UPDATE5: 5/5/10:30AM Donna Laframboise pulls out of the conference.
http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/2012/05/05/why-i-wont-be-speaking-at-the-heartland-conference/
Instead, those of us who had accepted Heartland’s invitation to take part in its conference found ourselves blindsided – a mere two weeks before the conference is set to begin – by a torrent of negative press. Suddenly, we were all publicly linked to an organization that thinks it’s OK to equate people concerned about climate change with psychopaths.
Blindsided is right. AFAIK, not one attendee was given the courtesy of weighing in on the billboard campaign beforehand, and if I had been given that courtesy my answer would have been a resounding NO. Instead, I believe we all got the notice after the fact.
UPDATE4: 7PM PST Heartland issues a press release ending the billboard
May 4, 2012 – The Heartland Institute has pulled its global warming billboard starring Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber whose manifesto expressed his belief in catastrophic man-caused global warming. The digital billboard ran for exactly 24 hours along the Eisenhower Expressway near Chicago in the suburb of Maywood, Illinois.
The following statement by Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast may be used for attribution. For more information, please contact Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or 312-377-4000.
“This provocative billboard was always intended to be an experiment. And after just 24 hours the results are in: It got people’s attention.
“This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message. We found it interesting that the ad seemed to evoke reactions more passionate than when leading alarmists compare climate realists to Nazis or declare they are imposing on our children a mass death sentence. We leave it to others to determine why that is so.
“The Heartland Institute doesn’t often do ‘provocative’ communication. In fact, we’ve spent 15 years presenting the economic and scientific arguments that counter global warming alarmism. No one has worked harder, or better, on that task than Heartland. We will continue to do that – especially at our next International Conference on Climate Change in Chicago from May 21 – 23.
“Heartland has spent millions of dollars contributing to the real debate over climate change, and $200 for a one-day digital billboard. In return, we’ve been subjected to the most uncivil name-calling and disparagement you can possibly imagine from climate alarmists. The other side of the climate debate seems to be playing by different rules. This experiment produced further proof of that.
“We know that our billboard angered and disappointed many of Heartland’s friends and supporters, but we hope they understand what we were trying to do with this experiment. We do not apologize for running the ad, and we will continue to experiment with ways to communicate the ‘realist’ message on the climate.”
========================================================
UPDATE3: 3:15PM PST I saw this private letter to Joe Bast earlier from Ross McKitrick, and I agreed with Ross in a reply. He has posted it on Climate Audit so I’ll share an excerpt here:
He wrote: “This kind of fallacious, juvenile and inflammatory rhetoric does nothing to enhance your reputation…”
“…hands your opponents a huge stick to beat you with, and sullies the reputation of the speakers you had recruited. Any public sympathy you had built up as a result of the Gleick fiasco will be lost–and more besides–as a result of such a campaign. I urge you to withdraw it at once.”.
UPDATE2: 1PM PST
From Joe Bast via email:
We will stop running it at 4:00 p.m. CST today. (It’s a digital billboard, so a simple phone call is all it takes.)
UPDATE: I’ve added a simple poll at the bottom to gauge opinion on this issue. – Anthony
There’s a disturbance in the farce. Tom Nelson captures these:
Do you believe global warming is real, poses risks to the environment, and needs to be addressed? The Heartland Institute, a think-tank based in Chicago which has promoted climate skepticism, wants you to know you’re in some sinister company.
Twitter / @eilperin: In new ads, the Heartland …
In new ads, the Heartland Institute suggests only terrorists believe in the link b/w human activity and global warming: wapo.st/IOUuEI
Predictably, ThinkProgress/Climate Progress is all bent out of shape.
But Joe Romm and Brad Johnson (who now also runs “Forecast the Facts” to hassle TV weatherpeople) think nothing of making a similar comparison about “deniers”.
Speaking of “mass murderers and madmen”….
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/07/25/277564/norway-terrorist-is-a-global-warming-denier/
Romm of course will be unable to embrace his own hypocrisy, because he’s reportedly paid a six figure sum by the Center for American Progress to write the hateful detritus he produces daily.
