for years and have followed Anthony’s blog for years, including “Climategate”. But really…this is getting too much for me.

Markus Fitzhenry

By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent. Telegraph.
16 Jan 2012
“Michael Mann vows to keep up the “street fight” against climate change deniers”
Even though the climate change debate is calmer today, with even Republican candidates in the US taking the issue seriously, Professor Mann insisted scientists have to keep up the pressure to prove man made climate change is a threat that needs to be tackled.
“Scientists have to recognise they are in a street fight,” he warned.
By Bryan Walsh . Time Science.
Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2012
Mann realizes that as long as he keeps conducting climate research, he’ll be a target for tough personal attacks. “I fully recognize that this is going to continue for the rest of my life,” he says. “And probably beyond.” He’s all right with that now, even though he knows that his side will always be fighting the climate war at least partially — and voluntarily — disarmed. “We can’t maintain the moral high ground if we adopt street fighting tactics ourselves,” says Mann. “We feel that we can and will win an honest debate.” As much as Mann wants to be a climate warrior, that’s really the only way he knows how to fight.,8599,2107747,00.html?xid=tweetbut

Silly bugger, in January he wanted to get into a street fight. Well, we all know how that went. Six weeks later, he wants it to stop.
Please, Please Anthony, can we have another post about Michael Mann, the last one was hilarious, the next one will be even better.


“Appearance of hypocrisy”? Seriously, Andrew? “Appearance”?!?

Chuck L

“Tragedy” implies some kind of nobility or innocence. Gleick’s actions contain neither.


re Mike, February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm :
No, Mike, this isn’t going away anytime soon, and for good reason.
People like Gleik have been subverting actual science and the minds of young people for much too long. I’m a teacher (a Physics professor), and I have seen the results of this among the students in my classes. When they arrive from high school, they have been brainwashed to oblivion, mostly by people who don’t have a clue about Thermodynamics or Atmospheric Physics, or anything else that impinges on the topic of “climate”. The people who have subverted them might have done so in all innocence, but that’s because they too have been brainwashed by people like Gore, Hansen, Suzuki, Gleick, and all the rest…
You say “Please, let’s get back to the science.” I’ve been trying to do that for years, but before we can do that, we need to expose these fraudsters for what they are, and then, perhaps, we can get back to the science. If they are allowed to continue, or to be let off with a bit of mild wrist-slapping, it will just continue like the destructive game of whack-a-mole that they’ve been playing all along.

Ben D.

Mike says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm
“I understand how this story about Gleick is important. He was/is unethical. But 71 posts on the same subject seems like riot mentality or similar to who police have been caught on tape kicking and beating some cockaroach gang member until he is bloodied.
There are OTHER issues with the global warming debate which are not appearing in this blog as of late because everyone is going after Gleick with vengence.
Please, let’s get back to the science. I have been a skeptic for years and have followed Anthony’s blog for years, including “Climategate”. But really…this is getting too much for me.”.
Can you clarify, are you suggesting that there have been 71 WUWT posts on Gleick?.

Richard Sharpe says:
“someone needs to create a genuine Evil Anti-Climate institute board meeting template so that those AGW fanatics won’t get embarrassed again.
That would be Anti-Climactic


I think Steve M’s take is sound
“Whether Gleick, a member of the U.S. intellectual elite and a former student and coauthor of John Holdren, Obama’s Science Adviser, is ever charged is a different issue than whether his acts meet the elements of 18 USC 1343.”
That pretty much sums up where this is going. Heartland is in Chicago (hint: Rahm Emanuel), Gleick is in CA (hint: Jerry Brown)…and well, you know the rest

Markus Fitzhenry

Mike says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Please, let’s get back to the science. I have been a skeptic for years and have followed Anthony’s blog for years, including “Climategate”. But really…this is getting too much for me.
I can understand your feeling Mike. I’ve only been looking at this climate science fiasco for a short while now and I have a lot of science to learn.
However, I think I’m astute enough to know that we a close to a endgame here. WUWT and others have swamped the ‘consensus’ with science. But, because they refuse to debate or consider the proper scientific process, sceptics have had to strategise differently to what has been happening in the last few years.
I can only say I’m having a great time, it is just as enthralling as a Gladiatorial battle at the Coliseum.


