Guest Post by Joe Bast
In a December 28 post, blogger Greg Laden, a self-described “biological anthropologist and science communicator,” ranked The Heartland Institute’s efforts to expose global warming alarmism as one of the “top climate stories of 2012”. I suppose we should be flattered, but his error-filled explanation for including us in the list requires some corrections:
- Heartland isn’t a “climate denial ‘think’ tank.” Last time I checked, no Heartland spokesperson ever denied the existence of the climate, or even climate change.
- Heartland didn’t “implode” or “suffer major damage” in 2012. In fact, we increased receipts by about 15% from 2011, increased the number of donors nearly four-fold, more than doubled the number of policy advisors (to 237), and set records for press attention and online traffic for our sites. 2012 was a breakthrough year for us, thanks in no small part to the attention generated by our work on global warming/cooling.
- We have never tried to “prove that cigarette smoking was not bad for you.” We do argue that taxes on smokers are too high and second-hand smoke is not the public health threat that anti-smoking zealots claim.
- We were not “caught red handed trying to fund an effort explicitly (but secretly) designed to damage science education in public schools.” That description is based on a fake memo circulated by disgraced water scientist Peter Gleick. We announced the curriculum project in our members newsletter and explained there that our intent is to help de-politicize the issue. How is that a bad thing?
- We did run a billboard about global warming, but it did not “equat[e] people who thought the climate science on global warming is based on facts and is not a fraud with well-known serial killers.” The billboard simply pointed out that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, still believes in global warming, and asked viewers if they do, too. We know why lefties went nuts over it – Kaczynski, after all, is one of their own – but it wasn’t inaccurate or offensive.
- We lost a few corporate donors who couldn’t stand the heat when liberal advocacy groups, using a donor list stolen by the aforementioned Peter Gleick, circulated online petitions demanding that they stop funding us. But as already mentioned, we gained many more donors than we lost and had an exceptionally good fundraising year.
- Laden ends by saying The Heartland Institute, “which never was really that big, is now no longer a factor in the climate change.” He’s right that we aren’t very big – about $6 million a year – but he’s wrong about the role we continue to play in the international debate. Our Eighth International Conference on Climate Change, held in Munich on November 31-December 1, 2012, was a huge success. We’ve got projects on climate already lined up for 2013 that make 2012 look like a dress rehearsal.
In short, Heartland played a major role in shaping the debate over global warming in 2012, and we expect to play an even larger role in 2013. Sometimes it takes a little controversy to break through media bias and public indifference. Heartland achieved this in 2012.
Joe Bast is the president of the Heartland Institute
==============================================================
Note to get a window into the strange and hateful mind of Greg Laden, all you need to do is read his about page here and scroll down. Pity the soul that lives in Texas or West Virginia.
– Anthony
tckev says:
December 30, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Laden proves, yet again, that some people are educated beyond their capacity to understand.
OR that degrees can be purchased or found with your corn flake package.!! 🙂
Clowns like Gleick are desperately wishing those that have not been converted to their cAGW religion will disappear soon. The thermometer refuses to register a climb in global temps, despite a limitless supply of models saying it should, and they know that time is running out. The truth will always out and, one day, the world will re-discover the real science that led mankind out of the dark ages.
Happy New Year to you all.
Gred Laden – so full of
BShimself he has an event horizon.trafamadore says:
December 30, 2012 at 8:38 pm
[Snip. Invalid email address. — mod.]
——————————————————————————-
Traf, why do you guys do that? It makes you seem infantile.
“projects on climate already lined up for 2013 that make 2012 look like a dress rehearsal.”
Cool, I”m looking forward to this. You have the right stuff.
And the billboard was hilarious, thank you.
What Merovign says:
December 31, 2012 at 12:28 am
and what James Sexton says:
December 31, 2012 at 12:36 am
In spades, with bells on, indubitably.
“Die Zauberflotist says:
December 30, 2012 at 6:17 pm
I notice you don’t deny being funded by the Koke Brothers, Grover Norquist, Tea Party and Big Fracking.”
Yea, so what. I think I’ll scoot over to Heartland and donate some of my hard earned money.
Greg Laden – Bin Laden. They all want to destroy the West.
Although I have to say I can understand an outsider wanting to destroy something, more than I can understand an insider wanting to destroy themselves. That, to me, is pretty barmy, as for as barmy goes.
Selbhass, I think it is called In German – the self-haters.
.
