Shocking lapse of ethics at #AGU19 – Gleick returns

On Wednesday, I attended a keynote lecture at the annual American Geophysical Union convention in San Francisco, held in Moscone Center. The panel, according to the AGU website note, made no inkling of who the moderator would be.

Governor Jerry Brown in Conversation with AGU Scientists: Protecting Earth’s climate for the next 100 years

Wednesday, 11 December, 12:30-1:30 p.m.
Moscone North, Hall E, LL

Former California Governor Jerry Brown (and 2016 AGU keynote speaker) helped California become an international leader in climate change policy, establishing the most comprehensive and integrated climate action program in the Western Hemisphere. Governor Brown will join a panel of scientists led by AGU President and glaciologist Robin Bell, to discuss the science and politics of climate change and what needs to be done to protect Earth’s climate for the future.

To my shock and surprise, the moderator turned out to be Dr. Peter Gleick, disgraced former president and founder of the Pacific Institute. Gleick, who was forcibly removed from the AGU as chair of their Scientific ethics task force in 2012 for admittedly stealing internal documents from The Heartland Institute, was back.

The debacle became known as Fakegate. It was the day in February 2012 that Pacific Institute President Peter Gleick sent to liberal activists and reporters documents he stole from The Heartland Institute and claimed to have obtained from a “Heartland insider” and later from an “anonymous source.” The documents included Heartland’s annual budget, fundraising plan, and other confidential documents. Media outlets in the U.S. and around the world reported on the “leak” of supposed “secret plans” by an anonymous “insider” at the world’s most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made global warming.

Gleick eventually confessed to being the “insider” and explained that he had stolen the identity of another person – a member of Heartland’s board of directors, it soon became known – in order to steal the confidential documents. There was no “leak.” Gleick also admitted to lying about the nature of one document he originally claimed had come from Heartland, a “strategy memo” that purported to describe Heartland’s plans to address climate change in the coming year. That document was quickly shown to be a fake, written to misrepresent and defame The Heartland Institute. Gleick denied he was the author of the fake memo.

It was clear then why AGU had to remove him from the Ethics Task Force position – he did a very unethical thing and the entire world knew about it. But they did the deed behind closed doors, and made no announcements nor admonitions at the time. In retrospect, I think they privately applauded what he did, but had no choice in the firestorm over the issue.

It became clear to me at AGU 2019, seven years later, that AGU simply doesn’t care. In the keynote session that included Dr. Michael Mann, former California Gov. Jerry Brown, and others, the words “climate denier” were used in abundance, along with phrases like “We have to be more imaginative and more aggressive [on the climate issue].”

And, this year, for the first time ever, AGU changed its position statement to reflect that the leadership there believes the world is in a “climate crisis.” From their press release:

“In a revised climate position statement released today, based on the overwhelming research and scientific evidence, AGU is declaring the world to be in a climate crisis.”

Yet, as many observe, the crisis level climate predictions of the past 30 years have not happened. Even so, predictions continue to worsen and voices calling for action have gotten even more shrill than ever before.

During the same meeting, the AGU also invited politics into the fray, by inviting presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg to speak. This is unprecedented, and I believe due only to the fact that Bloomberg has said he’ll make climate change action a big part of his platform.

It is a sad state of affairs. AGU has clearly relinquished their scientific organization and membership to political winds of change that is connected to the funding cash cow out of Washington.

At the end of the keynote address, no questions were taken from the audience or the press (which I represented there along with others). Immediately, a security guard was posted at the stage to prevent people from approaching the speakers to ask questions.

Apparently, they don’t like inconvenient questions.

In my opinion, this entire event represented the most shameful and shocking lapse of ethics I’ve ever seen in a scientific organization. With this one meeting, AGU has crossed the threshold from being a science organization, to one of “anything goes” advocacy.


Since “big oil” checks never seem to arrive, WUWT readers funded my trip, and I’m very grateful. But after what I witnessed yesterday, I’m rethinking whether I should retain my membership in the AGU, or attend any of their meetings ever again – Anthony

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Joel Snider
December 12, 2019 3:10 pm

At this point, how is a ‘lack of ethics’ among greenies ‘shocking’?

