The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

In Apologizing for Global Warming Hoax, Peter Gleick Blames His Victims

Posted on | February 21, 2012 | 35 Comments

The Heartland Institute was vicitimized by global warming fanatics who published stolen documents and at least one forged document in their attempts to portray the Institute as dishonest.

One of the central figures in this criminal hoax was Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute, who uses the Huffington Post to offer an excuse:

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.

“It’s not my fault!” The end justify the means: The alleged evil of their opponents excuses any shoddy smear Gleick and his allies may perpetrate against them. And despite their admitted amorality, they wonder why we doubt their claims to “science”?

Permit a brief digression: For the past few weeks, my bedtime reading has been Robert Service’s Trotsky: A Biography. One of the last major works that Trotsky published was Their Morality and Ours: The Moralists and Sycophants Against Marxism. This was the exiled Bolshevik’s defense of revolutionary ruthlessness, in which he declared that the proletariat “must be completely free from the fictions of religion, ‘democracy’ and transcendental morality — the spiritual chains forged by the enemy.”

Think about that for a moment, and then remember that within two years of publishing that booklet, Trotsky got an ice-ax in the skull from KGB assassin Ramon Mercader, an agent of Stalin who was, needless to say, “completely free from the fictions of religion,” etc.

Once you begin to believe that the success of the Cause justifies deceit and theft, how long until you begin making excuses for other crimes committed on behalf of the Cause? I do not accuse Peter Gleick and his fellow fanatics of any Stalinist ambitions, but when we see them engaged in Stalinist methods — publishing forged documents to smear their critics – aren’t we justified in suspecting that they are not otherwise honest?

UPDATE: Linked by Da Tech Guy, Moose and Squirrel, Transterrestrial MusingsThe Conservatory and Pirate’s Covethanks! — and welcome, Instapundit readers!

UPDATE II: Now a Memeorandum thread.

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://twitter.com/dustbury Charles G Hill

    Oh, go ahead and accuse them of Stalinist ambitions.  It won’t take them long to prove you correct.

  • paulzummo

    It’s like that scene in Forrest Gump where Jenny’s boyfriend smacks her around.  “It’s just Johnson and this damned war!”

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Charles is quite right.  If they could get away with the Stalinist actions, they would.  The Left has rejected morality, tradition, and Right Reason.  God is dead to them, therefore, they are unbound and believe they possess free license – just like Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Hitler.

  • http://thecampofthesaints.org Bob Belvedere

    Never underestimate the banality of Evil.

  • http://twitter.com/richard_mcenroe richard mcenroe

    I take it Snuffleupagus is still hors de combat

    Back in the day, the NYT published, approvingly, an interview with a thug who claimed victims who tried to defend themselves only provoked his violence against them.  That’s right, it’s your fault if the guy already attacking you beats you up worse for trying to protect yourself…

  • Finrod Felagund

    Typical liberal claptrap, accuse your enemies of what your side has been doing all along, and claim that it makes everything you’re doing OK.
     

  • Pingback: Warmist Peter Gleick Admits To Being Part Of Heartland Document Leak » Pirate's Cove

  • Pingback: Datechguy's Blog » Blog Archive » A “climate story” that won’t get “promoted” » Datechguy's Blog

  • Pingback: Fallout from the Theft of Heartland Institute Climate Documents

  • http://www.thepiratescove.us/ William_Teach

     And don’t forget rejecting science. They’ve turned science into a pseudo-religion.

  • Quartermaster

    “…aren’t we justified in suspecting that they are not otherwise honest?”

    Yes, a conservative is. But to a loony Lib, his heart is in the right place and we are just anti-science. I agree that we are anti their kind of science, which isn’t science at all.

  • Pingback: Global Warming Fanatic Blames Victims for His Abuse | Across the Fence with Mark Meckler

  • Pingback: Transterrestrial Musings - The Climate Fraud

  • Pingback: More on #Fakegate / #Gleickgate: Meet Peter “Mr Integrity” Gleick who used fake identity to obtain documents — mooseandsquirrel.ca

  • BLBeamer

    I read on Megan McArdle’s blog that this Gleick character was recently named the Chair of the Ethics committee for the AGU.

