Heartland Institute Calls on Oxford to Cancel Speech by Admitted Thief Peter Gleick

 

‘All Honest Scientists Should Be Outraged’

The Heartland Institute today called on Oxford University to cancel the April 24 “Oxford Amnesty Lectures” event featuring disgraced climate scientist Dr. Peter H. Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute, who committed theft, fraud, and defamation in the “Fakegate” scandal – all potential crimes and an affront to scientists everywhere.

Gleick is slated to deliver a lecture on “The Human Right to Water” at the prestigious university just weeks after he admitted to stealing the identity of a board member of The Heartland Institute to obtain confidential documents – including personal information of Heartland employees and board members – which he subsequently sent to environmental activists and sympathetic journalists.

On February 20, 2012, Gleick admitted to using deception to obtain the documents and acknowledged that his intent was to expose Heartland’s funding sources and damage the institute’s reputation.

Gleick also distributed a “climate strategy memo” he and other environmental activists claim describes Heartland’s “secret strategy” to mislead the public about the true nature of climate change. The document is a fake created by Gleick or a co-conspirator, but Gleick has yet to confess to writing it and has not asked his allies in the environmental movement to take it down from their Web sites.

“All honest scientists should be outraged that Oxford University should honor Gleick with a guest lecture,” said Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast. “The actions Gleick has admitted to having taken – lying repeatedly and committing fraud, and then denying responsibility and refusing to take corrective action – all make him unqualified to speak to students or as a scientist.

“The oldest university in the English-speaking world should be ashamed to associate itself with a bungling thief and scientific fraud,” Bast said. “John Locke, Linus Pauling, and Edwin Hubble must be spinning in their graves.”

In Gleick’s February 20, 2012 public confession, he admitted his actions amounted to “a serious lapse of my own professional judgment and ethics.” Gleick took a “temporary short-term leave of absence” as president of the Pacific Institute, but he is still listed at the Pacific Institute Web site as “president.” The Pacific Institute relies heavily on government grants and support from the CISCO Foundation, Kaiser Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Rockefeller Foundation, Walton Family Foundation, Oxford Press and dozens of others.

Oxford Amnesty Lectures is a charity organization independent of Oxford University. The lectures are organized by Oxford faculty and held at the university’s Faculty of Law building.

For more information about the Fakegate scandal surrounding Peter Gleick, visit Fakegate.org, or contact Jim Lakely, director of communications at The Heartland Institute, at jlakely@heartland.org or 312/377-4000.


The Heartland Institute is a 28-year-old national nonprofit organization with offices in Chicago, Illinois and Washington, DC. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our Web site or call 312/377-4000.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
theduke

Not a problem. Just rename the building “the Faculty of Lawlessness” for the day.

polistra

“All honest scientists should be outraged.”
No scientists are outraged.
You can complete the syllogism.

Roger

The trouble again with this is that nothing is being done (as far as we can see, take back if I am wrong). It seems he is getting off scott free and this handwaving by Heartland is pathetic. Why haven’t they initiated legal proceedings? It’s the ONLY thing that will actually stop these people. Would not be surprised at all if Oxford does not even bother to reply and Heartland will look like weak puppies.

Jeremy

The organiser of the lecture by Peter Gleick is Bronwen Morgan.
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/aboutus/law-school-staff/person-details.html?personKey=LTvY0picxSPD8E9Vu9xj6IqERjOzj2
Bronwen may be blissfully unaware of the clod of controversy surrounding Peter Gleick. If you decide to write to her please be courteous and polite.
Email B.Morgan@bristol.ac.uk
Telephone +44 (0)117 954 5333

Oxford Amnesty, that is for the benefit of Amnesty International. I wonder what the human rights organization thinks of Bast’s right to see his good name cleared from Gleick’s faked document.
Also past Oxford Amnesty lectures, lecturers and topics might provide food for thought by comparison with this year’s self-destroyed buffoon.

gator69

Just dropped a note for the folks at Oxford, suggesting they rename the “Oxford Amnesty Lecture” the “Liar’s Club”, in honor of their April 24th guest speaker.