It’s really more of a standard trait.

Komrade Kuma
Reply to  Joel Snider
December 12, 2019 5:16 pm

Lets face it ‘green ethics’ like ‘progressive policies’ is an oxymoron that makes the sneering at ‘military intelligence seem a bit weird.

Reply to  Komrade Kuma
December 13, 2019 10:00 am

Legally , you cannot “steal” a document just by obtaining a copy. Theft means depriving the legal owner of possession. The main admitted offense Peter Gleick committed was wire fraud in pretending by telephone and email to be someone else in order to obtain the internal memos. It is highly likely ( as Mosher astutely noted at the time from writing style ) that it was also Gleick who for forged the fake Heartland document he then circulated.

This would have been very easy to verify had the police interviewed him and investigated the case and say, seized his printers, as they would have done in any other such case. I doubt that he is a very tough character who would have resisted police questioning very long. Instead got a free pass. Not even a police interview or a deposition. Clearly he was getting protection from higher up.

The wire fraud would have fallen under the jurisdiction of the state of Illinois, where then president Obama studied and taught law.

Statue of limitation is 5 years on that so he got off scot-free with an imprisonable offense.

One wonders whether a “climate deeenyer” would have been granted such juridical largesse.

It is reprehensible that this man should be allowed anything more than the right to attend these meetings, which derives from he paying his membership fee.

John Francis P.Eng
Reply to  Joel Snider
December 12, 2019 10:27 pm

Yes, but most of us think that the majority of Geophysicists and Geologists are AGW skeptics, as are nearly all of my engineering colleagues. I still think so, but clearly the executive of professional organizations are not. The leadership has drunk the funding Kool-Aid. I think there us a need for all professional and scientific organizations to be forced to poll their members before issuing a statement on climate change, along with the poll statistics.

It is ludicrous that the Royal Society, founded 1660, violates its motto “Nullius in Verba” so badly. Let’s push lower professional associations to do better.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  John Francis P.Eng
December 13, 2019 3:45 am

Was it not former President of the Royal Society, one Lord Kelvin, who said profoundly that “heavier than air flying machines are impossible!”in 1895? No flying goes on these days other than short distance hot air balloons!

Reply to  Alan the Brit
December 13, 2019 5:46 am

Using then available technology, he was correct as the power to weight ratio of engines was too low. The Wright brothers succeeded only because they developed the technology to use aluminum for their engine blocks. This increased the power to weight ratio enough to make flying feasible. The engines were painted to resemble cast iron to hide that fact and protect their technology.

Reply to  AZeeman
December 13, 2019 3:46 pm

And new drilling and fracking technology put a stake in the heart of the “peak oil”. These people always base their assumptions about the future only on technological advances that support their concept of “green energy or “environmental protection”. In every other realm they assume there will be no technological advancements that will effect their calculations, estimates, and prognostications. They seem to be about as narrow minded as it is possible to be. So much so they can’t even be allowed to be questioned.

Reply to  John Francis P.Eng
December 13, 2019 10:23 am

I see the hands of the socialists at work in the way the war on climate is leading us to a new world order. The warmunists rather quickly gained control of state broadcasters and then eliminated all pretense of balanced reporting because “saving the planet”. Professional organizations are easy pickings as in most, members are not clamouring to be on the executive. It is simple for those with an agenda to gain control. Bullying tactics are widely employed in public debate, forums or on-line and are effective as most normal people have no desire to engage with spittle spewing lunatics. With the media guaranteeing coverage for compliant politicians, the numeracy challenged political class quickly sold their souls for the faintest promise of a vote, as they generally do. Teachers tend to be the avant garde of the politically correct- their entire existence being devoted to the creation of docile, compliant populations. They were an easy conscript to the new world order. Those of us who keep waiting for the science to assert itself may be in for a disappointment as this stopped being about science a long time ago.

December 12, 2019 3:14 pm

Captain Louis Renault is shocked at this turn of events.

December 12, 2019 3:18 pm

Anthony, only by investigators like you keeping tabs on the shenanigans and perfidy of outfits like the AGU, IPCC, UN, and many academic bodies, can we – the ordinary punters – have any chance of understanding just how blatant and misleading the whole AGW construct is.