    If this is true, how delicious to flood the AGU with emails asking them to explain that.

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

    Stalin also pioneered The Big Lie, which so impressed Goebbels on an early visit that he adapted it for the Nazi propaganda machine.  When this thief talks about “lack of transparency,” he is practicing it.

    In fact, as the emails released over the last year or so prove, it is the warmists who have conspired to misrepresent research, rig reports, and fake graphics to maintain their myth.

    And once again, the question raised by those disclosures are seconded by this event:  if science were on your side, why do you have to fake all this?  Wouldn’t the truth be your ally?

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/EU5DQWQTTHTPO4A4ZYSL3AAV2U Adjoran

     It more or less explains itself, doesn’t it?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002979387798 Sam Spot

     “accuse your enemies of what your side has been doing all along”

    There is no more consistent theme these days.  Over and over and over I see these jackasses level an emotional accusation that neatly summarizes what they felt justified in doing to others.  I used to think these people were mental and merely projecting. Now I realize it’s a clever defense tactic.

  • robertstacymccain

    I’m still alive, Richard. The sniffles haven’t gotten worse and, after a good night’s sleep, I’m feeling somewhat better.

  • robertstacymccain

    this Gleick character was recently named the Chair of the Ethics committee for the AGU

    Typical. I’m always profoundly suspicious of people who make a big deal about “ethics.” How about just obeying the law and not “bearing false witness”? Isn’t that enough?

  • sjimike

    Wow. Once again I’m attracted to a headline on this site that seems to contradict or somehow distort a story that I’m familiar with, so I guess I should have expected what I got.  Shame on Memeorandum for including this site. 

    Mr. Gleick did not apologize for a nonexistent hoax, rather he was clearly apologizing for his lapse in judgment for acquiring information under false pretenses (he lied about who he was to get data from Heartland). 

    Nor did Mr. Gleick say “It’s not my fault” as Stacy quoted. Do you people understand what quotations imply? I realize this is a fact impaired crowd, but come on, people.

    I can understand how these distinctions might confuse this crowd and it’s selective morality. I don’t recall seeing anyone apologize for stealing all of that email from the UK last year. Which, by the way, after careful review (not just one email or one turn of phrase) only strengthened the scientists claims and reputation. 

    I think it is bold statement about Mr. Gleick’s moral compass that he has decided to come clean on this and take his due criticism so that he can move on. Which would have been more to your liking, that he did or did not admit his transgression? 

    Ironically, the only thing that would have made this group happy is ignorance: If he hadn’t admitted his failure then you would not have had anything to froth about.

    And maintaining ignorance is what this site is all about. Enjoy!

  • Pingback: Daily scoreboard « Don Surber

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Noah-Zark/719165126 Noah Zark

    “Mr. Gleick did not apologize for a nonexistent hoax,
    rather he was clearly apologizing for his lapse in judgment for
    acquiring information under false pretenses (he lied about who he was to
    get data from Heartland). ”

    >>>given that the forged doc has a West Coast timestamp, where Mr. Gleick lices, lets wait for the other shoe to drop, OK?

    “Nor did Mr. Gleick say “It’s not my
    fault” as Stacy quoted. Do you people understand what quotations imply? I
    realize this is a fact impaired crowd, but come on, people.”

    >>>Heh.  Another construction of Gleick’s hand-waving, explaining-away orgy of exculpation is, “The devils made me do it.”

    “I
    can understand how these distinctions might confuse this crowd and it’s
    selective morality.”

    >>you snot-flinging is duly noted.

     I don’t recall seeing anyone apologize for stealing
    all of that email from the UK last year.”

    >>>I don’t recall anyone owing up to stealing all that email.  Do you?

    “Which, by the way, after
    careful review (not just one email or one turn of phrase) only
    strengthened the scientists claims and reputation. ”

    >>>Yes, of course.  All those admissions about deleting docs to thwart FOIA requests, all that contemptible stuff about trying to get people fired, yeah, that “strengthened… claims and reputations….”