Roger

OT but the Huff Post has actually published the astronaut NASA story LOL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/11/nasa-global-warming-letter-astronauts_n_1418017.html

Lilith

Time to write to the University, all you Oxford graduates out there…

KnR

This actual not a smart move from Heartland as he and his followers will love the ‘victim’ status this could give hi. And its better he does it , as his highly likely to go shooting off at the mouth and show what a fool he is .

mwhite

For you in the USA

Piers Corbyn predicts severe tornado activity 22nd – 24th April

HI has all the interest to look like weak puppies, as that destroys all arguments about Big Oil funding and allows them to be portrayed as as close to “grassroots” as possible.

I doubt it is anybody’s business to tell Oxford who they invite to speak, but that may just be me. I’m sure there are many out there that would delight in such censorship.

I read this article and then called my older daughter to tell her about it. She’s an alumnus of one of the Oxford University Colleges. She’s called a number of her University friends, some already graduated and some still undergraduates. She has just called me back and informed me
that a growing number of students, warmists and sceptics alike, are very upset about Gleick’s proposed appearance.
They are most disapproving of his appearing at any function related to Oxford University, not because of his views on anything to do with the climate but because of his self-admitted
dishonesty. The general consesus is that anyone with a reputation as tarnished as Gleick’s should not be permitted to address anyone within the precincts of the University.
Daughter No.1 has promised me an up-date later this evening (UK time) on student feelings and what, if anything, is proposed to make their feelings known..

O/T Steve Goddard has spotted some retroactive upward adjustments in the Envistat Sea Levels. (Well they would be upward, would not they).
Perhaps Bob Tisdale might have some views.
http://www.real-science.com/sea-level-data-corruption-worse-than-it-seems

jorgekafkazar

Birds of a feather flock together.

““All honest scientists should be outraged that Oxford University should honor Gleick with a guest lecture,” …”
Sign outside Oxford University:
“Diogenes, don’t look here”

Tonio

Roger, it’s always dicey to second-guess others, but taking the same risk you did: Assume that Heartland knows what they’re doing and if they haven’t yet filed a lawsuit it’s for a reason. Perhaps there is a strategic reason for the delay. Perhaps they’re waiting for the government to file criminal charges against Gleick, which would make things easier for Heartland. There are doubtlessly things we don’t know.

elftone

Jeremy says:
April 11, 2012 at 10:32 am
Bronwen may be blissfully unaware of the clod of controversy surrounding Peter Gleick. If you decide to write to her please be courteous and polite.

Jeremy is absolutely correct, and brings up an important point: being polite costs nothing, and one tends to get more with a kind word.
p.s. I love the idea of a “clod of controversy”… it describes his situation so well ;). Sorry Jeremy – couldn’t resist :).

Sirius

@polistra
“So, there is no honest scientist.”
Certainly at least one premisse is false…

James Evans

Well I’m an Oxford graduate, and I think Gleick should be invited to speak every hour on the hour. Let the merchants of dishonesty hoist themselves by their own petards.
Disinviting people from conferences is the kind of shabby behaviour that warmistas get up to. Rise above it, I say. The more that Gleick and his ilk open their mouths, the more scorn will come their way.
Trying to silence Gleick, on the grounds that he is a liar and a fraudster, is an utterly awful tactic. Let him speak. Encourage him to speak. Let the world know which causes this liar has been helping to prop up.
Trying to stop him from talking is a cretinously bad idea, if you ask me.

Chris B

JohnWho says:
April 11, 2012 at 10:58 am
““All honest scientists should be outraged that Oxford University should honor Gleick with a guest lecture,” …”
Sign outside Oxford University:
“Diogenes, don’t look here”
______________________________________
Diogenes made a virtue of poverty. He begged for a living and slept in a tub in the marketplace. He became notorious for his philosophical stunts such as carrying a lamp in the daytime, claiming to be looking for an honest man.
LOL

Jeffrey Ziegler

Hey Anthony, I think your site is invaluable – I visit many times per day – but isn’t there a way to ban these adverts that take over my audio system while I read an item? It seems to have started happening today. Very annoying.

James Allison

What fascinates me is that Gleick must feel no humility about what he has done. He and his ilk are such useful idiots to the Cause.

tadchem

No one is ever so worthless that he cannot at least serve as a bad example.

jbird

The Home Depot ad at the top of this thread keeps playing over and over. There is no way to stop it. I finally just turned off the audio on my computer to block it out. It was totally distracting for me while reading the comments here.

pokerguy

Lief writes :”I doubt it is anybody’s business to tell Oxford who they invite to speak, but that may just be me. I’m sure there are many out there that would delight in such censorship.”
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Let these folks hang themselves with their hypocrisy, bad acts, and genera lack of wisdom. I think this is a mistake…understandable though it is.

