Breaking news: A look behind the curtain of the Heartland Institute’s climate change spin

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The Heartland Institute — a self-described "think tank" that actually serves in part as a way for climate change denialism to get funded — has a potentially embarrassing situation on their hands. Someone going by the handle "Heartland Insider" has anonymously released quite a few of what are claimed to be internal documents from Heartland, revealing the Institute’s strategies, funds, and much more. These documents are available over at DeSmogBlog. Several people are going over them, and so far they appear legit. You can read some relevant discussions at DeSmogBlog, Deep Climate, Planet 3, Greg Laden, ClimateCrocks, Shawn Otto, and Think Progress. John Mashey at DeSmogBlog has more info that also corroborates the leaked documents, and to call it blistering is to severely underestimate it.

One thing I want to point out right away which is very illuminating, if highly disturbing, about what Heartland allegedly wants to do: they are considering developing a curriculum for teachers to use in the classroom to sow confusion about climate change. I know, it sounds like I’m making that up, but I’m not. In this document they say:

[Dr.

Wojick

's] effort will focus on providing curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain – two key points

that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science

.

That seems clear enough, doesn’t it? From that, it sure sounds like they want to dissuade teachers from teaching science. I imagine there will be a lot of spin about how this quote is out of context, or a typo, or something alone those lines. Perhaps. But I remember all the hammering real scientists took when they used jargon in their emails to each other, jargon which was gleefully misinterpreted to make it seem as if these scientists were faking data. Interesting how this is pointing right back at them. Just as I said it does.

When it comes to all this, the comparison to "Climategate" springs to mind, but there’s one enormous difference: Climategate was manufactured, a made-up controversy (what I call a manufactroversy) that had no real teeth — as was its failed sequel. The emails released weren’t damning at all, and didn’t show scientists tinkering with or faking data. As much as the media made of it, as much as climate change denial blogs played them up, it has been shown again and again that Climategate was all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

These new documents, though, look different, especially given that quote above. The next few days should be very interesting as people start digging into them, especially if they prove to be authentic.

And how ironic! It was the Heartland Institute themselves who played up Climategate quite a bit. Back in 2009 when they were trumpeting Climategate, Heartland said:

The release of these documents creates an opportunity for reporters, academics, politicians, and others who relied on the IPCC to form their opinions about global warming to stop and reconsider their position. The experts they trusted and quoted in the past have been caught red-handed plotting to conceal data, hide temperature trends that contradict their predictions, and keep critics from appearing in peer-reviewed journals. This is new and real evidence that they should examine and then comment on publicly.

That claim from them is nonsense, but it will be interesting to see how happy they are when the tables are turned, and "reporters, academics, politicians, and others" look into their documents. And around that same time they also said:

For anyone who doubts the power of the Internet to shine light on darkness, the news of the month is how digital technology helped uncover a secretive group of scientists who suppressed data, froze others out of the debate, and flouted freedom-of-information laws.

Again, none of that is true. But that claim about freezing out others sticks out, especially in light of another of these leaked Heartland internal memos which says,

Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow high-profile climate scientists (such as [Peter] Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own. This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate

and it is important to keep opposing voices out

.

Emphasis mine. Yes, that sounds like a group interested in promoting "sound science".

Wow. Just, wow.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/02/15/breaking-news-a-look-behind-the-curtain-of-the-heartland-institutes-climate-change-spin/

[Penguin_ie 5,994]

**** One irrelevant post and one reply to it removed. PLease address the issued raised in the Opening Topic *****

[^_^ 5,021]

This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate...

anti-climate? what the heck does that even mean?

when deploying incendiary and nonsensical language like that to attack someone it's usually a bad idea to accuse others of not being interested in promoting sound science.

Yes, that sounds like a group interested in promoting "sound science".

[one...two...tree 2,762]

anti-climate? what the heck does that even mean?

another of these leaked Heartland internal memos which says,

Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow high-profile climate scientists (such as [Peter] Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own.