Stay with them please.

Angus McFarlane
Reply to  Mr.
December 12, 2019 5:24 pm


Reply to  Angus McFarlane
December 13, 2019 10:04 am

totally covfefe !

Former California Governor Jerry Brown (and 2016 AGU keynote speaker) helped California become an international leader in climate change policy

They seem to forget the amount of CO2 he caused to be released by blocking bipartisan bill to address forestry management issues, which led directly to the massive forrest fire and loss of lives and property.

Great “leadership”.

Reply to  Mr.
December 13, 2019 5:48 am

Absolutely. The more you know about them, the better off you are.

steve case
Reply to  Mr.
December 13, 2019 6:18 am

That’s what I was thinking. Of course eventually his membership will be revoked.

Javert Chip
December 12, 2019 3:26 pm

I dunno…maybe a thief like Pete Gleick doesn’t look too bad after you’ve walked thru a couple blocks of human poop to discover him at your conference…

Mickey Reno
Reply to  Javert Chip
December 12, 2019 9:36 pm

So, Gleick’s strength is that he’s house trained? It’s not much, but it’s something.

mark from the midwest
December 12, 2019 3:27 pm

The kinds of political hacks that are behind AGU should take heed of what is just happening in Great Britain. Boris Johnson has a clear majority win tonight, and Brexit can finally move forward, but wait, there’s more, it means 5 more years with a conservative government. The people at BBC and Guardian are weeping openly, not making that up, a BBC report was driveling all over herself as they started to release exit poll results.

Lee L
Reply to  mark from the midwest
December 13, 2019 12:04 am

Well ya… it means Britain WILL leave the EU and that the EU fans cannot claim the original referendum was screwed up or people just didn’t know what they were voting for. This time it is now very clear that a majority of Britons are FED UP TO THE TEETH with the EU and want out of its grasp.

This of course may come at the cost of losing Scotland and maybe even Northern Ireland.

Interesting times. Of course the BBC and Grauniad have to spin it as Brexit fatigue.

Kurt in Switzerland
Reply to  Lee L
December 13, 2019 6:24 am


You said, “This may come at the cost of losing Scotland and maybe even Northern Ireland.”

Wanna bet?

I seriously doubt it. Of course many Scots voted for Sturgeon’s Nationalist movement. But earlier efforts to pry Scotland away from the UK have failed miserably. The UK is a 400 year old alliance, which has endured through thick and thin. The EU is merely a decades old “Work in Progress” comprised of self-serving bureaucrats, non-transparent inner workings, a Byzantine construction, and Globalist, Immigration-drunk Spenders of Britons’ hard-earned money. That is why Brexit won a majority: they saw that Mutti Merkel was taking the entire bloc down the path which leads to destruction and rightly decided, “Not with us!”

Any love for the EU by the Scots or the N Irish will be lost when they see how the EU deals with the UK going forward. The EU bureaucracy only wanted the UK for its funding! London has Edinburgh’s and Belfast’s backside covered. Do you really believe that Brussels could of would do anything similar?

Non Nomen
Reply to  Lee L
December 14, 2019 1:00 am

BoJo is grateful for all the assistance of the evil witches oft our times – Angie Ferkel and ‘Rifle Queen’ von der Leyen. A big hand goes to Brussels as well, where top positions are dealt out w/o running for office, being nominated or even elected. Pre – dictatorship and nepotism at its finest. Britain resisted, thankfully.

Patrick Healy
Reply to  mark from the midwest
December 13, 2019 1:32 am

Yes Mark,
There is good and bad news.
The communist anti Jewish Corbyn (strangely he has a sane brother) will be history soon. The Labour party should not be an issue for a while.

The bad news is that blustering Boris has been cooerced into the global warming religion by his current female companion.
He and the entire Tory lite party are ardent warmists.
The other bit of bad news is that up here in Scotland we have a rabidly left wing bunch of alarmists in charge.

Btw Anthony congratulations on not catching some nasty virus at that party political event.

