Arguments
Recent Comments
Prev 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 Next
Comments 63751 to 63800:
-
Tom Curtis at 12:38 PM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
With regard to the strategy document: 1) Based on the information provided by GreenCooling, it was scanned on an Epson machine on Feb 14th. 2) It is not possible to conclude from that that it was not authentic, but only that prior to that it did not exist as a computer file in the hands of the leaker; 3) It is not possible to conclude from its late creation date that it is not authentic, because that is just the date of scanning; 4) It is not possible to conclude from its lack of a mentioned author that it is not authentic, as that again is just a product of its being scanned; 5) It is equally not possible to conclude from its accurate details that it is authentic, for if was inauthentic, the creation date means the creator had access to the other materials at the time of purported forgery; 6) It may be possible to get an indication one way of the other by checking the properties of the 2010 tax return, which was also scanned. When I check it does not indicate that it was scanned by an Epson machine, which is consistent with (but not conclusive evidence of) its not be created at the Heartland Institute, and hence being a fake. 7) Clearly if the Heartland Institute's claim that the authentic documents were obtained by a phishing attack is correct, the strategy document is a fake in that it was not emailed to the recipient. 8) Clearly also the Heartland Institute can easily confirm their account, and that the strategy document is a fake by releasing the email from the purported fake board member, and the email and attachments to the purported fake board member. Doing so would also clearly indicate which part of other documents had been falsified, if any. Their're failure to release the emails should be interpreted as showing their account to be a cover story rather than the truth, IMO. Their failure to release the attachments would, IMO, show that they believe the original documents to be as damning as those released, regardless of any falsifying of those documents. -
Glenn Tamblyn at 12:34 PM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
John Brookes @72 "Is there anything connecting Heartland with Australian skeptical bloggers? Maybe through the Institute of Public Affairs... " Carter is involved in most Australian Skeptic Blogs/sites, Science Adviser to SPPI, The Galileo Movement in Australia. And he is a Fellow at the IPA. The guy is connected and a player. -
Lloyd Flack at 12:20 PM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
If the Heartland Institute's claims about how the data were obtained are true the question arises, how did the caller know enough to get away with this impersonation? I don't see how it could have been done unless someone inside gave the caller the required information. Someone correct me if they can think of another way. But if an internal leak is required to carry out the impersonation why would the impersonation be necessary? Surely the provider of the information could have just taken out copies of the files. It is a bit unusual to have seven genuine documents and one fake released. The fake is likely to undermine the impact of the real documents. Still, a zealot might be tempted to gild the lilly. I think it is more likely than not that the Heartland Institute is lying. But even if they aren't their indignation is a bit rich. They actually complain about the integrity of their people being attacked. Pity they did not have such indignation about the attacks on the integrity of climate scientists. -
Glenn Tamblyn at 12:20 PM on 16 February 2012Tropical Thermostats and Global Warming
Emilio Yep, there are good reasons why tropical waters are so crystal clear so we can ogle the pretty coral - they really are deserts as far as microscopic life is concerned. Where as cold polar waters are 'dirty' and grey - teeming with life. So more warming equals less productive oceans. -
From Peru at 11:58 AM on 16 February 20122000 Years of Climate Reconstructed from Pollen
Thank you very much. One question: what is the red line on figure 1 of the paper?Response:The caption for Fig 1 delineates those individually.
