Pacific Institute reinstates Peter Gleick – but won't provide confirmation of the "independent investigation"

UPDATE4: 6/7/12 11AM PST The independent investigator is named, see update #4 below.

UPDATE5: 6/7/12 11:15AM PST Heartland has just released a statement, read it here.

UPDATE6: 6/7/12 1:15PM PST Josh weighs in with some biting satire in a cartoon here

Breaking news from the Pacific Institute website: http://www.pacinst.org/press_center/press_releases/statement6612.html

PACIFIC INSTITUTE BOARD OF DIRECTORS STATEMENT

The Pacific Institute is pleased to welcome Dr. Peter Gleick back to his position as president of the Institute. An independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of the Institute has supported what Dr. Gleick has stated publicly regarding his interaction with the Heartland Institute. This independent investigation has further confirmed and the Pacific Institute is satisfied that none of its staff knew of or was involved in any way.

Dr. Gleick has apologized publicly for his actions, which are not condoned by the Pacific Institute and run counter to the Institute’s policies and standard of ethics over its 25-year history. The Board of Directors accepts Dr. Gleick’s apology for his lapse in judgment. We look forward to his continuing in the Pacific Institute’s ongoing and vital mission to advance environmental protection, economic development, and social equity.

“I am glad to be back and thank everyone for continuing their important work at the Pacific Institute during my absence,” said Dr. Gleick in a statement. “I am returning with a renewed focus and dedication to the science and research that remain at the core of the Pacific Institute’s mission.”

==============================================================

Of course there’s no mention of who conducted this “independent investigation” nor are we given the opportunity to read it.

There’s no mention of it it prior releases:

News Updates and Press Releases

[6/06/12] Dr. Peter Gleick Returns to the Pacific Institute

[5/31/12] Survey of Water Suppliers Launched to Better Understand How Water is Priced in California

[5/24/12] Training Now Available Online for Cost Effectiveness of Water Conservation and Efficiency Model

[5/16/12] Pacific Institute May Update: Mobile Phones to Improve Water Access for Poor; New Model to Evaluate Urban Water Efficiency; Community Choices Tool Tested in Ghana, and More

But hey, this is climate science politics, so anything goes.

Since we heard about this some time ago (May 21st 2012) from Guardian reporter Suzanne Goldenberg, it seems the fix was in. Oddly, there’s no mention of this new official announcement at the Guardian today per the search I made. The last mention of Gleick was May 24th. (Update: they finally got around to posting their article at 12:03PM EDT today)

Maybe they were distracted by Wisconsin.

UPDATE: I’m waiting on an email reply from their press contact to these two questions:

1. What organization, law firm, or group conducted the investigation?

2. Why has that investigation not been made public?

I would call them, but with my hearing issues telephone interviews could be misunderstood. Anyone want to make the call for me? Tel: 510-251-1600

UPDATE2: They aren’t talking with openness or providing any details.

I received a response from Pacific Institute Communications Director Nancy Ross at 3:59PM today.

She says:

It was conducted by an independent professional investigation firm. The independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of the Pacific Institute has supported what Dr. Gleick stated publicly and has further confirmed and the Pacific Institute is satisfied that none of its staff knew of or was involved in any way. It will not be released because it is a confidential personnel matter.

So, there is no way to confirm the investigation even took place. Since they even refuse to name the firm, it could be entirely made up for all we know.

UPDATE3: 6PM PST Two queries to Pacific Institute Communications Director Nancy Ross sent after her 3:59PM PST response regarding the disposition of the issue of the fake document have gone unanswered. The second query advised her that I had an approaching deadline, and that was related to the radio interview I gave from 5:20 to 5:30PM on the nationally syndicated Lars Larson show regarding the Pacific Institute. The nation knows the story now. Since then, according to comments left here, others have spoken with her, so I know she wasn’t out of the office.

Meanwhile I seem to have scooped everyone with this story, including the Guardian which still has nothing up on it as of this writing. I also scooped Climate Progress’ Joe Romm, who posted a “breaking news” item almost two hours after mine, but of course can’t bring himself to point to my website as the source for breaking the story. “Integrity” all around with these clowns it seems.

Romm, like the Pacific Institute, doesn’t want to talk about the fake document, which was demonstrated by an independent investigation that WAS revealed with full disclosure to have likely been authored by Peter Gleick.

