Self admitted cyber thief Peter Gleick is still on the IOP board that approved the Cook 97% consensus paper

From a more relaxed point of view we should be glad with this journal and Cook’s contribution as it is a completely rotten lifeboat for those still on the Titanic. Or as Delingpole said about Davey: ‘Therefore to stand at a lectern and invoke it to support your case is a bit like calling on phlogiston theory to support an argument on combustion, or like referring to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion to support the case for a two-state solution in Palestine’.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100220113/ed-davey-makes-the-silliest-speech-ever/

zootcadillac demonstrates he’s either having a “senior moment” or otherwise demonstrating a curious type of forgetfulness (perhaps related to pharmaceutical consumption) when he says on June 5, 2013 at 3:43 am:

I don’t know why you persist in attacking Gleick or the people who employ him. Sure, he is everything you say and probably more but the fact remains that his reputation remains untarnished within the circles that matter to him because the heartland institute allowed him to walk away from that debacle absolutely scot free.
They did not have the courage of their convictions in that matter. (…)

On the 1 year anniversary last year, there was a WUWT post on the matter, Heartland releases the Peter Gleick legal briefing.
The reason prosecution was not pursued was given in the very first comment:

Heartland Institute (@HeartlandInst) says:
February 14, 2013 at 6:07 am
Regarding possible civil litigation: Heartland’s lawyers warned us that if we filed a civil suit against Peter Gleick, they could not guarantee that our donors would be protected from subpoenas won by Gleick’s attorneys from a sympathetic (liberal) judge. All of the donors identified in the stolen documents could receive threatening letters from Gleick’s lawyers demanding that they surrender correspondence, emails, notes, receipts, etc. Obviously, that would be devastating to our future fundraising efforts, and a violation of our pledge of preserving the privacy of our donors. So we made the difficult choice to not pursue civil litigation.
Jim Lakely
Director of Communications
The Heartland Institute

Heartland could have tried for their pound of flesh from Gleick, at the cost of their donors being bled by the bucket. Heartland did right by their donors, swallowed their pride, and let getting payback from Gleick wait for another day.
BTW, zooty finished with:

I’ve still never had a reply as to what happened to monies solicited for a ‘legal fund’.

Since Heartland’s legal counsel didn’t do that briefing for free, if you consider the issue long enough, then you might consider yourself to have at least part of the answer.

***
is apparently still on the editorial review board of the Institute of Physics (IOP),
***
As we’ve seen recently, the goobermint’s policy nowdays is to promote unethical law-breakers.

Looking at the list of names on the Environmental Research Letters editorial board page, I see:
1 Editor-in-chief
10 Executive board members
32 Advisory board members
…for a grand total of 43 board members. Can this large gang be anything other than pals supporting pals?

So, Ryan, enlighten us, what did the documents reveal? Go ahead.

“Ryan” said on June 5, 2013 at 5:52 am:

It’s not important whether he forged the memo.

This is like Hillary’s ‘Why does it matter who screwed up on Benghazi?’ As a well-known long-standing principle of American law, with roots going back to Biblical times, once the bodies are buried then how they died ceases having all meaning.

What’s important is that we keep accusing him of doing it, so that we can forget what the leaked documents revealed.

They revealed absolutely nothing spectacular, or hardly noteworthy.
“Ryan” then said:

This, to me, sounds like you just accused Anthony Watts, whom you just described as being paid by Heartland, of posting this piece as an obfuscation tactic, to make people forget what was in the STOLEN documents.
Yo, pinhead, if he wanted people to forget, he’d just stop posting articles about Gleick. Ignore Gleick, we stop talking about him, the Heartland docs stop being brought up when talking about Gleick because we’re not talking about Gleick.
Dear God, you’re such a freaking moron.

“So, Ryan, enlighten us, what did the documents reveal? Go ahead.”
That a large amount of previously-undisclosed money flows into the government and blogosphere to foster doubt about the dangers of unregulated GHG release. Do you really think we would know who was funding the surface station project or why if the leak hadn’t happened?

Ryan says:
June 5, 2013 at 7:05 am
“ Do you really think we would know who was funding the surface station project or why if the leak hadn’t happened?”
_________________
You mean, we finally figured it out? Does Anthony know?

Ryan the leaked documents revealed nothing except that Gleick had nothing. Except for an obviously fake memo that he added to the mix but that didn’t come from The Heartland Foundation. It didn’t show any vast infusion of secret money into the blog sphere nor did it reveal any other secrets.
And Surface Station is funded by Anthony not anyone else. Nothing Gleick stole showed it was funded from anywhere else. All that is revealed is that Anthony sought and recieved some funding to pay for a computer programmer to work on a different project. About 40K which is very reasonable for such a project I might add.

Gleick, Mann, Gore, Hansen, Briffa, the list gorws long.

Ryan,
If you think the memos Gleick stole show “large amounts of previously undisclosed money” flowing to support the cause of skeptics, you clearly suffer from a reading comprehension disorder.