I don’t see this anecdote highlighted anywhere on this blog, but I think it should be. It’s a good reminder there are sane people on both sides of the debate. Over at All Models Are Wrong near the end of January there was a pretty intense debate over ethics, you may have read it ( Mr. Gleick, who we now know was engaging in a little climatic espionage, was pushing some rather shady tactics. Some of his fellow scientists, to their credit, told him to sod off in so many words, including this rather prescient quote: “@nmrqip: @richardabetts Yep. Lying ‘to avoid being misunderstood’ never ends well @PeterGleick @flimsin”. Talk about foreshadowing. Doesn’t that just about sum up this entire fiasco?


I say time to lay off Gleick, we’ve had our fun he may actually have a wife and kids

Anthony and I had an email discussion about this before adopting my graphic. Here is a slightly edited version of what I said: The sanctimonious bastard’s “confession” was &&%%() legal damage control, completely lacking any contrition. %$&#% him. He has crossed the line and still is trying to make it work for him. Behind the scenes he is orchestrating his defenders to attempt to salvage a win. No mercy or forgiveness is appropriate until he admits everything he did and stops trying to make a “win” out of it. ~ ctm

Tim Jenvey

May be some “management” going on at the BBC Richard Black blog. I would be classified as a ‘denier’ on previous posts. I get a message now that tells me I need to update my profile.When I click the link I get blown off and it tells me comments are not being accepted at this time.
And strangely the votes are very high for the AGW proponents whereas ‘deniers’ are usually well in majority
Just thought to mention in case others find the same problem.


WUWT – Hats off, guys! Despite all the heavy rhetoric in this thread, I have to applaud you for managing two elegant puns in one headline, one literal, one visual
Gleick tragedy = Greek tragedy
G [loser hand gesture]-eick tragedy = GLEE the US TV sing-a-drama program
That’s why you’re Number One again – Content + Humor = Success!

wte9 says:
February 28, 2012 at 7:40 pm
“Mr. Gleick, who we now know was engaging in a little climatic espionage, was pushing some rather shady tactics.
To be precise, he was engaging in criminal activity on several levels, and Gleick should be prosecuted with the same energy as was Bernie Madoff. This AGW scam is orders of magnitude more egregious, morally and economically, than was the Madoff scheme.


The Gleick Affair (Team Rules) is not unprecedented.


What is quite clear is that all the employees of NASA GISS need to take ethics training.
Most private sector employees in publicly traded companies are required to take ethics training at least every two years.

Warmist Cargo Cult Scientists

It ain’t the way we wanted it! We can handle things! We’re smart! Not like everybody says… like dumb… we’re smart and we want respect!


MattN says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:58 pm
“Appearance of hypocrisy”? Seriously, Andrew? “Appearance”?!?
Huh? Was that to me?
If so, hypocrisy?


Two thoughts on Aristotelian tragedy from wikipedia ( I think both apply to some extent in this case. From what I can tell, Gleick was a gifted scholar and valuable scientist before the CAGW nuts got to him, so the “seriousness and dignity” part could apply to his pre-CAGW days…
1. “The philosopher Aristotle said in his work Poetics that tragedy is characterized by seriousness and dignity and involving a great person who experiences a reversal of fortune (Peripeteia).”
2. “Tragedy results in a catharsis (emotional cleansing) or healing for the audience through their experience of these emotions [pity and fear] in response to the suffering of the characters in the drama.”


Mike says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm
“Please, let’s get back to the science. I have been a skeptic for years and have followed Anthony’s blog for years, including “Climategate”. But really…this is getting too much for me.”
Mike, you don’t have to read the Gleick threads, there have been plenty of others over the past days, but you seem to have missed them. But of course you didn’t miss them.
So why is it that you don’t like other people analyzing the organized fanaticism of the raving lunatic CO2AGW scientists, Mike?


This is a masterful compilation.
I was into my 100 or so saved articles on Gleck and fakegate, dutifully cut and pasted into a huge Word document, this timeline and anthology now sits at the top of the page like a shiny crown.
What we have here is a quick and painless reference library of a sordid group of CAGW pond scum scammers, adoring followers, promoters and press.
A littoral Agatha Christie novel of real life losers and easily caught idiots. On second thought Agatha wouldn’t have touch it with a 10 ft pole, what a pathetic group!
Well done Anthony and the brilliant crew that have taken the lid off the warmist septic tank and exposed the filth within!

