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
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.
“It will not be released because it is a confidential personnel matter.”
Sorry, Nancy, it is not. Someone created and publicized the fake Heartland memo. If the alleged investigation was confidential, why did you and are you now talking about it?
Now that the PI has thrown in their lot with their rainmaker it’s the proper time for Heartland to file their lawsuit. It’s no longer just the private person to face court but the institute and its officers as well. Good thing they already worked on their discovery, that will streamline the process.
They now have a liar and a thief in charge of ethics? Was he cleared by John Corzine and Bernie Madoff? It just doesn’t get any better than this.
“It will not be released because it is a confidential personnel matter.”
So someone needs to call out Suzanne Goldenberg on her BS when she said , “That investigation is now complete, and the conclusions will be made public.”
My guess: lawyers on contract with the institute. If they are not employees, it is an independent review “on behalf” of the institute.
I predict that Gleick will spend the next several years of his life in court with Heartland and that it’s going to cost a lot of money. I also predict that in a civil suit, the jury will be far less forgiving than the “independent” ringers who conducted this investigation. I’m guessing it was probably the same team of lawyers who came up with the alibi that the forged document had been sent to Gleick in the mail and that he had nothing to do with its creation.
Heartland will not let Gleick off the hook for this.
Heartland would have to show damages to win a court case. But their donations have gone way up as a result of Gleick’s identity theft, so I don’t think Heartland will pursue legal action.
And of course there was nothing ‘independent’ about PI’s faux ‘investigation’, because someone paid for the results. Who pays the piper, calls the tune. So who paid for the Fakegate investigation? George Soros?
Does any of this surprise anyone? I think not.
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.
If people can not see the multiple logical fallacies in that one paragraph they should realize that they have no logical ability. Seriously, if I murder someone, I can just say I am sorry and its forgiven? The organization claims that they abhor murder, but accept the person back with a simple appology? Outregous!
But at the very least we can lump the Pacific Institute with other unethical organizations. Start talking to your representatives and senators. I know I am and I will keep pushing the issue that the person in charge of the Pacific Institute is a confirmed crook. He told us that himself in his own words! Identity theft is not a crime that any president of an organization should be guilty of.
So yes, this will come back to bite the organization in the rear. You can not simply tell people that an appology is acceptable, and yes I am curious how they cleared him of writing the forged memo. Whoever ran that investigation has some answers to make such as how experts in the past have shown that it was Gleick who is the probable author of that memo….and how did they clear him? Just by accepting what he said? This organization has absolutely no morality or ethics. Of course, we could have said that before when we saw the “ethics” chair of the organization commit identity theft and probably wrote the false memo.
He’s baaaack! And now he’s really, really hopping mad. Therefore it sjouldn’t be too long before he shoots his other foot.
I wonder if these fellows have any idea what carttons they are.
I’m thinking of documenting all the malfeasance I’ve encountered during my climate science studies, but I’m waiting for 3 TB hard drives to get cheaper.
I thought he confessed to his crimes; maybe he’s catholic, and that’s all it takes for salvation.
THE ETHICS! THE ETHICS!
When is an external investigation going to reinstate Gleick as an ethics watchdog?
Are they going to let the AGU’s ethics on the fritz?
Naturally!
“An independent review conducted by outside counsel on behalf of the Institute…”
Translation-
After consulting with our private donors, government granting agencies, NAS and IPCC contacts, the Pacific Insitutute has satisfied itself that Peter Gleick has not caused irreparable harm to our funding channels.
“‘President Nixon has apologized publicly for his actions, which are not condoned by the United States and run counter to the country’s policies and standard of ethics over its almost 200-year history. The Watergate Commission accepts President Nixon’s apology for his lapse in judgment. We look forward to his continuing leadership in the country’s ongoing and vital mission to advance its domestic and world agendas.'”
Every crook would love 3 lashes with this kind of a wet noodle!
One way to look at this is since they didn’t publish the investigation then just claim it didn’t happen. If anyone asked me about it I’d just say “what investigation?”.
This was most likely a fait accompli from day one. Their investigation was going to tell us nothing about Gleick’s ethics, but rather the ethics, or lack thereof, of the board of the Pacific Institute.
I’m just shocked! SHOCKED I tell you!! /sarc
did anyone really expect anything different from these sorts? Truly disgusting, but there it is.
I just spoke to Ms Ross. She repeated the “independent counsel” line. We need to be ready for the Guardian and BBC to start their parroting.
Well it just shows what type of organization the Pacific Institute is. Maybe one day the greenies will stop listening to people like al gore and peter glelick etc
We have to settle on a new name for them, like the Pacific Institute of Fraud, or the Pacific Criminal Institute, or whatever.
If they actually disapproved, he wouldn’t be back. Maybe (*maybe*) a confessed criminal who humiliated his coworkers and organization could get a second chance at a regional meat-packing plant – but a research institute that depends on PR and its public image?
They don’t care about what he did, and his suspension was a formality. In the “real world” people are fired and humiliated for posting risque personal ads to the local paper or “borrowing” office equipment.
I wonder if it was Nava & Gomez, Attorneys at Law.
As an aside just enter Peter Gleick and see what comes up:
http://www.instantcheckmate.com/
Truly, this is the birthday of AGW, as well as its ugly twin – CAGW, as a bona fide religion. The false penance by Gleick and the “private” selling of indulgences by the Pacific Institute were especially moving.
If anyone had reason to doubt past assertions of whitewashing by official committees on previous deceit by the AGW faithful (e.g., Climategate 1 and 2), let the mendacious actions of the Pacific Institute be the prima facie example of the contempt Warmists have for humanity.
To reiterate Gleick’s own words, “To those climate [alarmists] and [warmists] who don’t like [reality] and hence don’t care: please stop imposing your distorted sensibilities on the rest of us.” – http://tinyurl.com/3h4f3hs (Forbes link – dated October 4, 2011).
Excellent ! This is the best possible result.
This type of in house corruption repels the neutral fair minded. It screams, “stinking fish”!
Their ability now to hold any moral or political high ground is even more severely compromised, if not ruined.
In the egocentric minds of those in the Pacific Institute they have regained lost ground but in reality have lost more.