Some advice to the board of the Pacific Institute: This question is not going away, and will be asked at any meeting where Dr. Gleick appears or submits an opinion. You really need to deal with the issue, because all you’ve done so far is draw suspicion on yourselves.

BTW it bears repeating that Heartland has scored a prize plum in all of this, not only are their donations up, but the have secured Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker as the featured keynote speaker for their annual dinner in August.

Readers may recall that Dr. Peter Gleick turned down this same invitation as keynote speaker on the same day he declined the offer then posed as a Heartland board member to obtain board documents under false pretenses.

I hope somebody hands Governor Walker some bottled water to hold during that address, it would be great symbolism since Gleick had not the courage to fill that spot.

UPDATE4: Apparently feeling the blowback from the lack of transparency, Pacific Institute Communications Director Nancy Ross sent me an email this morning stating:

The investigator is Independent Employment Counsel, LLP.

I am waiting for confirmation that they performed the review from one of the two partners at the firm.  http://www.iecounsel.com/ If I get credible confirmation, I’ll edit the headline to fit the facts as they are known.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Chris B

War is peace. Hot is cold. Fraud is virtue. What next? Obama re-elected?

James Ard

Indeed, the fix was in. That Goldenberg got the tip off is all we need to know. I welcome back their ethics expert onto the Team. Can’t they see how stupid they are?

“to advance environmental protection, economic development, and social equity.”
By any means necessary apparently.
But an able, imaginative, creative writer can be important to a futurist oriented organization. At least his dedication to the mission was never an issue. Fuzziness on means is just a small lapse.

Dave L.

Whitewash! Did anyone expect anything different?

barryjo

Probably the same review board that exonerated Michael Mann.

bubbagyro

He did not do anything wrong, and he sincerely apologizes for his poor judgment.
Huh?

clipe

Big mistake. The magnifying glass will only become more focused

I see the warmist footshootings continue apace.

Peter Miller

“I am returning with a renewed focus and dedication to the science and research that remain at the core of the Pacific Institute’s mission.”
Yeah, right.
In the world of real science, he would not have been heard of again. In climate science……………….

temp

“which are not(<—-) condoned by the Pacific Institute"
is this a typo… or just the truth coming out?

Olen

Reading it smiley face stickers came to mind. I wonder if they are scented.

Skiphil

UNREAL….. we knew it would be a whitewash but they don’t even pretend that they might want to be credible!!!

Eve Stevens

They don’t seem to care if the public knows how crooked they are. That is because the fix is in?

JEM

Pacific Institute has always been Gleick’s sandbox. Doesn’t matter that he’s defecated in it, it’s still his.

And there’s a perfectly valid reason that Pacific Institute should not be held to the standards of “transparency” that Gleick was demanding of Heartland, isn’t there?! /sarc
It would not surprise me in the least that – if the report of this so-called “independent investigation” were to be made public – one would find that it was (you should pardon the expression) modeled on those conducted by Oxburgh and Muir Russell. In both of these, the primary principle underlying the mode of “investigation” appears to have been: Ask all the wrong questions of the wrong people in order to ensure that you always get the right answer!

just some guy

Nauseating, but not unexpected. Gleick is a co-founder of Pac Institute. The real question is: Is there going to be a lawsuit over this?

Paul_K

“An independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of the Institute has supported what Dr. Gleick has stated publicly regarding his interaction with the Heartland Institute.”
I seem to recall that he admitted publicly that he was guilty of a number of criminal acts. The independent review has confirmed that he really was guilty of a number of criminal acts.
So that’s, er, OK then.

Kozlowski

Gleick coming back to the public eye is the best thing that can happen.. for us.. 😉 Let him come back and keep on showboating. He is an embarrasement to their cause and exposes them for the frauds they really are.

everyone should tweet him congratulations on apparently *not* being a liar and a document faker

just some guy

“I seem to recall that he admitted publicly that he was guilty of a number of criminal acts. The independent review has confirmed that he really was guilty of a number of criminal acts.
So that’s, er, OK then.”
The forgery of the fake memo is the issue.

beesaman

Gleick is a dishonest man, that is something that no whitewash can hide and all of his future work will be tainted by that one simple fact.

To whitewash a confessed criminal act is beyond Muir….beyond Russell….beyond the Penn State/Mann ‘double’ limbo under the hockey stick. Pacific Institute has set the high water mark in water scientist coverups. Doubtful that the Heartland civil suit will reach the same conclusion, so justice is merely postponed.

Dan

Deplorable, unreservedly deplorable!