That said, I’ll be blunt; I think Heartland’s billboard campaign is a huge misstep, and does nothing but piss people off and divide the debate further. IMHO it isn’t going to win any converts, and had they asked me I would have told them that it is a bad idea that will backfire on them.
Here’s what they have issued in a press release about it:
May 03, 2012May 3, 2012 – Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Institute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” – and ask viewers if they do, too.
Heartland’s first digital billboard – along the inbound Eisenhower Expressway (I-290) in Maywood – is the latest effort by the free-market think tank to inform the public about what it views as the collapsing scientific, political, and public support for the theory of man-made global warming. It is also reminding viewers of the questionable ethics of global warming’s most prominent proponents.
“The most prominent advocates of global warming aren’t scientists,” said Heartland’s president, Joseph Bast. “They are Charles Manson, a mass murderer; Fidel Castro, a tyrant; and Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber. Global warming alarmists include Osama bin Laden and James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).
Bast added, “The leaders of the global warming movement have one thing in common: They are willing to use force and fraud to advance their fringe theory.” For more about the billboards and why Heartland says people should not still believe in global warming, click here.
Ugh. Ugly.
There’s more than enough climate ugliness to go around. Though, it seems harder and harder to find this ultimate warmist embarrassment.
Anybody that can help with Donna’s suggestion?
And there’s many more examples of climate ugliness from the left that we’ve seen.
On another note, the serially mendacious commenter known as “Dorlomin” left this comment over at the Romm shop:
dorlomin says:
I thought I should clear this up. First, “dorlomin” of course is all about smear, that’s his MO, and the MO of the many anonymous cowards who purvey such things without having any integrity or courage themselves.
Second, the simple fact is that I didn’t know about the association of the person making the claim that “Climate skepticism could soon be a criminal offence in UK
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/07/19/climate-skepticism-could-soon-be-a-criminal-offence-in-uk/
Third, when I learned who was behind the story, I immediately took it down because it was an inappropriate source, just like I don’t post videos from LaRouche and other fringe organizations.
Of course “dorlomin” and left foot forward would have you believe that I consort with these folks and have them over for drinks and dinner, rather than the fact that once I learned more, I found them offensive and immediately deleted the story. It was my mistake for not checking sources further.
“dorlomin” is of course playing the very hate game he rants about, and is hypocritically blind just like Romm. The only difference is that one is paid to produce propoganda and the other is a coward.
But will Climate Progress delete their offensive story about climate deniers and terrorists? Not likely, it would hurt their sales figures image.
POLL:
Note: multiple anti vote stuffing features are enabled in this poll. I’ve made the questions simple so that editorial bias in the questions is minimal.
Rick Bradford,
Are you so easily influenced that you make a snap decision over one tiny, very temporary aspect of a stand-up organization that has been fighting the good fight for decades on a shoestring budget?
If so, that says a lot more about you than Heartland, whose ‘sin’ was to tell the truth.
So, what’s your opinion of Gleick’s actions, or 350.org, orany of the other propaganda outlets?
Philip Bradley says:
May 4, 2012 at 7:17 pm
“What will cause them to question their belief is to associate CAGW belief with bad things.”
Exactly. The more run-of-the-mill Progressives I know are extremely worried about merely being associated with “bad things” or being called “bad names” – even though they seldom seem to understand the basis for which the “bad names” are rightfully applied in appropriate cases where the names or terms are therefore correctly descriptive, instead of functioning like the inherently unhinged infantile name-calling used as a primary method by the “mainstream” Climate Scientists, enc..
Likewise, as per what “Pointman says: May 4, 2012 at 7:19 pm”, the very mass of the o’so “concerned” newbies suddenly showing up here at WUWT probably does indicate “sort of a reverse endorsement” by the at risk Warmist Totalitarians.
In the comments about the “Group Think” post someone commented that they thought WUWT was an example of it. I’d say this thread disproves that!
James Sexton says: May 4, 2012 at 8:04 pm
NEWS FLASH TO THE “REAL MEN AND WOMEN OF SCIENCE”!!! The battle you’re fighting isn’t science based. It never was. It is ideological.
