HeartlandGate?

In a previous thread, we were discussing the claims of desmoblog.com, which presented leaked e-mails and documents supposedly originating from the US Heartland Institute. That thread has now been closed for further commenting (refer to "addition" in http://klimazwiebel.blogspot.com/2012/02/climate-gate-of-skeptical-site.html).

Reports indicate misconduct by an activist climate scientist (see below). We consider this case a very exciting demonstration of the situation the issue and science of climate finds itself in, and invite readers for discussion, also how this case compares with ClimateGate.

Climate-Gate of a Skeptical Site?

The blog desmoblog.com reports under the headline

Heartland Institute Exposed: Internal Documents Unmask Heart of Climate Denial Machine

about internal processes within the Heartland Institute (such as funding by whom and of whom). For details see http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/2012 Climate Strategy.pdf.

If true, the details of the report are highly relevant and point towards a larger, coordinated activity on the side of many visible US skeptics. The blog does not refer to a source, as in case of the Climate-gate affair with the CRU mails - are the claims trustworthy?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Addition 21 February 2012

The Heartland Institute has declared that material presented by desmoblog.com is false. Reports from other sources, such as http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/-the-origin-of-the-heartl_b_1289669.html or http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com indicate that among the leaked "real" e-mails a document provided by unknown, questionable origin has been placed by Peter Gleick. Quotes from this questionable document has been discussed at some length in this thread (below).


An analysis Leaked Docs From Heartland Institute Cause a Stir—but Is One a Fake? of the text supports the understanding that the document would not be authentic.

We are now closing this thread; as Klimazwiebel is legally responsible also for readers comments, we are prepared to delete comments which would constitute "falsche Tatsachenaussagen" (cf. Rahmstorf verdict). Thus, if somebody considers some comments as such, please contact us, and we will check.

A new thread will be opened soon - as the affair is evolving into a another chapter of post-normal science.

-------------------------------------------------------------

For legal reasons we add

Haftungshinweis: Trotz sorgfältiger inhaltlicher Kontrolle übernehmen wir keine Haftung für die Inhalte externer Links. Für den Inhalt der verlinkten Seiten sind ausschließlich deren Betreiber verantwortlich.