Green Sand

Well there you go, you get to learn something every day.
My lesson for today? Being wrong in thinking that the UK “Establishment” had cornered the market in whitewash! Wrong again in the thought that the brave new world would not succumb to the old world established traits.
Welcome to the ever expanding control of the elite!

Andrew

Heartland did a huge mistake with the billboard thing and not prosecuting Gleick

Ron

Says way more about the Pacific Institute than Gleick. Ouch on them.

George Daddis

Lewis Carroll would have been proud of that Wonderland statement.
An independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of Bernard l. Madoff has supported what Bernie has stated publicly regarding his interaction with his investors. Therefore he is reinstated as CEO. (Please issue “a get out of jail free” card for poor Bernie.) /sarc
The fact that Gleick confessed to a federal crime which clearly caused damage to another party is apparently of no import. All you have to do is confess and get that confession certified and you are in the clear.

Mac the Knife

def. “surreal” – 2. having the disorienting, hallucinatory quality of a dream ; unreal; fantastic ..
That sufficiently describes it….

Latitude

I thought internet “fishing” was against the law?

just some guy

Kozlowski says:
June 6, 2012 at 3:36 pm
“Gleick coming back to the public eye is the best thing that can happen.. for us.. 😉 Let him come back and keep on showboating. He is an embarrasement to their cause and exposes them for the frauds they really are.”
I was about to say you are probably wrong because the logical thing for Gleick to do now would be to keep a low profile. But then I got to thinking, Gleick is just not that smart. So I do concur.

Ian

Clearly the Pacific Institute’s vaunted “standard of ethics” is not a standard that even the president is required to adhere to; i.e., they don’t have a standard of ethics.

Andrew

Looks like Cucinelly is miles ahead in the re-election. Walker has won as well. Romney needs to be advised of the AGW scam with all the proof and data so that when he wins all these people and organizations can be brought to justice

Martin457

I’ve heard better stories from Tommy Chong.
“Oh yeah, these guys over here said it was all cool.”

No mention of the forged document, I wonder what the review board did with that part of the investigation.
I think the next move will come from the Heartland Institute.

Chris B

Perhaps a Star Chamber has absolved him. Has anyone seen Holdren in public lately.

DocMartyn

I am still waiting for him to be arrested for identity theft; a crime which he has admitted to in public.

Jeremy

Pacific Institute and Integrity have long since parted company.

John M

I presume the Grauniad’s style guide would list this as an example of the correct usage of the term “cleared”.

CraigR

“run counter to the Institute’s policies and standard of ethics” What ethics? what standard? …non existent.

Ray Donahue

Hi All, Would this reinstatement be something that Heartlands attorneys were waiting for??
Any tort attorneys want to weigh in??

Gary D.

Decent Interval comes to mind.

jack

…”This independent investigation has further confirmed and the Pacific Institute is satisfied that none of its staff knew of or was involved in any way.”
Say what? Further confirmed what? Knew of what? Involved in what?
This statement is vapid and not even a proper sentence. What did Gleick say that they were satisfied with? Did he not admit to being involved?
They can’t rationally address the issues so they don’t.

Well you didn’t expect Gleick to fall on his sword did you? He and the others at the Pacific are true believers and when you have a righteous cause all becomes acceptable. This by the way goes for all sides of any question that have substituted faith for reason.

eyesonu

Skiphil says:
June 6, 2012 at 3:31 pm
UNREAL….. we knew it would be a whitewash but they don’t even pretend that they might want to be credible!!!
=================
Maybe credibility is not a desired trait. They will attract more of the like minded without it.

Athelstan.

It wouldn’t be the seven dwarfs without Dopey.

Gunga Din

Didn’t he a position that had something to do with ethics? Are they changing their name to “The Pathetic Institute”?

J. Felton

Boy, do I have a lot of four letter words the Mods would be fast to snip.
This is ridiculous. At least it shows that anything connected to the Pacific Institute is fit to be ignored or thrown into the trash bin.

sophocles

… it’s the _intent_ which counts, not the actions.
The only sin is to be found out.
And of course, nobody is fired for an itty bitty little sin… no matter how huge.

Howling Winds

Man, I am just *shocked* the Pacific Institute has reinstated Peter Gleick! I should have never “bet the farm” on this issue but that’s just my own stupidity.

Malcolm

Pacific wouldn’t do this unless they knew that Heartland were unable or unwilling to press charges.