-
GreenCooling at 11:57 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
This is pure speculation, but if you look at p.6 of the budget, titled "3. Personnel Overview" it seems there has been a bit of staff turnover, with some recent retrenchments and unhappy circumstances such as: * "...director of the Center for Transforming Education, was reduced to part-time and then volunteer status as fundraising for the Center failed to reach expectations. He will be restored to part-time or full-time status only if funds are raised."; * "...a legislative specialist working out of our Washington DC office since 2010, was let go mid-year after we concluded he wasn’t the right guy to lead a new and expanded Free to Choose Medicine project."; and, * "...our computer systems manager for the past 10 years, was let go in late 2011 due to chronic truancy. She received severance pay for 2 weeks in January, so she still appears in the personnel budget for 2012." Perhaps our leaker (or at least one of them?) might be a disgruntled employee? Or one of the new ones who's been shocked to find out what they've walked into? -
pbjamm at 11:53 AM on 16 February 2012Book review of Michael Mann's The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars
Going to go see Dr Mann speaking at the Aquarium of the Pacific (Long Beach CA) in just over 2 hours. Still not too late to make it if you are a local! -
Doug Hutcheson at 11:38 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
The Guardian article makes clear the dichotomy between HI's attitude to the CRU email theft and the exposure of its own documents:The exchanges over the provenance of the documents are bound to deepen the comparisons to the 2009 hacking of scientists' email at the University of East Anglia's climate research unit. At the time, Heartland said the theft of those personal emails created "an opportunity for reporters, academics, politicians" to revise their belief in climate change. On Wednesday, however, Heartland said DeSmog and others should be "ashamed" of writing about the documents before the thinktank could comment. [Heartland communications director, Jim] Lakely also asked bloggers and journalists to take down the documents and refrain from quoting them. (Emphasis added)
I am a blogger and I will not stop commenting on the leaked documents, because I believe they have created an opportunity for reporters, academics, politicians to revise their belief in climate change denialism. -
sauerj at 11:34 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Article now posted on www.msnbc.com US environmental page -
GreenCooling at 11:30 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Dennis @94 makes a very good point, there is something fishy with the "2012 Climate Strategy" document. Heartland is claiming it is bogus, and it appears to me they are correct. My guess is that someone has taken a step too far, and prepared an "executive summary" to make the package more digestible, but it's a shame they didn't just do this and sign off as 'anonymous'. Strikes me that nothing in the strategy is unsupported in the other documents, but the deceptiveness in play adds an unfortunate twist. If you have a look at the "properties" or use "tools" - "inspector" on Mac, it is pretty clear it is a scan, all the other docs give the file location and identify the author. And the date of 14 Feb is a bit of a giveaway, given all the others are from the January meeting or before.
-
From Peru at 11:06 AM on 16 February 20122000 Years of Climate Reconstructed from Pollen
Tom Curtis , from where you got that beautiful paleoclimate graph in comment 21?Response: -
skywatcher at 10:47 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Oh the irony. Heartland comes out claiming both theft and forgery! The documents are fake! But even if they were not fake they were stolen! Why am I reminded strongly of ... Global warming isn't happening! ... Even if it is, it's all natural! I think comparisons with how Heartland treated the CRU emails theft would make very interesting reading right now. -
John Russell at 10:29 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
The alleged 'faked' document is full of figures. And it appears that they are correct figures. So do we find it plausible that the faker -- supposedly an outsider -- could make up these figures and get them so accurate? And anyway, the document itself is not that important -- provided the figures are confirmed as accurate. So the Heartland is snookered: the only way it can prove the document is a fake is by showing that the figures it contains are wrong; and they can only show they're wrong by letting an independent auditor verify the real figures. If they don't agree to an audit then everyone knows they're lying. And they can hardly refuse an audit when they were so keen on the UEA enquiry, can they? However one sees it, it looks like they'll go down in flames. -
Albatross at 10:15 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
If Heartland wish to demonstrate that the doscuments are authentic then they can post side-by-side comparisons with their own versions, together with information on the computer that was used to produce the documents, time of creation etc. As for thei claim that the scanned confidential memo is fake...show us all your memos then and associated emails so that we can corroborate that claim. The fact that the content of the alleged "faked" memo is corroborated by the content of the other PDFs makes their claim not very compelling at all. Anthony Watts is throwing a tanturm and suddenly cares about journalistic integrity and ethics etc.. How much did Heartland contribute to or pay Watts for publishing this nonsense? -
Paul D at 10:11 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
CBD@117 "It is almost like they are applying slightly different standards." Slightly different standards? From what I can see, they have posted numerous articles about the climategate emails and not once checked the validity of those articles with the scientists concerned. -
Emilio at 09:29 AM on 16 February 2012Tropical Thermostats and Global Warming
And 31 oC isn´t a paradise. For most ocean species, 31 oC is a hell. -
citizenschallenge at 09:11 AM on 16 February 2012Fritz Vahrenholt - Duped on Climate Change
Interesting discussion re elsa, her comments and the valuable replies she received then how she handled them. I know this get's pretty simple but elsa try out this short video: Global Warming: It's Not About the Hockey Stick ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ However I came here for a different reason. Back to Vahrenholt's interview, answering question #4 his reply includes the following, when explaining why he doesn't trust the IPCC: "...In one case, a Greenpeace activist's absurd claim that 80 percent of the world's energy supply could soon be coming from renewable sources was assumed without scrutiny. This prompted me to examine the IPCC report more carefully." ~ ~ ~ Does anyone know the background to this. . . and the rest of the story? -
johnkg at 09:06 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Curry's waded in with some 'balance' http://judithcurry.com/2012/02/15/heartland/ The damage limitation crew are working overtime... /sarcasm -
Rob Honeycutt at 09:06 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Paul said... "Oh, and of course they threaten legal action against anyone posting the documents." That's a Monckton Maneuver. It would be 1) impossible for them to do such a thing, and 2) it would clearly violate freedom of the press. -
dorlomin at 09:05 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Its called blagging Link text There is likely to be a world of challanges in figuring out if a law was broken as there is a case for a public interest defence. Thats if the Heartless story is true. Most of the info on the claimed faked document is available on others. -
CBDunkerson at 08:43 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
It's odd that Heartland's press release on this reads a tiny bit differently than their take on the CRU hack. It is almost like they are applying slightly different standards. As to the story about someone getting the documents by misrepresenting themselves through e-mail... if true that would mean that someone at Heartland made the (rather egregious) mistake of sending private documents to a random e-mail address claiming to be someone who should receive them. They're now vowing to find and prosecute the 'criminal'... but is this even illegal? If claiming to be someone you are not on the internet is against the law then the prisons of the world are about to get alot more crowded. -
Philippe Chantreau at 08:34 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Fydijkstra, your play on words is of no interest. Everybody knows what is referred to by climate denial, the denomination may not be exactly technically correct, who cares? Get over it. HI does not fund research, they fund a media campaign, in which they aim at keeping dissenting voices out. The stuff revealed by these documents is profundly despicable. I don't see how anyone who is part of the public would not feel threatened by an organized campaign of misinformation undertaken by an organization commnandited by a few industries, with the stated goal of fostering these insutries' interests above all other considerations. As for what H.I. spits out in their defense, I will not trust it one bit. I have no doubt that they will say anything to meet the need of the moment. -
NewYorkJ at 08:30 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
So Heartland denies the authenticity of the Climate Strategy document. Legal experts might want to comment. Is this something that could be confirmed one way or the other? Seems like Heartland could easily permanently delete the document in question from their records, and proving it to be authentic might be virtually impossible. At least with the financial info, it's subject to government audits. A separate strategy document, maybe not. -
CBDunkerson at 08:23 AM on 16 February 2012Fritz Vahrenholt - Duped on Climate Change
elsa wrote: "while I can understand a relationship between two variables might be statistically significant I do not see how you could make the statement that the trend in temperature is so." Then I can only conclude that you do not understand what the words 'statistically significant' mean in standard usage. A general overview on statistical significance in regards to temperature trends can be found here and here. and: "Perhaps you can explain then how you would take step (i) without using (iv). From where would you derive a relationship between eg CO2 and temperature without actually carrying out (iv)?" As others have noted, the relationship between CO2 and temperatures was established over a century ago... and decades before Arhenius first cited the possibility of anthropogenic global warming. You seem almost to be arguing that we cannot formulate any new theories without first going back and re-validating all previous knowledge. Obviously, new theories are based on our understanding of other things and thus in some sense all science could be described as one continuously evolving 'theory of everything', but if we are to separate out individual scientific theories (like AGW) then they must have distinct introductory points (Arhenius 1896 for AGW) as 'step i', founded on the state of science available at that point. also: "sorry about the timing of posts which is to do with the need to log out if one's view of the blog is to be updated." I'm not sure what you mean here... I update the view all the time without logging out. In most cases you should be able to just hit the browser's 'refresh' button. The only exception would be if you are still on the page displayed after you made a post... in which case refreshing might cause a duplicate post. However, you can just click to any other page and then back OR use the browser 'back' button to go back to your view of the page prior to posting. No need to log out, -
Dennis at 08:19 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
However, I think it's fair to say that caution should be exercised against reading too much into the documents while the authenticity is being questioned. Given Heartland's problem with scientific facts in their NIPCC reports, I wouldn't trust Heartland as the final word on what's "authentic" in these documents as well. I think it's time for some good journalists to start calling the Heartland staff and board members and start mining for contradictions in their version of these events. -
Paul from VA at 08:19 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Another thought, IANAL, but is seems to me Heartland wouldn't actually want to take legal action against anyone posting the documents, as that would allow for the real McCoy to be subpoenaed by the defendants.... Also, given that even without the documents, it's been obvious that Heartland's M.O. has been to spread corporate funded misinformation, their own press release should of course be taken with large block of salt. -
scaddenp at 08:18 AM on 16 February 2012Fritz Vahrenholt - Duped on Climate Change
Elsa, your line is that "observations contradict the theory of climate". Eg. "look little warming over past decade while CO2 goes up, ergo climate science is wrong". As has been pointed out this a/ not how to test observation versus model and b/ not what model predicts anyway. Likewise, claiming a cherrypick 1940 to 1970 is ignored, when gosh, it was cooling! is wrong for same reasons. The model has no problem with that cooling. The period chosen has to do with explaining why it is steadily warming over a period when there is no natural factors to explain that except for the short term noise. The denialists just focus on the noise. -
Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
An update: According to a recent press release from the Heartland Institute, they claim that the majority of the documents were emailed to someone claiming to be a board member who had changed emails and needed copies. In addition, they claim that the "2012 Climate Strategy" document is a fake - although the various components (monthly payments to Idso, Singer, Carter, $88K to Watts for a new surfacestations project, Wojick for "Lesson Plan modules") are line items in the (confirmed by HI) budget, and have in addition been supported by statements from Watts and Carter. So: this leak may have been obtained with "social engineering", not a whistleblower. And the exact language of the strategy document (curiously, it appears to be a scan from hardcopy, unlike the computer documents that make up the majority of the leak?) may be suspect, although the finances are in fact confirmed by the Heartland press release. -
Paul from VA at 08:09 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Heartland has now issued a press release on the subject. They claim that the documents may have been altered and that the climate strategy pdf is a complete forgery (although they have yet to indicate what parts of the other documents have been altered). They also indicate that the documents were obtained via a "spear phishing" attack, where someone impersonated a board member, so that would seem to imply a hack rather than a leak. Oh, and of course they threaten legal action against anyone posting the documents. Yay double standards. However, I think it's fair to say that caution should be exercised against reading too much into the documents while the authenticity is being questioned. -
ptbrown31 at 07:58 AM on 16 February 2012Fritz Vahrenholt - Duped on Climate Change
"Oceanic oscillations are just that - oscillations switching between positive and negative states, moving heat around between the oceans and atmosphere. Since both oceans and atmosphere are warming, it must be due to an external forcing, not an internal oscillation." This is incorrect. Changes in ocean circulations can change the distribution of radiatively active clouds and water vapor in the atmosphere and thus can cause an 'internal' radiative forcing (an actual change in total heat, not just a change in the location of heat). see this paper for example: http://www.mendeley.com/research/why-ocean-heat-transport-warms-the-global-mean-climate/ -
Bob Lacatena at 07:57 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Operation Angry Badger in their Fundraising Plan appears to directly violate the IRS laws on election involvement. It may be a judgment-call thing, but I think it's worth a closer look. At a minimum, given the tacit, admitted goal of the plan, the IRS should be investigating actual actions of the HI with respect to Wisconsin elections. -
ScaredAmoeba at 07:56 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
[quote] At present we sponsor the NIPCC to undermine the official United Nation's IPCC reports and paid a team of writers $388,000 in 2011 to work on a series of editions of Climate Change Reconsidered....[end quote] That would be SEPP, and is confirmed by: Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy Furthermore John Mashey has highlighted some interesting problems for Fred Singer at SEPP, like claiming that Fred Seitz worked for two years after his death. Here's hoping that this will soon prove very unpleasant for many of the characters concerned when the IRS start trawling through their books. -
actually thoughtful at 07:54 AM on 16 February 2012Climate mythbusting at Lane Cove, Sydney on Feb 28
I think you have a great intro now that the Heritage Foundation has been exposed.... I am hoping for video, but either way please report on the event. -
funglestrumpet at 07:34 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Considering the extent of support there is for the notion that letting climate change run its course will result in dire consequences for us all, any attempts to hinder action to combat it, regardless of any contrary personal viewpoint, has to be seen not only as dangerously irresponsible, but probably a crime against humanity according to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The leaked documents need to be secured as evidence for any future court proceedings in The Hague. It goes without saying that this body of evidence should also include examples of other deliberate attempts to hinder action on climate change such as those by the likes of such luminaries as Monckton, Lawson, Philips and Hitchens to name just a few of the Brits who should be subject to investigation by the court’s officers. I leave those from other countries to name their own ‘favourite’ miscreants. It is about time that those who are behind the campaign to rubbish the science of climate change were made to face the consequences of their actions. And as for all the hand-wringing about whether it is right or not for us to use the materials this whistle-blower has released, well can you see the denialati worrying about such niceties? We are in a fight for the sake of our descendents and judging by some of the above posts I am sure that I am not alone in saying that when it comes to ‘me and mine’ I will fight dirty, really dirty, if that is what it takes. The Americans have a lovely expression: “Show me a good loser and I will show you a loser.” If I end up on the losing side of this fight, no one is going to be able to describe me as a ‘good’ loser. -
actually thoughtful at 07:02 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Yahoo/live Science has a piece up that focuses on the false dichotomy. For example they talk about the curriculum, but fail to mention the goal is to distract from talking about science. They are trying to soft pedal it. -
scaddenp at 06:56 AM on 16 February 2012Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas
Emilio - I would assume this is Paltridge's long-debunked inference from the NCEP reanalysis. In the paper itself it was noted: "It is of course possible that the observed humidity trends from the NCEP data are simply the result of problems with the instrumentation and operation of the global radiosonde network from which the data are derived." though I doubt climate4you would be pointing that out. Since the NCEP reanalysis had known flaws and was in disagreement with practically every other measurement, this was a drawing a long bow, but then in denial-land, nothing like that gets replaced. It is contradicted by later reanalysis products. I think you can find better graph in AR4. -
actually thoughtful at 06:10 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Heartland 2012 Climate Strategies: "Expanded climate communications Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in-house experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences, and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts)." Wow. Of particular note is "mobilizing responses to new scientific findings". This is amazing information. (Amazing that it is exactly what one thinks must be going on, but can't in good conscience conceive of actually going on). -
Phila at 06:04 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
AT, I am giving up. In order to find common ground you have to want to have a discussion rather than stick to lecture mode. Disagreeing with you on certain important points does not constitute an unwillingness to have a discussion. Furthermore, statements like "valid points of view exist that are not your own" provide as good an example of the "lecture mode" as anything I've said here, if not better. Whether they also represent a greater avoidance of actual debate, I'll leave it for other readers to decide. So yes, by all means, let's give up...if not for our own sake, then for everyone else's. -
actually thoughtful at 06:02 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
I just got through to desmogblog -slow, but still there. -
Rob Honeycutt at 06:01 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Phila... Well, you can say one thing about Idso. He's very effective at negotiating his compensation. Can't say the same for Bob Carter. -
andylee at 06:00 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Sapient@93, yes, I was surprised too at the Register's positive stance, perhaps they are coming out from the cold? (I noticed you used my 1GW/45000 years observation, for which I gave you +1 :-)) -
Emilio at 05:59 AM on 16 February 2012Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas
If the temperature increases, the amount of water vapor should also increase (Clausius-Clapeyron law). Some graphs, however, seem to show that the humidity is decreasing http://www.climate4you.com/GreenhouseGasses.htm Could someone explain. Thanks in advance. -
Phila at 05:57 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Philippe, considering the quality (cough!) and the influence of Idso's miserable pile of nonsense, 6 figures is way overpaid. That's what really gets to me about this stuff. It's such a waste! If these people invested in, say, cleantech, they could earn valuable patents and popular and political goodwill, and provide a dramatic demonstration of the free-market principles they claim to cherish. People would probably be a lot less likely to begrudge them tax breaks, at that point. Or protest them. But jeez...giving all that money to Idso? As you say, he's not even any good at what he does. Seems to me they'd earn a better return on his annual income by taking it to Vegas and pumping it into the slots. -
actually thoughtful at 05:55 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Phila: "So in the interest of finding common ground, I'll just point out that the view you define here as "self-serving malarkey" seems to be the very same view you espoused upthread when you agreed that the leak is potentially good for humanity." You have an interesting way of finding common ground. I am giving up. In order to find common ground you have to want to have a discussion rather than stick to lecture mode. Valid points of view exist that are not your own. I hope folks made copies of those documents. I haven't been able to get to www.desmogblog for the last hour or so. AS others have noted, hopefully that means this is "going viral". -
Alexandre at 05:50 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Desmogblog still down, now with this message: "Desmog Blog is currently running scheduled maintenance. We should be back shortly. Thank you for your patience." A scheduled maintenance today seems a very unlikely coincidence, if you ask me. -