Luther Wu

Leif Svalgaard says:
April 11, 2012 at 10:50 am
I doubt it is anybody’s business to tell Oxford who they invite to speak, but that may just be me. I’m sure there are many out there that would delight in such censorship.
_______________
Agreed.
However, I think it’s a good idea to let them in on Gleick’s little secret, just in case they missed it.
Wouldn’t you agree?

Luther Wu

Oh, sorry- just realized that pokerguy already had Leif’s post covered…

James Evans

Seriously, my comment disappeared into the ether?
I’ll try again. Someone above asked graduates of Oxford to complain about Gleick’s talk. Well, I’m a graduate of Oxford and I think Gleick should be asked to give a talk every hour on the hour.
Disinviting people from conferences is shabby warmist behaviour. Let the bloke speak. Encourage him to speak. He is a known liar and fraudster. It will be educational for people to find out which causes this liar has been propping up.
Censorship is a cretinous tactic.
My original comment will probably turn up fifteen seconds after posting this.

James Evans

I will try once more, and then give up on posting here. Are my comments being moderated or something?
Someone above asked graduates of Oxford to complain about Gleick’s talk. Well, I’m a graduate of Oxford and I think Gleick should be asked to give a talk every hour on the hour.
Disinviting people from conferences is shabby warmist behaviour. Let the bloke speak. Encourage him to speak. He is a known liar and fraudster. It will be educational for people to find out which causes this liar has been propping up.
Censorship is a cretinous tactic.
My original comment will probably turn up fifteen seconds after posting this.

Hate to be harsh on this, but rather than bleating like sheep, I would prefer to see Heartland get Gleick charged for his crimes.

Gail Combs

Leif Svalgaard says:
April 11, 2012 at 10:50 am
I doubt it is anybody’s business to tell Oxford who they invite to speak, but that may just be me. I’m sure there are many out there that would delight in such censorship.
____________________________
So you approve of dishonesty among scientists and professors then?
This is not about censorship it is about not allowing a known dishonest person to lecture students and there are certainly precedents set for removal of dishonest persons from the teaching profession.
This is just one of many.

The Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession
The Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession are:
Care
The ethical standard of Care includes compassion, acceptance, interest and insight for developing students’ potential. Members express their commitment to students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment and empathy in practice.
Respect
Intrinsic to the ethical standard of Respect are trust and fair-mindedness. Members honour human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. In their professional practice, they model respect for spiritual and cultural values, social justice, confidentiality, freedom, democracy and the environment.
Trust
The ethical standard of Trust embodies fairness, openness and honesty. Members’ professional relationships with students, colleagues, parents, guardians and the public are based on trust.
Integrity
Honesty, reliability and moral action are embodied in the ethical standard of Integrity . Continual reflection assists members in exercising integrity in their professional commitments and responsibilities.

Adam Gallon

He should be perfectly free to speak, wherever he choses.
Censorship of another’s point of view, is a trait that the “Warmists” promote, we shouldn’t follow their lead.

DJ

Sadly, it should be noted….
http://www.oxford-amnesty-lectures.org/index.php?p=Newsletter
His lecture is not an “official” university event.

MindBuilder

Even Heartland seems to mistake what Gleick’s main crime was. It was not that he obtained the documents by lying, it was that he lied to the public, who are the jury here, about being a Heartland insider. And he lied about having gotten the bad document from Heartland, which he later admitted he did not. Some might argue that he was acting as an ethical spy or undercover investigator like the ones our governments employ to lie for us. But there is no excuse for him to have pretended to the public to be a Heartland insider or falsely claim he got the fake strategy memo from Heartland. That is not like an undercover investigator lying to the criminals he is investigating, it is like an undercover investigator lying to the jury about the evidence at trial. It is much worse.

MangoChutney

Free speech should be defended. Gleick should be allowed to talk. As should any interested parties be allowed to turn up at the lecture and question Gleick about his unlawful activities.

HankHenry

He should be allowed to appear if he will debate or answer questions regarding his juvenile hijinks. It would be interesting to hear Gleick respond to a question about whether he regards his activities as culture jamming.