Reply to  Patrick Healy
December 13, 2019 3:20 am

Boris is known to be completely untrustworthy and there is a widespread belief that the only cause he believes in is Boris. That makes him probably less dangerous than a committed ideologue since his actions are likely to be pragmatic.
I voted Conservative.

John Endicott
Reply to  Susan
December 13, 2019 10:58 am

there is a widespread belief that the only cause he believes in is Boris

So like most politicians then – really only in it for themselves.

Reply to  Patrick Healy
December 13, 2019 7:19 am

Btw Anth*ny congratulations on not catching some nasty virus at that party political event.

He always practices safe-journalism.

Gerry, England
Reply to  mark from the midwest
December 13, 2019 3:43 am

Just to point out that the UK will have a Conservative government and NOT a conservative government. The Conservative party is known as Blue Labour for good reason and given that Boris Johnson is a proven serial liar you can’t take anything he says at face value. He will get the Withdrawal Agreement through parliament and we will finally leave the EU by 31 January and enter the transition phase. Then comes the future relationship negotiations and if it is to take effect by 31 January 2020 then it will only be a bare bones agreement that will come as a nasty shock to the majority.

Reply to  Gerry, England
December 13, 2019 4:51 am

As Lucky Jack Aubrey says in the movie “Master and Commander”, given the choice between Corbyn and Boris, one should always take “the lesser of two weevils”.

December 12, 2019 3:32 pm

AGU goes all in on secular magical thinking.
Prayers to be offered to St. Greta…

John Francis
Reply to  hunterson7
December 12, 2019 10:29 pm

St Greta. Candidate for Hypocrite of the Year. Watch this 5 minute factual clip

Joel O’Bryan
December 12, 2019 3:37 pm

It is how Propaganda campaigns are waged.

Rule 1: No probing, unscripted questions are ever to be allowed in open forum.
Rule 2. A few Big lies are better than a bunch of little lies.
Rule3. Never never ever admit guilt or contrition when caught or the lie exposed. Simply blame the listener for not understanding what was said.

That is a reason colleges like Yale and Columbia U now offer degrees in Climate Communications. It is to teach these and other finer points to indoctrinated believers of CAGW how run successful climate propaganda campaigns. Another item they teach is how to setup “group testing” of ideas and slogans. That is finding what is most in effective emotional appeal on the climate scam without exposing intellectual or ethical shortfalls.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
December 12, 2019 7:12 pm

Those degrees should be in Contrafactual Communications.

Reply to  jorgekafkazar
December 13, 2019 7:33 am

Professional Propagandism. Shortened to PeePee.

Reply to  Joel O’Bryan
December 12, 2019 7:15 pm

Being a “climate denier” is heresy against the orthodoxy of the doomsday cult. To challenge the authority of the priesthood is to deny God. Now it will be necessary to throw a few more tourists into the volcano to appease the gods to stop the volcano from poisoning our atmosphere with its evil CO2… It’s a mad world!
At 400 ppm, every molecule of CO2 would need to warm 2500 air molecules that’s around it. To raise the temperature of the air 1° it would be hotter than molten metal at 2500°.
Hold your breath and then blow on your hot coffee with 5% carbon dioxide (50,000 ppm)
Does your coffee boil and melt your cup?
Religious belief is often stronger than sound science. I do not envy the feeling of banging your head against the wall. They have their consensus, and it keeps them warm at night. Until the power goes out then harsh reality will set in.

Reply to  Max
December 12, 2019 8:39 pm

CO2 absorbs IR photon, heats up, transfers that heat to another molecule.
Then it absorbs another IR photon, heats up, transfers that heat to another molecule.
Lather, rinse, repeat a few hundred times a second.

Just because the alarmists use bad science is no reason for us to do the same.

Reply to  MarkW
December 13, 2019 6:09 pm

Bad science??? MarkW?
Simple math. Whether it’s imparting 1° temperature over one second to 2500 air molecules or a few hundredths of 1° over a few hundredths of one second, the result is identical. The ratio of carbon dioxide to air is still 1/2500. CO2 would still need to be extremely hot to transfer heat to “all” the air molecules that “settled science” says is occurring. Cold CO2 radiates no heat, cannot give what it does not have. So how much IR radiation does CO2 need to absorb to heat the air 30° each day? 2,500×30° Equals 75,000° per CO2 molecule before afternoon. Ridiculous, impossible. There just isn’t enough CO2 to perform the work required of it with the amount of energy that is required to absorb and radiate. It is more reasonable to blame dark matter dragons and unicorns farts then put it on the shoulders of so little CO2. It is not “bad science” to point out the obvious.

