Verrassende wending in Heartland soap

Ik heb de laatste dagen regelmatig aandacht geschonken aan 'onhullingen' over de financiering van enkele klimaatsceptici door het Heartland Instituut, recentelijk nog hier. Deze waren gebaseerd op documenten die een onbekende onder valse voorwendselen aan een nietsvermoedende secretariaatsmedewerker van Heartland had ontfutseld. Dat is dus geen lek van een 'Heartland insider', zoals veelal wordt beweerd, maar diefstal. Deze onbekende heeft zich nu gemeld. Het bleek Peter Gleick te zijn, een prominent, radicaal klimaatalarmist. Hij blijkt geobsedeerd door de vermeende antropogene opwarming van de aarde en gefrustreerd door het gebrek aan voortgang van het klimaatbeleid. Tegen deze achtergrond heeft hij besloten zijn ethische principes even opzij te zetten (opvallend, omdat hij deskundig schijnt te zijn op het gebied van wetenschappelijke ethiek) omdat hij om wat in zijn ogen onbehoorlijke praktijken waren, te exponeren.

Hij heeft dit allemaal op zijn blog bekend en daarover zijn spijt betuigd.

Zie hier.

Peter Gleick:

At the beginning of 2012, I received an anonymous document in the mail describing what appeared to be details of the Heartland Institute's climate program strategy. It contained information about their funders and the Institute's apparent efforts to muddy public understanding about climate science and policy. I do not know the source of that original document but assumed it was sent to me because of my past exchanges with Heartland and because I was named in it. Given the potential impact however, I attempted to confirm the accuracy of the information in this document. In an effort to do so, and in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name.

The materials the Heartland Institute sent to me confirmed many of the facts in the original document, including especially their 2012 fundraising strategy and budget. I forwarded, anonymously, the documents I had received to a set of journalists and experts working on climate issues. I can explicitly confirm, as can the Heartland Institute, that the documents they emailed to me are identical to the documents that have been made public. I made no changes or alterations of any kind to any of the Heartland Institute documents or to the original anonymous communication.

I will not comment on the substance or implications of the materials; others have and are doing so. I only note that the scientific understanding of the reality and risks of climate change is strong, compelling, and increasingly disturbing, and a rational public debate is desperately needed. My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts -- often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated -- to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.

Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected.

Peter Gleick

Het eerste document dat hij – naar zijn zeggen - van een onbekende ontving, was een vervalsing. Maar wie heeft die vervalsing dan vervaardigd?

Heartland is niet tevreden met deze bekentenis van Gleick. Het vermoedt dat die onvolledig is. Dit was de reactie van Jospeh Bast, president van Heartland:

FEBRUARY 20, 2012: Earlier this evening, Peter Gleick, a prominent figure in the global warming movement, confessed to stealing electronic documents from The Heartland Institute in an attempt to discredit and embarrass a group that disagrees with his views. Gleick’s crime was a serious one. The documents he admits stealing contained personal information about Heartland staff members, donors, and allies, the release of which has violated their privacy and endangered their personal safety.

An additional document Gleick represented as coming from The Heartland Institute, a forged memo purporting to set out our strategies on global warming, has been extensively cited by newspapers and in news releases and articles posted on Web sites and blogs around the world. It has caused major and permanent damage to the reputations of The Heartland Institute and many of the scientists, policy experts, and organizations we work with. A mere apology is not enough to undo the damage.

In his statement, Gleick claims he committed this crime because he believed The Heartland Institute was preventing a “rational debate” from taking place over global warming. This is unbelievable. Heartland has repeatedly asked for real debate on this important topic. Gleick himself was specifically invited to attend a Heartland event to debate global warming just days before he stole the documents. He turned down the invitation.

Gleick also claims he did not write the forged memo, but only stole the documents to confirm the content of the memo he received from an anonymous source. This too is unbelievable. Many independent commentators already have concluded the memo was most likely written by Gleick.

We hope Gleick will make a more complete confession in the next few days. We are consulting with legal counsel to determine our next steps and plan to release a more complete statement about the situation tomorrow. In the meantime, we ask again that publishers, bloggers, and Web site hosts take the stolen and fraudulent documents off their sites, remove defamatory commentary based on them, and issue retractions.

Bron hier.

Lees verder hier.

Al met al lijkt het mij eerder een zaak voor de psychiater dan voor de rechter. Maar aangezien er in het kamp van de klimaatalarmisten velen zoals Gleick rondlopen, die vanuit hun moreel superioriteitsgevoel en vermeende gelijk manipulatie legitiem achten en zich daaraan regelmatig schuldig maken, is het misschien meer iets voor de sociale psychologie dan individuele psychologie. Met Diederik Stapel c.s. heeft Nederland op dat gebied best wat te bieden, al was het alleen maar inlevingsvermogen.

Voor mijn eerdere DDS-bijdragen, zie nieuwe link