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.Gleick then scanned it on 2/13 (according to its metadata). So the mystery of the faker remains....
Monday, February 20, 2012
To Clarify: Gleick Wasn't the Faker, But the Scanner
Just to clarify, I checked with the Pacific Institute, and they say Peter Gleick did not create the document the Heartland Institute says is fake -- that it was the document mailed to him that he mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of his HuffPost piece.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Let's try that last sentence again:
"So the mystery of why anyone thinks the document was faked remains..."
There, better now.
"So the mystery of why anyone thinks the document was faked remains..."
It's called "textual analysis"... try it sometime.
Gleick likely wrote that memo himself after receiving the other documents.
Since the only evidence for a fake was the metadata, this would seem to make it more likely that the meo was genuine.
We have zero proof that someone else wrote the fake document but a very strong circumstantial basis for believing that Gleick himself wrote it after illegally obtaining real Heartland docs. You'll want to stay truly skeptical on this, Dave, until the hivemind at Climate Audit (and especially Steve Mosher)gets through parsing this.
You must be seriously deluded if you still believe that Gleick wasn't the faker.
How would the PI know whether he faked the document or not?
It was analysis of the fake document that led Steve Mosher to suspect Gleick in the first place!
It's also clear that whoever wrote the fake document did so using the genuine ones, adding his own spin.
What are the odds that, of all the documents, the one document that Heartland immediately identified as fake just happened to be the only document that Gleick admits he did not receive from Heartland?
Gleick is most likely lying, just like he admits to doing in order to get the genuine documents. But even by his improbable account, he has no evidence that the document was produced by Heartland.
"To Clarify": There are two different anonymi above posting 5 mins apart. I'm anonymous1.
More alert and less blinkered bloggers than David Appell have pointed out the many flaws in Gleick's story. For example, in his email to the 15 he doesn't distinugish between the 1 document he claims he got from anon and the others he claims he got from HI.
If he genuinely got the first document in the mail in early Jan, he could produce it. See comments from Mosher and others at CA.
Since Mosher's writing analysis was nonsense, we can probably assume that Gleick's original contacts with HI in obtaining the documents left enough clues that HI, with Mosher's help, were able to trace him that way. SM knows computers.
Here comes Mangan/Morano and his spam bots to the rescue, saving the world from the warmistas! Yay spam bots! Yay dissembling!
Best,
D
In my opinion, I think Gleick created the fake document and then got scared when he realized that he might be into deep doodoo as people on WUWT were already speculating that the doc probably came from him.
Rather than wait for the fit to hit the shan, I think he decided to come forward and admit it was him. I also don't believe him when he says that he did not create that fake document.
Reminds me of Dan Rather and CBS news...
it's clear to anyone with half a brain cell that Gleick wrote that memo. Bigcitylib is just trying to spin this because his shitty little blog defames Heartland, and he pooped his pants.
Post a Comment