Bruce Cobb
December 12, 2019 3:37 pm

No one could possibly blame you, Anthony, for leaving such a disgraceful institution. Clearly, they are no longer about science, nor does there appear to be any hope of them pulling back from their vile anti-science, anti-truth, and anti-human stance. They are now the enemy.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 13, 2019 5:03 am

have to admit it would be very hard to stomach a repeat of this as reported.
I hazard a guess that next yr if you went to book that you would be told theyd sold out.
if not outright refusal to allow you there.
I wonder how many longtime members will be dropping out this yr though?
its a hard call really, go and feel angry and ill
or not go and miss the chance to see what they are up to and the lies theyre running

Kevin kilty
December 12, 2019 3:54 pm

I have quit over years APS, AAAS, AGU over nonsense like this. I have witnessed the worst sort of lying, inside dealing, nepotism, and other ethical lapses that were arguably felonies at three college campuses. Colleges and learned societies violate their own codes of conduct if it suits their purposes. Administrators have paid big dollars to bring know nothing activists like Jeremy Rifkin and crisis managers like Lord Oxburgh as speakers, when for half as much we could have invited people who actually know something. I have been forced to attend sexual harassment training led by serial harassers of women. You can complain about the hypocrisy and bad optics in the academic world, but no one really cares.

The academic world is corrupt. In fact it is so corrupt it is a parody of corruption. I would advise going to AGU sessions not involving climate science, and talk with some pretty good and honest scientists.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Kevin kilty
December 12, 2019 4:56 pm

I see it at Stanford, too, Kevin.

The NAS report on sexual harassment in STEM — the worst piece of pseudo-scholarship I’ve ever encountered — recommends that STEM departments have Sociologist political commissars to oversee hiring and tenure, so as to promote ‘diversity and inclusion’ and remove the supposedly patriarchal regime that promotes sexual harassment.

It’s a recipe for suspicion, accusation, character assassination and utter mediocrity; for the destruction of academic science, in other words.

Reply to  Pat Frank
December 12, 2019 7:12 pm

How many diversity officers does a university need?

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Scissor
December 13, 2019 5:21 am

There is no name for the number involved apparently. These offices on university campuses are a “jobs program” for the graduates of “studies” degrees. They absolutely chew up limited campus resources. Unfortunately social justice is the servo that animates the millenials, so we are expected to cater to it. The people involved and their methods and materials are neither inspiring nor accurate. I was made to attend about 2 hours of disabilities and diversity training this past week and here is what I observed.

1) The interactive training program (produced by a Bezos supported company) was inaccurate as to Federal law. It tries to misrepresent the law as demanding more than is required. I have pointed this out repeatedly to no avail.

2) The training is reported as a refresher for Title I, but universities are covered under Title II. The actual training seems a combination. It’s self contradictory in places.

3) The training is generally very boring. However, there were some interviews with minority and disabled people whose views seem more sensible and fair than anything yet observed from the diversity offices.

Reply to  Pat Frank
December 12, 2019 7:54 pm
Reply to  Pat Frank
December 13, 2019 1:39 pm

The equivalent of Russia’s political officers, planted in every large organisation to keep the management on the required political path, and to report back to their enablers.

December 12, 2019 3:55 pm

Ethics have left the building.

Tom Bakewell
December 12, 2019 4:04 pm

As a geophysicist and one time member of the AGU I am saddened by the chicanery. Perhaps Thuggery is a better word for the behavior. Maybe AGU should stand for Aware Greta Universe.