    BWAAAAhahahahahahhaaaaa!

    And, of course, policies against AGW have taken hold and grown stronger over the past three years — oh wait!  They haven’t!!!   No cap-and-trade, no Kyoto successor, no carbon market, bankruptcies of the solar and wind companies, end of subsidies for same….   Yep!   Strengthened claims and reputations!!!

    “I think it is
    bold statement about Mr. Gleick’s moral compass that he has decided to
    come clean on this and take his due criticism so that he can move on.

    >>>Bold statement according to a moral cretin such as yourself, maybe, paraphrased as :  “My judgment sucked.  I couldn’t help myself”. 

    “Which would have been more to your liking, that he did or did not admit
    his transgression? ”

    >>>How about, “we would have liked it more if Gleick had not “transgressed” in the first place.

    “Ironically, the only thing that would have
    made this group happy is ignorance: If he hadn’t admitted his failure
    then you would not have had anything to froth about.”

    >>Heh.  Seems you gullible warmists are the ones doing the frothing.  It’s easy to see why — you can’t quite yet admit that you were conned.

  • Jose Garcia

    On what basis do you call the leaked document a forgery? It may have been obtained under false pretenses but it’s legitamate.

    Did you decry the “climategate” emails because they were obtained by a hacker. 

  • Jose Garcia

     And unlike the climategate emails these leaked documents do contain a smoking gun.

  • Flicka47

    “Which would have been more to your liking, that he did or did not admit his transgression?”

    Ha-ha-ha! Heartland ALREADY had his IP address. We’ll wait and see what a judge has to say about his theft….

  • Neo

    “well-funded”
    Let’s declare that meme dead.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UNZU74NIXQBSAAC5PR2B36VMWM Edward

     Well whatever you do don’t try to buy some Sudafed.  Last I’ve heard they do a full body cavity search before you can even present a prescription!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UNZU74NIXQBSAAC5PR2B36VMWM Edward

    Smoking?  Yes.  Gun?  Not so much.

    But back to that “smoking” thing.  What’s in that glass pipe you’ve been puffing on?

    You know how damaging this is to the Global Warming crowd? This much. The lefty trogs have flooded conservative blogs and are doing a full-court press hoping to derail the criticism.

    Good luck with that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Noah-Zark/719165126 Noah Zark

     You’re confused and ill-informed, Jose:  it’s now clear who falsely asked for the docs (Gleick).  But it’s not clear who falsified the key document that purported to show HI’s strategy to thwart the teaching of science in high schools.

    HI says that’s a forgery, and there’s extrinsic/intrinsic evidence to support their claim.  (The timestamp on the key doc shows it was generated on the Pacific coast — where Gleick lives, but HI has no offices.  The memo reflects a lack of understanding of how boards of directors are addressed, and at what level of strategy).

    Other than believing hearsay (that the memo was generated by HI AND what it says is actually their strategy), what else you got?   Where’s YOUR extrinsic evidence?

    Nor is it clear that the Climategate emails were “hacked”.  If so, nobody’s come forward to take the credit.   They could have been leaked by an insider — just as DeSmog and others (falsely) claimed was the case with the HI docs.

  • teapartydoc

    Someone needs to ask Dan Rather about his opinion on this.

  • Frenchlaw

    It’s so funny that you have to inject the precautionary: “I do not accuse Peter Gleick and his fellow fanatics of any Stalinist ambitions”.  Because, of course, if you had not, you would certainly be accused of it….

  • Quartermaster

    You clearly are not familiar with the ethics issues among professional organizations. Simply being a moral, upstanding man is never sufficient under those paens to moral waffling. I’ve seen this type of trash among Engineers and Surveyors.

  • Quartermaster

    Heartland is going after thim too. Gleick’s “apology” does not deal with teh actual problems like slander and theft.

  • Pingback: FMJRA 2.0: I Got Them Old Flu Shot Blues Again, Mama : The Other McCain