What a mess....
just lol, wow.
Also, if what he saying is true, someone with inside information at HI wrote that strategy document.
He had all the time in the world. He should've waited for a while... I hope what he says is true regarding the insider at HI!
Oh, give me a break, David. Remember how recently you over=reacted completely to "Climategate" II? This is more of the same. A little isolated up there in that small town, are we?If something was going to damage the cause of environmentalism significantly, it would be the Sierra Club taking the $26M for its Beyond Coal campaign from a natural gas company. But not so much, it seems.Try to have a little perspective.
So let's see, NYT drops the story onto A16. Don't know about the location on the page, but that's plenty obscure. Good.
Peter Gleick admits to illicitedly obtaining the Heartland documents.... and sets environmental activism back 10 years (at least).No, the climate is doing that all by itself. But it sure helps when alarmists blame every shadow on climate change.
he climate is doing that all by itself*chuckle*. Warming means the environmentalists are in big trubah. Sure. But I'm with Steve Bloom here: David, you are teetering off the rails here, allowing Heartland and the spam bots to control the message. You are helping the spam bots, BTW. Put on a raincoat and go for a nice walk. Best,D
"A16" in the NY Times is not an obscure page - it is the first section of the newspaper, page 16, following the leading stories of the day. And why is when anyone dares to suggest that someone involved in environmental science or activism may have acted improperly there's a cascade of people implying that any such suggestion is either malign or the product of mental illness or stress. "Put on a raincoat and go for a walk" - you patronising little person. The author of the page is entitled to give his opinion on this crime.
Post a Comment