James A. Schrumpf
December 12, 2019 4:07 pm

Anthony , Gleick taking the podium may have been the perfect moment to execute a classic Hitchcockian maneuver, usually reserved for when the bad guys are closing in on the protagonist at a concert, or a play, or an auction.
You stand up, point a finger at Gleick, and loudly declaim his heinous actions, always sticking to the known, publicly admitted transgressions. You’ll have everyone’s undivided attention, for as long as it lasts, create an uproar, be escorted from the room,questioned by the police and perhaps reporters, to whom the whole sordid affair could be retold.

We have your back, and it could only be a breach of the peace anyway. You’re gonna renounce your membership anyway, right? Just don’t punch anyone, like Cary Grant did in “North by Northwest.”

Reply to  James A. Schrumpf
December 12, 2019 5:03 pm

Er, James, I would rather NOT hear that Anthony was “unfortunately shot and killed while resisting arrest.”

Far-fetched? Maybe… but the new AG there, remember, is the son of Bill “utopia will only be achieved by killing one-third of the population” Ayers.

Roger Knights
Reply to  James A. Schrumpf
December 12, 2019 5:12 pm

“You stand up, point a finger at Gleick, and loudly declaim his heinous actions, ”

And that of his enablers, the AGU.

The AGU’s alarmist position statement now has less credibility, because of its invite to, and implicit endorsement of, Gleik.

Lee L
Reply to  James A. Schrumpf
December 13, 2019 12:07 am

Nowadays they use a bullhorn.
De platforming ?

December 12, 2019 4:25 pm

Call him out on it using Trump style in front of everyone. It is an effective technique.

December 12, 2019 4:25 pm

It sounds as though someone or some group decided to take over the AGU and turn it into an alarmist group, much as the American Meteorological Society, the National Academy of Scientists, and other groups have been. Given that a lot of geologists are not climate alarmists (they all know that the Earth has seen much, much worse), perhaps you or Dave Middleton should make a post after the AGU meeting and invite geologists to post their own thoughts on this takeover.

Reply to  Ric Werme
December 12, 2019 8:01 pm

Ric: “It sounds as though someone or some group decided to take over the AGU …”

— known as the Deep Science —

December 12, 2019 4:30 pm

AGU—” based on the overwhelming research and scientific evidence,”
Dear AGU,
Please show us that “overwhelming …scientific evidence” that man’s CO2 is causing a “climate crisis”

Be sure to explain what caused the Minoan, Roman & Medieval warm periods and why that cause is NOT the cause of today’s warm period. Also explain how the Vikings farmed areas of Greenland now under permafrost if it was NOT warmer then.
Also explain how CO2 increase can cause warming BEFORE the CO2 increases as it does in the ice cores that AL Gore showed and in most other data.


December 12, 2019 4:46 pm

I honestly think the Watermelons are now in retreat, as I read this the common sense vote in the UK is being reported as a significant swing to the right. I believe the likes of Gleick and his cohorts are facing their waterloo and it will play out over the next 18 months, keep your eye on the german economy.

December 12, 2019 4:48 pm

“I’m rethinking whether I should retain my membership in the AGU…”

Yeah, stay away from “guilty by association”.

Evidentially, they not only don’t need any stinking data, they don’t need any stinking ethics either.

They need to change their name to “Geophysical Union” (GU) and drop the “A” since they don’t represent American values.

Reply to  JohnWho
December 12, 2019 8:06 pm

— yeah — a real GU infection —

Pat Frank
December 12, 2019 4:49 pm

Alan Kors has an extraordinary talk on the legacy of socialism. Kors is a Historian at U Penn.

Among other things, he condemns the left for its silence concerning its own enormous crimes, all the while shouting, decrying, and accusing about the crimes of others.

The left forgives the crimes of its own, because their cause is good. It condemns the beneficence of everyone else because their cause is not leftism.

So it is for Peter Gleick. He is forgiven his crime because his cause was good. The morality of socialists is ‘by any means to power.’

Among them, Peter Gleick is a hero. Had he been indicted and convicted, he’d be a martyr.

The AGU is now just one more Progressive front group. It has a residuum of science and scientists, but they will erode away with time.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Pat Frank
December 12, 2019 6:43 pm

The interesting follow on question to your view, Pat, is do you see most real scientists drifting away from these societies and forming new associations, or is science in a crisis where scientists themselves vanish and are replaced by charlatans and fakers?

