I recall reports about how Pielke Jr, (lately discussed here) reached out to Peter Glieck offering to sponsor Glieck's rebutal to lukewarmer Steve Mosher's accusations of forgery. Google is my friend...http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/02/peter-gleick-confesses-to-obtaining-heartland-documents-under-false-pretenses/253395/"I (Pielke) emailed @PeterGleick to ask if he faked the Heartland document, no reply yet. I offered to publish his confirmation or denial on my blog." Gleick didn't respond to Pielke but did deny FORGERY. (Although not other misbehavior...) Quote from the journalist discussing events at that time: "When skeptics complain that global warming activists are apparently willing to go to any lengths--including lying--to advance their worldview, I'd say one of the movement's top priorities should be not proving them right.... After you have convinced people that you fervently believe your cause to be more important than telling the truth, you've lost the power to convince them of anything else. "But that's not the current point. The point is that in the recent discussion about Mann, Trenbeth, and Pielke, only Trenbeth has followed Gleick's example and released documents in evidence of claims. (Those, in my opinion, being weak tea. "I will pursue this further" could mean anything from "I shall taunt you a second time" to "Cry Havoc, and let slip the dogs of war." We are invited either to join the offended parties in assuming that "further" can't possibly mean anything other than "sse you in court" -- OR, we assume that Pielke insulted Mann by saying something like "I'll keep coming, and a litigious bastard like you knows exactly how easy it would be for me to make your life a living hell." Now, you and I are no doubt in complete agreement that a jerk like Pelke did in fact express his thoughts to the saintly Michael Mann in terms very similar to those I have hypothesized. But Mann has not released the documents to prove it. He could have. He has chosen not to. This is in keeping with the legal precedents he has helped establish in this case:http://blog.ucsusa.org/recap-virginia-supreme-court-hearing-on-foia-scientific-research-and-michael-mann-369http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2014/03/26/17-news-companies-support-foia-lawsuit-against-michael-mannand others. ANYHOW, I wish more people would release evidence of their claims, and supporting documents of their models. With their names and reputations attached, as Gleick, eventually, did with his doc dump.
Post a Comment