The puerile trashing of Heartland in that blog post isn’t merely from Greg Laden, it’s a joint effort of the Grand Hyperventilating Crackedpots Collective (TM-by me):
The blog post hyped ’round the world
What a rogues’ gallery of hacktivists! How did they miss out on consulting Peter Gleick?
James Sexton says:
December 31, 2012 at 12:36 am
Really? There are people here who still think Heartland was wrong about the unabomber campaign?
—————————————————————
Yes.
How many people who were alarmists did it convert to sceptics?
How many uncommitted citizens did it convince to become sceptics?
I’d suggest zero, not a single one.
How many of the uncommitted ended up thinking (rightly or wrongly) that this was a cheap, irrelevant slur on people they didn’t recognize as being anything like the Unabomber?
Considerably more I’d suggest.
=====================================================
James Sexton says:
Death threats, advocacy to killing skeptics, re-education camps (…)
People, myself included, have been screaming this for years! Does anyone honestly believe these Malthusian monsters don’t knowingly allow this and even encourage this to happen? THIS IS THEIR ADVOCACY!!!
——————————————————————–
YES WE KNOW!!!!!
Look, I can scream in caps too.
We know because we are reading WUWT, Climate Audit, Bishop Hill etc.
Most people aren’t. They only know what the MSM tells them.
They have absolutely no idea how egregious warmist measures are.
Many people seeing the billboards or reading the alarmist spin will now think that the best argument sceptics have against warmists are not scientific, not all the evil effects you listed but the fact that the Unabomber is a warmist.
That’s it?
That’s the killer argument that’s going to change people’s minds?
If the word “counterproductive” didn’t exist it would have to be invented for this campaign.
===================================
James Sexton says:
And somehow, in your minds Heartland lost the high ground?
———————————————————————
It appeared to lose the moral high ground to the large proportion of the population who don’t know any better. That’s the point.
Do you seriously think that a single uncommitted person saw that sign and changed their minds in favour of sceptics?
======================================
James Sexton says:
What sort of delusional batshit crazy reasoning is that? Heartland can’t lose moral high ground until they advocate and fund force sterilization programs which leave people dead. Heartland can’t lose moral high ground until they advocate and fund forced removal of people from their homes under threat of death. Heartland can’t lose moral high ground until they violate laws, both of governments and laws of decency which separate us from animals, as the alarmists have repeatedly done throughout this entire insane period of history.
————————————————————————–
But the majority of the population don’t know that.
Tell them all the bad things that stem from the warmist agenda, don’t patronize them by thinking they are going to be convinced by simple-minded name-calling.
If you are trying to convince people of a position, especially if virtually every other information source is against you, you have to be smart. You have to think about what the recipient thinks and feels about a situation and what THEIR reaction is going to be to any message you send out. Not what will make you feel better.
If all you are doing is venting and getting patted on the back by a handful of people who agree with you anyway while putting off a whole load more who don’t, but might be persuadable, then you have failed miserably.
WUWT is a favourite site for me, and normally I am in favour of what Heartland does, but the advert with the unabomber was offensive to many, contrary to your assertion above. It was the skeptic equivalent of the warmist side deciding it was a good idea to blow up children if they did nt agree with CAGW. I think your position would be better served if you acknowledged it was a mistake and moved on.
“And somehow, in your minds Heartland lost the high ground?”
Yes, pretty much.
Ha!!! Laden thinks he has an offensive, ‘sweary’ blog! Like hell he has! That’s for kids. He should take a leaf out of the now defunct Deveil’s Kitchen blog in the UK. That guy knew how to tear a new one. He would have had Laden for breakfast. And he did in support of us realists. Laden should take a good look at some of the old blogs here: http://www.devilskitchen.me.uk/search?q=heartland and see just what a really good writer of blogs can achieve albeit with a little Anglo-Saxon thrown in (so be warned).
Happy New Year Anthony and all your team – and good to see Willis back!
I use to wonder how Hitler got the Germans to put people in gas chambers. As the arrogance of the left increases I am seeing how he did it. From a historical perspective it is very illuminating. From a personal perspective it is very frightening.
Socialism and fascism is just arrogant people who know it all gaining power. They will lie, cheat and commit fraud to gain power. You can never have a compromise with these guys as a compromise is just a step on their journey towards power and that perfect society.
Only nasty people would attempt to stop Mr Laden building a utopia in Texas and America and the world.
It is scary.
November has only 30 days. Your date of your Munich event is off.
Holmes,
So a single billboard that was up for less than 24 hours is enough for Heartland to lose the high ground??