Pat Frank
Reply to  Kevin kilty
December 12, 2019 10:28 pm

Kevin, I got a phone call several years ago from a scientist in Seattle — don’t remember his name — who was looking for support in trying to start a new scientific society, because of the political corruption he saw in the current versions.

But I heard nothing else since.

One suspects that the major impulse among scientists is to keep their head down to keep the job.

After “Propagation …” was published, I got a thank-you email from a German physicist who allowed that he was told by his university head to keep his skeptical views to himself if he wanted to keep his job

Reply to  Kevin kilty
December 12, 2019 11:21 pm

Kevin I am a layman hoping to see the scientists and other learned people such as the good men and women here at WUWT form new associations!

How else will the ordinary folk such as myself have our rather ‘common’ sense, reinforced by someone practiced in the scientific method?

You cannot imagine how important this site in itself has been to me. I am learning when I am way out of my debth in regards to technical discussions and I have enjoyed the humor and a sense of inclusion from all of you when I can contribute to the conversation. I’ve also enjoyed a few challenging discussions.

Mostly, I now have the confidence and enough knowledge to refute Climate Change and the associated leftist thinking that goes with it. I am finally able to speak up and be true to myself.

Please don’t let the charlatans and fakers win!

Christopher Dynak
Reply to  Megs
December 13, 2019 11:36 am


Reply to  Pat Frank
December 12, 2019 8:17 pm

To the extent that some people have drifted away from traditional religion, they still feel the need for some noble cause — hence the religious fervor among those who believe in CAGW — and hence the appropriateness of the term, “Noble Cause Corruption,” which Gleick may have used to quiet his conscience in the midst of his ethical lapse.

December 12, 2019 4:57 pm

The entrenched and corrupt political class seem to find a way of resurrecting themselves without shame or conscious. I would hate to say that these people rise like a Phoenix because the Phoenix is a majestic bird. These people emerge from the depths of foul smelling stuff and appear without odor.

Gerald Machnee
December 12, 2019 5:11 pm

If they do a podcast, it can be monitored that way.
Of course I and another person were deleted from a podcast by our newspaper. She asked about media bias and I of course made a comment and question about “climate change”

December 12, 2019 5:45 pm

Pretty much sums up how confident AGWers are with their position:

“… a security guard was posted at the stage to prevent people from approaching the speakers to ask questions.”

R Moore
December 12, 2019 5:58 pm

Please continue to cover these meetings. Surely you are not the only person present who feels shame for the blatant surrender of the board to political pressure. These sentiments would have been felt in the breast of Athenians listening to Alcibiades. Please seek the unsullied and compare notes. A true narrative prevails in the end as the purity of the natural world overcomes attempts to twist facts to purpose. Thank you for your diligence and attention. Please keep shining a light in the pettifogging duplicitous humbugs.

Larry Hamlin
December 12, 2019 6:32 pm

Why would any competent scientist spend any time dealing with the politically contrived AGU. This organization is a joke and has been for years.

nw sage
December 12, 2019 6:33 pm

Since you are a member, you should be able?? to get copies of their membership lists. Use that list(s) to write a letter to each member explaining Dr Gleick’s transgressions and the underhanded way he was ‘invited’ to moderate the meeting. Make a point of leading a group in cancelling your memberships.
Just my 2 cents worth

Jeff Alberts
December 12, 2019 6:36 pm

“Since “big oil” checks never seem to arrive, WUWT readers funded my trip, and I’m very grateful. But after what I witnessed yesterday, I’m rethinking whether I should retain my membership in the AGU, or attend any of their meetings ever again – Anthony”

I understand how you feel. But, if everyone who disagrees with the AGU leadership leaves, then they will be able to say “100% of AGU scientists agree…”

HD Hoese
December 12, 2019 6:39 pm

What is going on at AGU may not be surprising. The chairman of the climate panel, Donald Boesch, is a marine biologist who had a distinguished career from his education through research to administration. He was involved to some degree in a group which ended up, along with the National Academy of Science, taking the corn farmers to task over nitrogen. I have heard on good authority that it was contentious and controversial. This resulted from a fear over ‘The Dead Zone,” not much of a zone, more of a mosaic, and certainly not dead as the press keeps pushing. While there are effects, even mortality, it is a large septic system where most of the water column is still aerobic and still producing in abundance the same critters that were supposedly being killed off.