I disagree, I think we are fighting and winning a battle based on scientific and empirical evidence, e.g.:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/15/a-big-picture-look-at-earths-temperature-quarterly-update/
The Heartland billboard is a question of tactics, and in this case, I think Heartland is mistaken. We should stick to the facts and leave the hand-waving to the Warmists.
Just The Facts says:
May 4, 2012 at 8:26 pm
James Sexton says: May 4, 2012 at 8:04 pm
NEWS FLASH TO THE “REAL MEN AND WOMEN OF SCIENCE”!!! The battle you’re fighting isn’t science based. It never was. It is ideological.
I disagree, I think we are fighting and winning a battle based on scientific and empirical evidence, e.g.:…….
================================================
Well, then we can agree to disagree…….I will state, that if we only engage in the science, then we aren’t winning and at best can only win half of the battles, and can never fully win.
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; ……Sun Tzu
Gunga Din says:
May 4, 2012 at 8:04 pm
Alexander Feht says:
May 4, 2012 at 6:48 pm
Well, well. So, WUWT must not be anything more than a relief valve.
Anything more is “over the top.”
Cowardice.
========================================
WUWT is just a relief valve? If you mean letting the hot air out the CAGW preachers, I’d have to agree.
Cowardice?
I missed the date when Al Gore and Michael Mann will be in a public debate with Monckton or Anthony or Ball or … just about any of the people post articles here that the rest of us comment on. Do you have that date and location?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lol, Gunga, I think you missed the point of Alexander’s comment. I think he’s stating that he’s a bit appalled at the sudden sensitivities of some supposed skeptics. Suddenly, we are the faint of heart.
We are engaged in a war over this issue. Our only goal is to win – which we are – but progress is slow and sometimes hard to see. Anything else is a distraction. The truth will out eventually, but in the meantime any effort that may help to assist uncommited people in seeing the scam for what it is will probably be helpful. Accordingly, I commend and thank HI for its initiative. I doubt that those who think HI has made a tactical error here will be seen to be correct in the long run.
LOL,
how many people would have known about the billboard if Anthony and Joe said nothing about it?
I never would have since I do not live anywhere near Chicago that has a few of these billboard paid for by H.I. that shows a message that most of you have not understood.I am surprised at you guys.
Maybe staying quiet on it would have been a better idea?
The Heartland billboards are a most unfortunate tragedy. The battle we fight cannot be purely a relentless attempt to put genuine science back into climate science. It also requires other tactics such as humour and plain speaking.
Unfortunately, the Heartland billboards are not the way to go since the are crude and nasty and resemble the AGW warmists behaviour far too closely. They quite simply undermine the advantage Heartland had after the Gleick affair by sticking to the high road. .
“The climate activists do information war, not science. That is merely a veneer of authority to be used selectively in any way which will advance their political objectives. They do information war in all its guises; propaganda, disinformation, censorship, misrepresentation, character assassination, lies, intimidation and the rewriting of history. Science just provides ammunition in the form of sound-bite bullets of information which are to be used judiciously or suppressed if they aren’t on message.”
http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/happy-birthday-pointmans-2/
And we’re not supposed to do a bit of infowar? What do you people think we’ve been fighting for years?
A clue, it wasn’t science …
Pointman
Mike Mangan says:
May 4, 2012 at 1:58 pm
What a bunch of wheezy old women you people are. These people want to take your money and your freedom from you and then spit on you for believing in God or capitalism or sharing code or whatever. They have complete contempt for you and every value you hold dear. Not only is this billboard accurate it is coming at just the right time. I keep telling people that Alarmists deserve no better place in society than Birthers or Truthers. Most people have never absorbed anything about “climate change” except what they get in the background from mass media.
[snip]
They already know instinctively that this is some sort of tree hugger nonsense but, hey, never really thought about it being cool or not. Show the faces that let them know they don’t want to be associated with these people and that mind set.
————————————————————————————–
Well, this ‘wheezy old woman’ (which objectively, I am) worked in advertising and marketing for many years and says that what you claim is nonsense.
You do not convince people to buy your product through insulting them by association.
Apart from being strategically stupid, the ad is counterproductive because it offends the very people whose minds you are trying to change. Telling them that if they disagree with you they are no different to Osama Bin Ladin or the Unabomber is dumb, dumb, dumb.