Trash Mouth

Somebody once told me the world is gonna roll me
I ain’t the sharpest tool in the shed
They made me look sorta dumb with their fingers
And their thumbs in the shape of an “L” on their foreheads
Well deniers start coming, and they don’t stop coming
Fed up with rules and I hit Heartland running
Didn’t make sense not to smack them some
My brain’s so smart but my head’s so dumb
So little for you, so much for me
So what’s wrong with taking the baksheesh?
You’ll never know what I did there
I’ll always whine ’cause it’s not fair
Hey now, I’m an all star got my fame on, okay?
Hey now, don’t you squawk loud, leave me ‘lone now, go ‘way
All climate “science” has gone cold
Only an ethics’ star can break the mold


Markus Fitzhenry says:
February 28, 2012 at 7:34 pm
“Mike says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Please, let’s get back to the science. I have been a skeptic for years and have followed Anthony’s blog for years, including “Climategate”. But really…this is getting too much for me.
I can understand your feeling Mike. I’ve only been looking at this climate science fiasco for a short while now and I have a lot of science to learn.”
Markus, in that case the phenomenon of the “concern troll” might be new to you. These are warmists appearing here, telling Anthony to not talk about any political implications, and they always add that they are devoted fans of WUWT and been reading it for years. They always emphasize how much they would be interested in more science postings, and how much they are disappointed by the current post.
Mike is a classic example. Point me to one genuine non-concern-trollish comment of him.


Ben Shapiro at Breitbart about the NYT and its coverage of the Gleick affair.


For those seeking to investigate Peter Gleick further, is a gold mine for Peters closest connections!!!
William K. Reilly has a foreward in Peter’s latest book:
So who is William K Reilly? Chairman of the Board of WWF that is who!!!!
Reilly is a director of DuPont, ConocoPhillips, Royal Caribbean International, the National Geographic Society, and the Packard Foundation. He also serves as chairman of the board of the World Wildlife Fund, co-chair of the Energy Project formed by the Bipartisan Policy Center, and chair of the Advisory Board for the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University. He has also been the Payne visiting professor at the Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.
William K. Reilly is Founding Partner of Aqua International Partners, a private equity fund dedicated to investing in companies engaged in water and renewable energy. He is a former Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989-1993), and president of the World Wildlife Fund (1985-1989). He was head of the U.S. delegation to the United Nations Earth Summit at Rio in 1992.
Oh how the chickens may have come home to roost!!!!

Markus Fitzhenry.

DirkH says:
February 28, 2012 at 8:53 pm

Thanks for the heads up, DirkH.

Brian H

John Whitman says:
February 28, 2012 at 6:42 pm

NOTE: I leave aside for the time being another interesting emphasis which is whether PI staff and clerical members could have known of Gleick’s perpetration while it was in progress.

I’m not altogether sure such exist. I suspect that PI = Gleick = PI. A poster noted its official address is some small unrelated shopfront (using Google Maps to inspect it), without even a plausible second floor for an office. IOW, a mail drop.
It appears to be a Tides Foundation sock puppet, in reality.

Brian H

Jeremy says:
February 28, 2012 at 9:05 pm
For those seeking to investigate Peter Gleick further, is a gold mine for Peters closest connections!!!
William K. Reilly has a foreward in Peter’s latest book:

A foreword, even?
All these groups are thick as thieves, since that’s what they are. Money and connections form a tangled web of historic proportions.

Brian H

DaveG says:
February 28, 2012 at 8:47 pm

A littoral literal Agatha Christie novel of real life losers and easily caught idiots. On second thought Agatha wouldn’t have touch it with a 10 ft pole, what a pathetic group!

Don’t think Aggie wrote much about coastlines! 😉
But the “pathetic group” has a death-grip on huge funding flows, and will not let go of them until they are pried from their dead, cold, hands. Many, if not most, have staked their entire careers on the ultimate victory of the CAGW Narrative™. Without it, they are lost, busted. Don’t underestimate the fight they will put up!!


When the cold wind blows it will turn your head around.
James Taylor

Alex Heyworth

All this talk about Greek (Gleick) Tragedy reminds me that in Greek Tragedies, Hubris is traditionally followed by Nemesis “In the Greek tragedies Nemesis appears chiefly as the avenger of crime and the punisher of hubris” [].