Your mind was already made up, and you are being an apologist for Peter Glieck, who never held any moral high ground. Gleick is a moral basket case, as are his enablers.
In re Credibility, Wikipedia and much more;
Believe nothing that one reads or hears without verifying it oneself unless it fits ones preexisting worldview (this latter clause excuses the invincibly monolithically ignorant).
[‘Harddoneby’, ‘SuperiorIntellect’, ‘LetsBeReasonable’, ‘myfirstattemptatblogs’, etc. Please use only one screen name. Your sockpuppetry is frowned upon here. Read the site Policy page to understand our rules. — mod.]
Silver Ralph says:
December 31, 2012 at 2:34 am
“Selbhass, I think it is called In German – the self-haters.”
That would be “Selbsthass”; but that word is not in use; we use the term “Selbstverachtung”. (self loathing)
This Dr. Laden seems to have lost the “bin” that must once have preceded his name, but from his “About” rant, I would guess that the only thing that exceeds his arrogance, is his ignorance of anything outside his own self-determined opinion.
I won’t be engaging him for an “eco-tour” of the country I lived in for 40 years either, I suspect his “knowledge” will be driven more by ideology than science.
Is that the Laden who moderated-out my post on his site simple because I expressed agreement with the Met Office and the IPCC (Draft 2 AR5) who both claim there has been no warming in 16 years? I guess these organisations are no longer politically correct with him.
With which outfits does global warming still hold sway?
Stay Cool!
John West says:
December 30, 2012 at 6:01 pm
Did I mention he went to Havard to be Harvard educated beyond his intelligence at Harvard?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
When we (husband and I) want to explain how badly managed a business is we use the term “Harvard Business Schooled” The focus is Short Term bottom lie profit and ONLY Short Term profit. They cut things like routine maintenance or the high priced pastry chef that was the reason the restaurant was famous. The bottom line looks great for a year or two and they move on with high praise to ruin another business. Mean while the next poor schmuck has to scramble trying to keep the business in the black while he catches the results of the first guys mistakes.
We see the same happen in politics all the time.
For example the results of Bill Clinton’s five banking laws, ratifying NAFTA and WTO and bring China into the WTO did not hit until 2008. Just as soon as Bush Jr. set foot in office the MSM was yelling recession. I noticed because the poor guy had been in office for less than a month before the press was on him like the jackals they are. (I dislike Bush BTW but for other reasons) We will not see the effects of Obamacare, the Food Modernization Act or the EPA regs designed to shut down coal powered plants until after Obama has left office. A republican will be in office most likely and the press will immediately blame all the ills on him. Hopefully this time with the internet the blame game will not work but I would not bet on it.
Joe b.,
The only way to really make a quick impact on the debate is to prove that ridiculous belief that 97 percent of scientists believe CAGW is settled science, is false. We need a valid, statistically sound poll. Only you can’t do it. It has to be a neutral source. Maybe one of the polling firms. Is this something you’ve given any thought to? I don’t know how it could be done, but that 97 percent canard is a bottom line defense that comes up every time I get into an argument with an alarmist. This seems an obvious strategy to me, but I never see it being discussed.
G00glespeak, their translation, is, indeed, selbsthass. I found selbst Abscheu too
Die Zauberflotist says:
December 30, 2012 at 6:17 pm
I notice you don’t deny being funded by the Koke Brothers, Grover Norquist, Tea Party and Big Fracking.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So how is all that funding from Shell Oil, BP, Enron, Rockefeller (Standard Oil) working for your side? Did the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at East Anglia get the grant from Shell they mentioned they were hoping for in the Climategate e-mails?
You DO KNOW of course that the CRU was set up with funds from:
British Petroleum (Oil, LNG)
Central Electricity Generating Board
Eastern Electricity
KFA Germany (Nuclear)
Irish Electricity Supply Board (LNG, Nuclear)
National Power
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (Nuclear)
Shell (Oil, LNG)
Sultanate of Oman (LNG)
UK Nirex Ltd. (Nuclear)
Source: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/about/history/
You do KNOW Ged Davis who featured in a Climategate e-mail was the vice president of global business environment for Shell International. He held positions predominantly in scenario planning, strategy.
Try slinging the funded by big oil mud around here and we will drown you in a boiling mud pool
….
By the way Joe, the funding of CAGW by big Oil would have made a better bill board.
Sort of like:
Did you know the Climate Research Unit was set-up by….
Did you know Peter Gleick’s company has a Shell VP on board?
YOU have been HAD!
THAT the average American could understand easily.