It is the sort of thing you expect to see in a student newspaper, and has done Heartland a lot of harm. Many people who are cautiously supportive or neutral towards HI will be repelled by this undergraduate fit of pique and spite.
There are many ways for advertising to be hard hitting without descending into the slimepit with 350.org et al. It is not about being wimpy, it is about being smart and not giving away one of the few advantages that you have – your reputation for ethical conduct.
We’ve tried being polite. We’ve tried being the voice of reason, against a shrieking storm of unreasonable criticism and massive expenditures which have done pretty much nothing but shovel money to folks who didn’t deliver on their promises.
We’ve been called every name in the book, and they’ve invented new names when the old ones lost their sting.
We’ve not adhered to the AGW religion unquestioningly, and activists have called for us to be burned.
I think it’s long past time we used the same tactics. When you have one side whispering and the other using a bullhorn, the attention will be to the louder. THIS is an example of using a bullhorn to get people’s attention, and I – for one – think it an effective way to shock people and get them to go “Wait… WHAT WAS THAT?”
It’s a clue-bat to the head – getting your attention and making you think about your belief and reconsider what you’re really believing.
It’s about bloody time.
It’s over. None too soon; it has proved there is such a thing as bad publicity.
http://heartland.org/press-releases/2012/05/04/heartland-institute-ends-experiment-unabomber-global-warming-billboard
You do not convince people to buy your product through insulting them by association.
That’s not the point. The point is to persuade people not to buy the competing product (CAGW).
James Sexton says: May 4, 2012 at 8:35 pm
I will state, that if we only engage in the science, then we aren’t winning and at best can only win half of the battles, and can never fully win.
But we are winning;
http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/americans-global-warming-concerns-continue-drop.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/146606/concerns-global-warming-stable-lower-levels.aspx
and the key battles that remain are to win over the opinion leaders, the scientific community, the politicians and the main stream media who still believe in Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming. The Heartland billboard certainly doesn’t appeal to any them, and might actually serve to harden some of their perspectives.
We will “fully win” when the editorial board of the New York Times realizes that CAGW isn’t happening.
It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; ……Sun Tzu
“We may convince others by our arguments; but we can only persuade them by their own.” Joseph Joubert
James Sexton says:
May 4, 2012 at 8:41 pm
Lol, Gunga, I think you missed the point of Alexander’s comment. I think he’s stating that he’s a bit appalled at the sudden sensitivities of some supposed skeptics. Suddenly, we are the faint of heart.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
That wouldn’t be the first point I’ve ever missed. I haven’t been here long enough to recognize who all the commenters are and where they coming from. (Another example of how this place isn’t “Group Think”.)
I’m willing to accept the billboards as “a smack on the rump” to get peoples attention. But if they aren’t followed up with some correction, the billboards just remain a smack in the rump with no lesson to be learned.
Smokey says:
**So, what’s your opinion of Gleick’s actions, or 350.org, orany of the other propaganda outlets?**
I dislike them all, to various degrees, one criteria being whether they are prepared to engage in civilised debate, or are content with unpleasant and dismissive ad hominem attacks.
Heartland’s sin is not in telling the truth; it is in telling a crude and unpleasant angle on the truth, at the wrong time, in the wrong place, and then trying to pass it off in exactly the same way as 10:10 did with Splattergate.(“Well, that got your attention, just as we planned!”)
It is a stupid ploy, worthy of the Warmists themselves. I thought Heartland and Joe Bast had more class.
Just The Facts says:
May 4, 2012 at 9:23 pm
James Sexton says: May 4, 2012 at 8:35 pm
I will state, that if we only engage in the science, then we aren’t winning and at best can only win half of the battles, and can never fully win.
Just…. I truly do love many of your comments and observations on the blogs, but, this is what I’m talking about….. winning the CAGW discussion is just one battle, and we’ve seen where many have already jumped to other issues.
