The mystery of who acquired and leaked documents that detailed the Heartland Institute's funding, and its ongoing plans for sowing seeds of climate change denial, lasted just a week. On Monday, scientist and blogger Peter Gleick outed himself as the source, prompting quite the ethical debate in the blogosphere.
ANALYSIS: Climate Warming Denial: Big Business
Writing in Huffington Post, Gleick explained that earlier this year he received an anonymous paper in the mail that purported to be a "strategy document" outlining Heartland's "apparent efforts to muddy public understanding about climate science and policy." In an attempt to establish its veracity, he procured additional materials from the institute that confirmed much of what was included in the document; he then anonymously forwarded those materials to a number of different climate writers.
However, the method by which he procured those materials was through deceit: "I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name," he admitted. Calling his actions "a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics," Gleick wrote that, "I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected."
PHOTOS: The Changing Face of Antarctica
Others seconded and emphasized that, in their view, such contrition was warranted. Most notably and directly, Andy Revkin of the New York Times opined that "Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing... Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others... The broader tragedy is that his decision to go to such extremes in his fight with Heartland has greatly set back any prospects of the country having the “rational public debate” that he wrote — correctly — is so desperately needed."
Few, outside of Heartland sympathizers and other climate change deniers, took quite so severe a view, although some felt disappointed that Gleick had perhaps dragged himself to the level of those he frequently criticized, and others wondered whether the potential blowback was worth the revelation. (Heartland is being funded to deny, distort and dismiss climate science? Really?) In this regard, Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, for example, offered that, "I don’t think this is from the Art of War, but I read it somewhere and it seems apt: When fighting a war, don’t waste a bullet on yourself (ouch). The end result of Gleick’s actions are to cede the high ground to Heartland, especially in light of the fact that Heartland had invited Gleick to a debate shortly before the theft of the documents occurred."
ANALYSIS: Climate Skeptics: A US and UK Press Phenom
However, several others highlighted anew the seeming hypocrisy of Heartland's affronted response to the leaking of its own documents when set against the glee with which the institute helped orchestrate the distortion of the stolen e-mails at the heart of the manufactured Climategate 'scandal'. Naomi Klein, for example, tweeted: "Still waiting 4 whoever stole thousands of emails from climate scientists 2 show an ounce of Peter Gleick’s honesty." Some of the scientists at the heart of that controversy wrote an open letter in which they stated that:
We hope the Heartland Institute will heed its own advice to 'think about what has happened' and recognize how its attacks on science and scientists have helped poison the debate over climate change policy. The Heartland Institute has chosen to undermine public understanding of basic scientific facts and personally attack climate researchers rather than engage in a civil debate about climate change policy options.These are the facts: Climate change is occurring. Human activity is the primary cause of recent climate change. Climate change is already disrupting many human and natural systems. The more heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions that go into the atmosphere, the more severe those disruptions will become.
One of the strongest defenses of Gleick's actions was offered by science blogger Greg Laden:
Peter is like the rest of us: He knows enough about the science, the politics, and the economics surrounding the issue of Anthropogenic Climate Change to have been very frustrated with the mindless zombie-like hate filled denialist movement, bought and paid for by the corporations and individuals with the most to gain from ignoring the science, to have risked falling on his sword for the benefit of the next generation. Thank you Peter. I don't know yet if I will ultimately wish you hadn't done this or not, but no matter what, there is a positive benefit to knowing the truth, and Heartland will never be seen quite the same way again in the future ...
The up side of all this is that we know more than we did before about important things. The downside is that much of the conversation in the press and the blogosphere over the last several days has been about the process and the activities of individuals and groups, not about the release of ancient Carbon into the atmosphere and its potentially dire consequences. Anthropogenic Climate Change is real, important, and needs to be addressed. Let's do that.
UPDATE, February 22. More opinions are coming forth, and further repercussions are emerging, following Gleick's admission. Noted climate scientist Gavin Schmidt of NASA stated on the RealClimate blog that "Gleick’s actions were completely irresponsible and while the information uncovered was interesting (if unsurprising), it in no way justified his actions. There is an integrity required to do science (and talk about it credibly), and he has unfortunately failed this test." The board of the Pacific Institute, which Gleick founded and heads, said it was "deeply disturbed" by his actions. "Neither the board nor the staff of the Pacific Institute knew of, played any role in, or condones these events," it added. Meanwhile, Raúl Grijalva, a Democratic member of Congress, called for a congressional investigation into whether Indur Goklany, described as a senior policy analyst at the Department of the Interior, had broken rules by accepting a monthly stipend of $1,000 from Heartland, as revealed in the documents that Gleick leaked. According to Suzanne Goldenberg of The Guardian, "the Heartland fundraising documents indicate that Goklany was taken on to write a chapter for the thinktank's annual climate report, which works to try to undermine the UN's climate science organisation, the IPCC."
IMAGE:
Polar bear climbing on cliff to eat seabird eggs, Novaya Zemlya, Russian High Arctic July 30, 2011: A subadult male polar bear (Ursus maritimus) pauses near the top of a cliff after climbing precariously on the face of it above the ocean, attempting unsuccessfully to feed on eggs in the nests of Brünnich's guillemots (Uria lomvia). Glaucous gulls (Larus hyperboreus) lurk nearby, also hoping to eat eggs. This bear was marooned on land, unable to feed on seals -- his normal prey -- because the sea ice had melted throughout the region and receded far to the north as the result of climate change. (Jenny E. Ross, Corbis)
Tags: Climate Change, Global Warming, Politics
comments ( )