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.
WTF? No really….WTF?????????????????
Wonder how long it’ll be before the NCSE sees its way clear to re-appoint Peter Gleick to its board.
I may be wrong, but I don’t recall anything at all from the good Dr. re the forged document. If my recollection is correct, then the weasel-worded statement could be strictly true; Gleick said nothing of the forgery and PI is only commenting on what he said in public, which would also include his admissions regarding potentially criminal acts. It seems they only wanted to know if what he said (or the final version) was reasonably accurate. They ignore the forgery because Gleick didn’t say anything about it. Some Jesuit or someone trained by them wrote this press release.
By taking Gleick back the Pacific Institute has shown their true colors.
Birds of a feather flock together.
Integrity? Nope…. Everything done by the pacific institute is now suspect to fabrication and lies… way to go idiots… next thing ya know Obama will make him head of the EPA…. he will do anything illegal to get his agenda done..
As usual, the Warmistas hide their data, perform Pal Review and generally cover their arses.
The Pacific whatever has no credibility; neither does Gleick. All we have here is a Pacific Institute press release proclaiming clenliness. This is obviously self-serving and unconvincing.
What a mess!
“the Pacific Institute is satisfied that none of its staff knew of or was involved in any way.”
Gleick is on the staff, isn’t he? Did you mean to say that “Other than our founder and president, none of the Pacific Institute’s staff knew of or was involved in any way.?”
Another falshood. I call out the Pacific Institute for merely issueing a press release of an “investigation”. I will not believe it until I know who the investigators were; what was investigated; see the records of the meetings held during the investigation and the minutes of those investigators.
This is just normal behavior for the Warmistas. Simply make a statement and damn those who want to see, like, you know, actual evidence.
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.
===========
Ummmmmmmmmmmm,
Nothing is as it seems.
These guys play to WIN.
To restate my case more clearly:
I do not believe ANY investigation took place because I am offered no evidence.
As I said indirectly below, all this statement says is that Gleick confessed to a crime and an independent group certified that he confessed to that crime. This is the epitome of hutzpah.
To me, this binds the Pacific Institute to Gleick for any future litigation by Heartland…clearly, he is their boy and his actions are their actions…
What did you expect? He was cleared by a prestigious panel of noted ethical US climatologists: Hansen, Mann, Revkin, and Romm.
Odd turn of events in a time when executives are regularly fired for this type of unethical behavior. It really says a lot more about the Pacific Institute than it does about Peter Gleick, and none of it’s good.
This was not any impartial “investigation” but rather a legal and political process of deciding where they would make their stand. Evidently they believe they can best fight any future legal or public battles with Gleick inside the tent…. surely their “investigation” made sure no damaging evidence will be retained, and/or they have pulled it into a client/counsel confidentiality status. Clearly they have hunkered down and will simply fight all attempts at real investigation.
Next move, Heartland….
Holy moley! Romm is a certifiable nutjob. But likely not the only one that won’t realize how bad this all makes the Guardian, Gleick, the Pacific Institute, and Romm look. His “reversal of fortune” line is a hoot!
We win! 🙂 More than climategate, Gleick proves our case!
You would think that a communications professional like Nancy Ross would be capable of writing English!
“It will not be released because it is a confidential personnel matter.”
You mean”personal matter”! How pathetic!
”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.”
_____________________________________
ERRRrrrr Pacific Institute I hate to tell you YOUR PRESIDENT is a self-confessed criminal who practiced identity fraud, I would say that that means your staff WAS involved. You know the big dude at the top.
Did anybody expect anything else? Think of the billions of stolen dollars at stake here.
It seems that many of you still require the short course in Liberal moral relativism. He’s back because that segment of society doesn’t care about what you think, because you are inherently defective, and any means necessary to rout you out is just fine, perfectly acceptable and appropriately just. Deniers get no consideration because they are fundamentally flawed, wrong. and corrupt. In Liberal moral relativism you don’t actually count, and you are an impediment to a “just society” and are therefore quite expendable . There is no moral failure in dispensing with deniers (or conservatives).
Liberal moral relativists only counsel themselves, and any action that furthers the cause is just. The means is simply irrelevant.
Merovign says:
June 6, 2012 at 5:48 pm
We have to settle on a new name for them, like the Pacific Institute of Fraud, or the Pacific Criminal Institute, or whatever.
=============================================================
I still like “The Pathetic Institute”.
Andrew says:
June 6, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Heartland did a huge mistake with the billboard thing and not prosecuting Gleick
_________________________________________
Bringing a case to court is up to the District Attorney and not Heartland if the charges are criminal.
All Heartland can do is sue for damages in a civil suit. At this point if I was Heartland, I would wait a bit and see just how many big Corporate sponsors pull funding because their names were made public and they are getting pressure from the Eco-bots. I would also time my lawsuit to come just before the November elections so it makes a big news splash.
Pacific Institute has just made themselves a big wide target for Heartland by reinstating Gleick. BTW If a friend who makes flags got named in a lawsuit (with all other US flag manufacturers) and had to PAY because some idiot got his arm broken folding a flag made by another company, I would certainly not be trusting the American court system to protect me.
I bet the “independent investigation” run by Pacific Institute had absolutely nothing to do with the ethics of the situation and had everything to do with how open Pacific Institute is to criminal charges or a civil suit. That would certainly explain why Pacific Institute is being so closed mouth about the whole situation but feels comfortable with bringing Gleick back on board.
@ur momisugly Jeremy on June 6, 2012 at 7:29 pm:
Either that was (bad) sarcasm, or you’re unaware that personnel is a real word, with a real definition. I linked to it for you, just in case.