Heartland: AGW-tilhenger skjemmes over svindelen

[Amatør1]

En litt annerledes vri på forsøket på å sverte Heartland-tenketanken ved å forfalske et dokument og late som om det var et hemmelig strategi-dokument: Nå protesterer selv AGW-ere mot dette, og dét må anses som en positiv nyhet!

Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics.

Leaked Docs From Heartland Institute Cause a Stir—but Is One a Fake?
Feb 16 2012, 12:03 PM

"Predictably, climate blogs are having a field day.  Much of the attention has centered around an explosive document titled "2012 Heartland Climate Strategy", which contains stuff like their plans for "dissuading [K-12 teachers] from teaching science".

Heartland has confirmed the provenance of most of the documents, in a blustery press release which I think they're going to end up regretting heartily:

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.

[/i]

But in that press release, they unequivocally deny that the "Climate Strategy" memo came from them, or anyone in their employ.  And after reading through the documents, I'm inclined to believe them. 

I should also probably note that I disagree pretty strenuously with Heartland's position on global warming.  I not only believe that anthropogenic global warming is happening, but also support stiff carbon or source fuels taxes in order to combat it.  While I've expressed some dismay at the behavior revealed in the leaked Climategate memos, they haven't changed my mind about the reality, or the danger, of global warming.  I'm not defending Heartland's stance on climate science; I'm mostly interested in this because I have a longstanding fascination with fake quotes and documents.

[...]

The commenters who attack me on my global warming views do not see us as equals doing battle on the plains of Mordor.  They think of me as having been captured by a dubious consensus that is manufactured and maintained by social pressure, the general human tendency to alarmism about complex threats, and the self-interest of a few scientists--and in truth, they can point to some instances, like the longstanding belief that humans had 48 chromosomes, which were maintained against all evidence by a very powerful social dynamic.  Obviously, I disagree with their analysis, but I do understand their reasoning process--and that they have a reasoning process.  I don't feel like the writer of this memo understands either. It's more like they sat down at the computer and said, "What would I write IF I WERE AS CRAZY AS AGW SKEPTICS?"

[...]

Need I point out that this seems almost expressly designed as a counterweight to the ClimateGate emails which talked about keeping opposition voices out of journals and the IPCC report?



Velformulert og grundig analyse fra "den andre siden". Sjelden kost.