I’m not a concern troll but I would like to be able to tell if I’m reading Romm’s blog or WUWT without looking at the banner. Lately the two sites have little distinguishing differences. I was actually concerned with all the trash talk as the Bloggies were winding down but WUWT fared well.
I quit reading Stephen Goddard’s site because of the anger and I can drop this site for a while until this blows over. It turns out most recent posts are from other sites anyway, and the comments are not worth mousing through. Including this one. JMO

Rhoda Ramirez

Oh but bp, it’s all so delicious! Just look at what Jeromny, seven or so inputs above yours, has found about. Look at the connections to Big Oil! Look at the connections to Big NGO! Incestuous!

Rhoda Ramirez

heh: found about = found out

Roger Knights

“someone needs to create a genuine Evil Anti-Climate institute board meeting template so that those AGW fanatics won’t get embarrassed again.”

See my “Notes from Skull Island,” here:

Roger Knights

pat says:
February 28, 2012 at 10:26 pm
When the cold wind blows it will turn your head around.
James Taylor

The warm is turning.

Scottish Sceptic

I hope that no one has forgotten to send a copy of this to the FBI, together with original documentation and/or references to source material so that it is ready to go to court.

Interesting new climate blog just spotted:
The title of the blog is from a quote by the statistician George E. P. Box which is a mantra of modellers everywhere:
“essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful”
The blog is the creation of a climate modeller at the University of Bristol.
Interestingly, it runs an ‘illuminating’ dialogue with one Peter Gleick, prior to his Seppuku moment, and Prof Richard Betts of the Met Office Hadley Centre chips in:
Gleick: Not all models are wrong
Betts: Which model is right? Please can I have it?
No new post since the Gleick affair, but it may be worth keeping an eye on.

Scottish Sceptic

Mike says: February 28, 2012 at 6:45 pm
There are OTHER issues with the global warming debate which are not appearing in this blog as of late because everyone is going after Gleick with vengence.

Mike, this is not vengeance. What I think is happening is that sceptics for the most part like things to be done according to the rules. Gleick has clearly broken the rules, and there is frustration and/or anticipation that our view that the rules should be enforced is going to prevail.
I think you could compare this to the trial of Charles I in England. His view was that he was ordained by god to be king. As such he believed he was above the law. Likewise, the climate scientists have been of the view that they are above the law … both of man and of science (and of morality/god).
We have already seen that scientists who were clearly breaking the law of FOI in Climategate were not subject to the law. If Gleick gets away with it, then effectively the FBI/courts are saying that they have no jurisdiction over climate science.
This will be a very profound judgement. Are scientists subject to the law?
And remember, this profoundly affects are criminal system which daily uses scientific experts. Is it permissible for these people to lie and cheat for the “greater good”? To what extent is reversing the null hypothesis acceptable: “they must have raped someone, unless or until there is evidence to the contrary”. To what extent can an expert witness rely on scientific consensus, when there is little or no evidence to back up that consensus?
So, if Gleick’s actions potentially undermine all science and therefore the court experts that underpin so many convictions. Why will the judicial system willingly bring this case to court and potentially undermine it’s own authority?


The new “satirical logo” has the wrong finger pointing up.
Just sayin’…………. 😉

John Whitman

Gleick is not a lone wolf type activist climate scientist, he is a clingy social associate of the nexus of activist scientists centric to the CAGW biased IPCC. I think that it is not credible that he, as a lone actor, both conceived and perpetrated the fraud on the HI.
At the least, given his nature, I see him as getting guidance before, during and after.

Bloke down the pub

It’s just as well Gleick broke US law and didn’t pull his scam in the UK. Here the data protection act would be used to prosecute Heartland for being so lax on who they sent confidential information to. It’s a strange world we live in.


“Huh? Was that to me?”
No sir. Andrew Lacis, as referenced in Steve’s entry (update 71).

Old England

It strikes me that Gleick’s insititute has been a significant beneficiary of government funding and Gleik is/was employed and paid by that organisation out of those funds.
His admitted fraud was intended or designed, so far as I can see, to prop up the alarmist cause at a time when it is in some difficulty – and difficulty which could see a very significant reduction in govermental funding in time to come as the ’cause’ unravels further.
If part of his intention or motive was to encourage or prolong governmental funding for his institution and thus his own employment then it seems to me that it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that he had a direct personal and financial motive.
Maybe due legal process will get to the bottom of it.