MangoChutney

Perhaps Heartland should attend, writ in hand to deliver at an opportune moment
Hmmm, having said that, Gleicks views on water is something I agree with, so could the writ be delivered just after the Q&A section?

Darkinbad the Brightdayler

He wouldn’t be the first liar, cheat, thief or fallen angel to speak at Oxford and I doubt that he will be the last.
It won’t do the students there any good to shield them from the realities of life. I doubt that they’ll give him an easy ride anyway.
Sounds more like the Hearland Institute is trying to squeeze to more out of this lemon

JD Ohio

I would let him speak. He, like Mann, is so stupid that whenever he speaks he makes obvious errors. His errors and the failure of warmists to notice them or correct them are useful to the cause of climate realists.
JD

kakatoa

Maybe someone could ask Dr. Gleick his thoughts on what went wrong with NOx emissions as recently noted-
“Despite meeting more stringent regulatory standards for exhaust emissions during type approval, many Euro IV and Euro V heavy-duty vehicles equipped with selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems have significantly elevated emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) during in-use driving, particularly when operating in urban traffic. In some cases, actual in-use urban emission levels may be as high as or higher than those from much older vehicles with engines certified to more lenient emission standards.
These high “off-cycle” NOx emissions threaten efforts to improve ambient air quality in many European cities. And many developing countries, including Brazil, India, and China, have begun or plan to implement standards for new trucks and buses that are based on the European regulation………….”
http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/ICCT_WP18_urban_Nox_emissions.pdf?utm_source=ICCT+mailing+list&utm_campaign=4e4eea1879-Urban_offcycle_NOx_trucks_and_buses_10apr2012&utm_medium=email

kbray in california

Send an officer of the law like a sheriff or magistrate
to serve legal papers on him during his speech.
That would make it an “official” event, with fireworks.

charliexyz

I’m against censorship. That tactic is commonly used by leftists to prevent opposing views from being heard.
OTOH, Oxford should ensure that everyone in the audience is told about about Gleick’s actions and that they are about to hear a liar and a thief.

charliexyz

I’m against censorship. That tactic is commonly used by leftists to prevent opposing views from being heard.
OTOH, Oxford should ensure that everyone in the audience is told about about Gleick’s actions and that they are about to listen to a liar and a thief.

Rob Crawford

Saying he shouldn’t be honored with access to give a speech isn’t “censorship”. It’s free speech.

Paul Deacon

I am an Oxford graduate, and I have no inclination to ask the University to disinvite Gleick (assuming it is in their power, which is unlikely, power being well diffused there). I don’t see how freedom of speech is served by its suppression. And Gleick, like Hansen, is a buffoon who probably does much for the sceptic cause every time he opens his mouth.
Your readers may be interested to know that I have spotted an obvious change recently. As an alumnus, I receive regularly the University and College magazines. For the last year or two, both were packed with loud pro-Global Warming propoganda, including lead articles. This appears to have suddenly ceased.
All the best.

Rob Crawford says:
April 11, 2012 at 12:36 pm
Saying he shouldn’t be honored with access to give a speech isn’t “censorship”. It’s free speech.
Sounds like Newspeak to me: http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ns-prin.html

John F. Hultquist

So here I was, about to write something brilliant about allowing folks to speak. Even self admitted scoundrels might have something interesting to say. Gleick seems to know more about water than he does about ethics.
Then I read
Jeffrey Ziegler says:
April 11, 2012 at 11:26 am RE annoying audio
The solution, Jeffrey, is to turn your audio off.
I have turned off most of the beeps someone thought I would like to hear also. The problem with audio is that there is no standardization so one thing hurts your ears and the next whispers. I now always start at zero and work up.

Merovign

You know, either a large number of people here have no idea what the word “censorship” means, or all my dictionaries were written by liars.
Chill, people. HI isn’t “oppressing” anyone, they’re stating an opinion, as are all of you. They aren’t forcing anyone to do anything.
Just saying “you shouldn’t associate with that person, they’re “x”” isn’t “censorship.” It’s advice. You can decide whether it’s bad or good advice.
The cry of “censorship” here reminds me of Hansen having interviews every darned day claiming he’s not allowed to speak.

R. de Haan

This in my humble opinion is the wrong approach.
We should keep the honor to ourselves and refuse to descend to the level of our opponents.