Predictions about its size are still being made based on spring concentrations of river nitrogen, predicted to be one reason for the demise of fisheries. As late as 2014 a Louisiana paper laments as to how they don’t understand how fisheries have not collapsed. While there has been an effect, it turned out to be more complex, as was known by many for decades. Like carbon dioxide a single factor was too simplistic, and a now deceased long time student of the problem (still was studying) of the process called in print (2003) that nitrogen had become “demonized.”

There is nothing wrong with going into another discipline, even necessary for some innovation, if you do your homework and realize it is also necessary to be disciplined by what is actually known in that field, not easy. Such members on the climate panel should run for office if they want to make policy as do some medical doctors. The latter face life or death problems sooner.

There is a lot more to this, but my wife calls it the “Ph.D syndrome,” to which I would add the level above. I have been on such committees, always someone wanting to make policy instead of problem solving. Decades ago Gordon Gunter who had an oceanographic ship named after him more or less told me this sort of thing would happen.

December 12, 2019 6:53 pm

Renewable ethics.

December 12, 2019 7:22 pm


John Robertson
December 12, 2019 10:07 pm

Not surprising.
We have known since the CRU emails that these are low creatures.
The only surprise is how low they choose to go.

Our progressive comrades know,with no shadow of doubt, that they are the superior ones,here to help the rest of us lowbrow creatures through life.
Ethics play no part in the bubble they inhabit.
Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming,in all its names, is proof of that.
Scare the children,to control the world!
Possibly the only reality that will reach them,is physical.

December 13, 2019 7:00 am

Anthony ==> Better to fight from the inside than the outside.

steve case
Reply to  Kip Hansen
December 13, 2019 9:15 am

Until they throw him out on his ear.

Steve Oregon
December 13, 2019 7:54 am

Here is a video of Gleick explaining how his unethical behavior was noble.
Watch how he describes it.
Starting at about 58:50

Reply to  Steve Oregon
December 13, 2019 10:30 am

Hey Steve,

Thanks for the link. That’s a quintessential fauxpology, if I can be allowed to make my own portmanteau.
Glick offers a dry “apology” (essentially saying he isn’t thoroughly proud of some of the tactics he used), but then goes right on to say that he essentially IS thoroughly proud of himself for standing up for Climate Science and against Climate Denial funded by Dark Money, yadayadayada. He makes claims about the certainty of Climate Science that are unfounded and then goes on about his concerns for his children and so on. Basically, he’s a classic self-appointed hero for the cause. Anyone disagreeing is disgusting.

Also, the interviewer had to pry out anything like a readmission from Glick; nobody highlighted on the fact that he stole the identity of a Heartland Board Member and then most likely personally forged a nefarious-sounding summary document with rather comic-book like wording. He really believes he is David fighting the Climate Denier Goliath.

The problem with the “dark money” argument is that the ‘Mainstream Climate Science’ (doomsayers) get orders of magnitude more funding than do any skeptics, who have to put up with being called Deniers.

Glick lost his ethical credentials with that act. He’ll never get them back. Yet he doesn’t even seem aware.

December 13, 2019 8:05 am

This being about Gleick, shouldn’t the obligatory “Mosher Drive-by” happen any minute?

December 13, 2019 10:49 am

In my opinion, this entire event represented the most shameful and shocking lapse of ethics I’ve ever seen in a scientific organization.

Your first mistake was thinking that the AGU is a scientific organization.

December 13, 2019 11:29 pm

What relevance do the outdated concepts of ethics or truth or honour have in a world based on moral ambiguity, dedicated to achieving the desired objectives by the most effective means possible? The old black and white certainties were too restrictive. The ‘truth’ of what actually is must be subsumed by the more pragmatic truth of what should be. Those who can be used are there for the benefit of the visionaries unfettered by the restraints of ethics and moral scruples. Therein lies true freedom, at least for the few elite willing to forgo the shackles of obeisance to the useless concept of right and wrong.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights