A Gleickgate “teleconnection” or coincidence?
February 25, 2012 6 Comments
He certainly succeeded in generating enough blog and MSM coverage that at the AAAS Annual Meeting held in Vancouver – which just happened to end Feb. 20 – the AAAS president was sufficiently “alarmed” to echo and amplify Gleick’s “concerns”.
[Excerpt from the Guardian]
Was AAAS president Federoff one of [Gleick's] 15 “fences” – or perhaps one of the 15 had “teleconnections” to Federoff?!
In January of this year, Jeff Condon at The Air Vent had made a valiant attempt to warn the National Center for Science Education (NSCE) that appointing Gleick to their board was not a wise move – and that they would come to regret this decision.
NSCE had decided to expand its mandate and jump into the climate wars, in order to combat the forces of darkness etc. in the schools of the nation.
Included in his Feb. 23 post, is a press release from NSCE in which one finds inter alia:
The scientific community is applauding NCSE’s new initiative. Said Alan I. Leshner, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
“Teleconnection” or coincidence?! You be the judge!
No, I am not suggesting that either Leshner or Federoff was one of the 15 “fences”. However, YMMV, but I do consider the AAAS “amplification” of the new, improved warm-side mantra to be somewhat, well, alarming!
In the meantime … while I have seen no sign that Revkin, Goldenberg, Hickman or Black have apologized for their role in promulgating the contents of Gleick’s forgery, the Chicago Tribune has an editorial worth reading:
Skulduggery undermines the case for global warming
Earlier this month, the Internet lit up with a tantalizing whodunit. Someone had leaked to bloggers confidential internal fundraising and strategic documents from the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based think-tank that questions global warming orthodoxy.
The apparent goal: to discredit and embarrass those who raise doubts about the science behind climate change.
Heartland officials cried foul, asserting that at least one of the documents was forged. They vowed to track down the leaker and pursue charges.
This week, Peter Gleick saved them the trouble of a search. He confessed that he had assumed a false identity to obtain some of the documents and then leaked them. That sounded plausible: Heartland had said last week that someone got the documents by calling its Chicago headquarters and posing as a Heartland board member seeking information, the Tribune reported.
[Climategate], too, was an embarrassment to serious scientists who warn about the dangers of climate change. RIP, any chance for global climate action.
Now this fresh climate madness, with Mr. Ethics stalking his Chicago-based foes from afar.
Gleick may have thought he could undercut Heartland and thereby advance the case for global warming. Instead, he fueled doubts about which side is right in this long-running debate.
That’s a shame. Science relies on multiple layers of honesty. They include the honorably conducted gathering and analysis of facts, a perpetual quest for irrefutable evidence supporting conclusions — and trust that everyone is acting with integrity.
When scientific truth becomes sufficiently compelling, it matters little what the critics or skeptics say. It doesn’t matter if everyone doesn’t believe. Doubters cannot make the Earth flat.
But stunts such as Gleick’s — this effort to sully opponents with dishonest tactics — undercuts scientists around the world as they marshal evidence to convince an increasingly skeptical public about the dangers of global warming.