This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate

and it is important to keep opposing voices out

.

when deploying incendiary and nonsensical language like that to attack someone it's usually a bad idea to accuse others of not being interested in promoting sound science.

Emphasis mine. Yes, that sounds like a group interested in promoting "sound science".

That was from a Heartland internal memo.

[Ban Hammer 13,407]

one post removed and one member thread banned for continuing to go off topic despite a warning from vj moderation.

Edited February 15, 2012 by charles!

[SMOKE 1,426]

one post removed and one member thread banned for continuing to go off topic despite a warning from vj moderation.

Penguin_ie got 4 +1s. so, i gave you one to get you started.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Penguin_ie got 4 +1s. so, i gave you one to get you started.

I gave him a +1 too for being a good follower.

Edited February 15, 2012 by luckytxn

[luckytxn 2,264]

Looks like the climagate people are seeing their funds dry up and are getting desperate. Pathetic individuals to be trying to pass off fakes and altered documents.









The Heartland Institute Responds to Stolen and Fake Documents





The Heartland Institute issued the following press statement today:





Yesterday afternoon, two advocacy groups posted online several documents they claimed were The Heartland Institute’s 2012 budget, fundraising, and strategy plans. Some of these documents were stolen from Heartland, at least one is a fake, and some may have been altered.





The stolen documents appear to have been written by Heartland’s president for a board meeting that took place on January 17. He was traveling at the time this story broke yesterday afternoon, and still has not had the opportunity to read them all to see if they were altered. Therefore, the authenticity of those documents has not been confirmed.





Since then, the documents have been widely reposted on the Internet, again with no effort to confirm their authenticity.





One document, titled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy,” is a total fake apparently intended to defame and discredit The Heartland Institute. It was not written by anyone associated with The Heartland Institute. It does not express Heartland’s goals, plans, or tactics. It contains several obvious and gross misstatements of fact.





We respectfully ask all activists, bloggers, and other journalists to immediately remove all of these documents and any quotations taken from them, especially the fake “climate strategy” memo and any quotations from the same, from their blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.





The individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation. We ask them in particular to immediately remove these documents and all statements about them from the blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.





How did this happen? The stolen documents were obtained by an unknown person who fraudulently assumed the identity of a Heartland board member and persuaded a staff member here to “re-send” board materials to a new email address. Identity theft and computer fraud are criminal offenses subject to imprisonment. We intend to find this person and see him or her put in prison for these crimes.





Apologies: The Heartland Institute apologizes to the donors whose identities were revealed by this theft. We promise anonymity to many of our donors, and we realize that the major reason these documents were stolen and faked was to make it more difficult for donors to support our work. We also apologize to Heartland staff, directors, and our allies in the fight to bring sound science to the global warming debate, who have had their privacy violated and their integrity impugned.





Lessons: Disagreement over the causes, consequences, and best policy responses to climate change runs deep. We understand that.





But honest disagreement should never be used to justify the criminal acts and fraud that occurred in the past 24 hours. As a matter of common decency and journalistic ethics, we ask everyone in the climate change debate to sit back and think about what just happened.





Those persons who posted these documents and wrote about them before we had a chance to comment on their authenticity should be ashamed of their deeds, and their bad behavior should be taken into account when judging their credibility now and in the future.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

So you agree that science and scientists can be biased. Good progress Stephan.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Looks like the climagate people are seeing their funds dry up and are getting desperate. Pathetic individuals to be trying to pass off fakes and altered documents.

So, anyone that questions a fake blog story will continue to have their post removed, and/or be thread banned?

Edited February 16, 2012 by ☼

[ready4ONE 5,400]

So, anyone that questions a fake blog story will continue to have their post removed, and/or be thread banned?

There are a wealth of posts regarding Heartland Institutes fake stories, articles and blogs, one or two removed from VJ will hardly be missed.

[luckytxn 2,264]

So, anyone that questions a fake blog story will continue to have their post removed, and/or be thread banned?

Don't look at me.