JohnMashey at 05:49 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
People might save themselves some time if they read the first 21 pages of Fake science, fakexperts, funny finances, free of tax. 1) The documents sure look real, they mesh perfectly with what I'd seen in 5 months' detailed study and much of that is documented in the massive appendices. The only one that even has the slightest possibility of fakery is the strategy doc, but it is certainly quite consistent also. The K-12 project seems an outgrowth of the education efforts documented in Fakery. 2) I have alleged that Heartland has been seriously breaking IRS tax law, specifically various provisions of 501(c)(3) public charity rules. Free speech lets people lie, but if you do it too much as a charity, you can have that status revoked, have to pay back taxes. Ignore the climate side: all their efforts on behalf of tobacco violate 501(c)(3). 3) Likewise, the US IRS frowns on a charity sending money abroad to non-charities ... and Heartland did that, certainly to CA and NZ, and almost certainly to Oz. -
Trent1492 at 05:47 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
Anyone want to bet that we are shortly going to see a another batch of hacked e-mails from Hadley CRU released as a distraction? -
Phila at 05:44 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
AT< I certainly don't need you lecturing me on ethics. Emotional conjugation at its finest: I raise legitimate issues, she counsels, you lecture. Being as you're recommending self-awareness, perhaps you should consider the possibility that your initial post itself constituted a "lecture on ethics." I'm honestly not trying to be snarky or nasty here; I think this is a reasonable request. Sadly, that will sound very familiar, as that is the self-serving malarkey offered by the deniers to cover stealing documents and cherry picking the contents. I can see how it might sound familiar...provided you obdurately persist in ignoring the fact that one was a lie, and one wasn't. That the evidence supported one position, and not the other. And that virtually no one involved in slandering these scientists has ever issued a correction or an apology, even after they'd been exonerated by multiple inquiries. But yeah, other than that minor detail of totally unrepentant cherrypicking and misrepresentation and slander in service of an incoherent conspiracy theory for which no actual evidence has ever existed anywhere...it's pretty much the exact same thing. We seem to be on the same side, ultimately, and I wouldn't want to turn this thread into an argument with you even in the unlikely event that the moderators would allow it. So in the interest of finding common ground, I'll just point out that the view you define here as "self-serving malarkey" seems to be the very same view you espoused upthread when you agreed that the leak is potentially good for humanity. This suggests to me that you can, in fact, distinguish between leaking a Heartland document and stealing CRU's emails....even before the issue of representing the contents fairly arises. As for whether this actually was "done for the good of mankind," I don't think we know that yet. The leaker could simply have been angry at someone, for all I know. Regardless, as you note, it has the potential to "make a huge advance in the public's understanding of what is happening." And as you also note, that seems likely to be good for humanity. So it seems like we agree on the important points. A small acknowledgement that yes, the whistle blown documents were taken against the will of the document owner I think the word "leaked" provides precisely that acknowledgment. Even if it doesn't, have you seen any articles so far that don't acknowledge that these docs were released against the owner's will? 'Cause I haven't. I appreciate your acknowledgement that there is a moral issue worth discussing. Weirdly enough, I kind of thought I made that belief clear with my original comment. -
tonydunc at 05:42 AM on 16 February 2012Fritz Vahrenholt - Duped on Climate Change
Must say I love reading Elsa's posts. She is quite adept at getting attention and finding some point that she can use as a goad to create responses that she can then use to find another point in order to continue the game. Of course I never see her accepting that anything she thinks could be wrong or admitting that someone has adequately address her objection. I am impressed with the patience of those who engage with her. So I have a question for Elsa. Have you tried pitting your rhetorical skills against the leading theories of climate that do not have CO2 being the main forcing of climate through the increase of anthropogenic CO2? What about the accuracy of their models and predictions based on actual data. How well do their theories explain the paleodata- ice ages, LIA, MWP, and all the various other verifiable changes in climate and global/regional temp. It has been over 30 years since AGW has been mostly accepted as a concern by scientists. And 20 years since there was strong political pressure to deny AGW. Certainly Lindzen, Spencer, Christie, and others have a robust theory with predictions that can be forecast and hindcast and compared to AGW theory. And you can put your same questions to them, and then compare. Please advise of your conclusions regarding the alternate theory and where it is consistent and adequately accounts for all the actual data in every discipline that has data on climate. It shouldn't take very long. -
andylee at 05:39 AM on 16 February 2012Denialgate - Internal Heartland Documents Expose Climate Denial Funding Network
I'm sure the site will be struggling to deal with the world's attention focussing on it right now. (AKA 'Slashdotted') They could have anticipated a 1000x increase in traffic and arranged for mirrors or extra servers to cope, but it is also conceivable that the Denialati have mobilised a DDOS too. Standard practice would be to release the docs as a torrent, making it extremely difficult to suppress. News is spreading quickly as various organizations are picking it up.
Prev 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 Next