In fact, I just did a post which now seems very relevant to this topic. Food is one area where they are going to attempt to assert themselves….. they will combine this issue with an attempt to control our water….. and this is where it gets relevant. As we all know HI recently was embroiled in and won a battle. They disgraced Peter Gleick. But, they didn’t finish him off. He’s out of the CAGW game, right? But, he’s not out of the totalitarian Marxist misanthropy game….. he’s still running strong. http://suyts.wordpress.com/2012/05/03/thats-just-what-we-need-completely-incompetent-and-delusional-greens-to-tell-us-how-to-feed-people/ (towards the end of the post)
If you confine your arguments to science, you’re playing “whack-a-mole”.
Skeptic wrote:
First I would have to see the “sound science” they ever have produced. Heartland Institute is a political think tank with a political and ideological agenda. They are not a scientific institution.
as a brief “experiment” to display the hypocrisies and grotesque double standards of the C-AGWarmists I’m more prepared to consider whether this exercise was worthwhile…. it’s hard to predict what the lasting memories of this episode will be in various quarters, but perhaps something good can result, I simply don’t know…..
To those pouring scorn on those of us who expressed doubts, no one can predict how particular PR battles (which is what this is) will turn out, but when the C-AGWarmists have the vast arsenals of (most) media and pols and activists on their side it it worth being very careful to maintain the credibility and seriousness of the “skeptics”…. everyone has to decide how to approach these matters. I, for example, am surrounded (family, colleagues, most college and grad school friends etc.) with people more aligned with Al Gore than with skeptical perspectives. Sure I can self-immolate, attack, and disown them all (and vice-versa), but stopping short of that I try to bring reasonable questions and careful challenges to their attentions as they are willing to consider anything I have to say. I don’t mean that this Heartland billboard issue should be understood as a “personal” matter for each of us, but this is an illustration of how (I think) discussions of C-AGW proceed all over the land, one by one. I don’t claim to know how minds can best be changed on these issues, but I do know that none of the people I deal with personally (including some very distinguished scientists and policy wonks at leading universities) can be positively influenced by comparing them to the Unabomber etc.
Just The Facts wrote:
So what are you saying? The majority opinion of the public is the deciding criterion for the validity of scientific theories? Politics and ideology determine what the scientific truth is?
REPLY: are you this person? http://www.giss.nasa.gov/staff/jperlwitz.html
Neither anger nor disappointment, but a lesson learned. It is unlikely that both sets of competing interests will be able to exploit the same tactics. The “global warming” campaign has already claimed the lower ground. Leave it to them.
Gunga Din says:
May 4, 2012 at 9:28 pm
……………
++++++++++++++++++++++++
That wouldn’t be the first point I’ve ever missed. I haven’t been here long enough to recognize who all the commenters are and where they coming from. (Another example of how this place isn’t “Group Think”.)
=====================================================
Lol, no doubt…… this is an incredibly diverse group, here. There really is only one thing we nearly unamiously agree upon. CAGW is garbage. Some of the most contentious discussions here, are the ones where skeptics argue amongst themselves. I’ve witnessed many. It’s what happens when the we’ve beaten the lunatics’ talking points de jour…. we get bored and beat up on ourselves.
A few years back, this used to bother me a lot. But, it was a different time. Now, it’s good exercise.
Jan P. Perlwitz says:
May 4, 2012 at 10:11 pm
Just The Facts wrote:
But we are winning;
http://www.gallup.com/poll/126560/americans-global-warming-concerns-continue-drop.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/146606/concerns-global-warming-stable-lower-levels.aspx
So what are you saying? The majority opinion of the public is the deciding criterion for the validity of scientific theories? Politics and ideology determine what the scientific truth is?
====================================================================
Jan, you know, or if you read the rest of his comment you would have known that wasn’t what he was stating at all. He was talking about preventing a dystopian world being thrust upon us by implementing ludicrious solutions to an imaginary problem…… and that involves politics and ideology. But, alarmists have used that knowledge for a very, very long time.
As far as scientific “truth” goes, the alarmists lost that fight quite a while back, and they continually lose with their catastrophic dark fantasies masquarading as science.
Bast from Heartland Institute spins:
Equalizing people who agree with the views of mainstream climate science with mass and serial murderers, and after the predictable response to this outrageous, insulting, and inciting smear campaign, Bast is trying to paint Heartland Institute as the victims of evil “climate alarmists” in this affair. How pathetic.