Beam me to Planet Gore !
“In a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, ...
No, this theft is consistent with the tactics used by "hydroclimatologists" of the warmist variety. (someday i need to invent a title about that long for myself)
Cheaters aren’t supposed to win.
Several quips here (scroll down and/or next page for more).
Links and updates at top.
I don’t get what the big deal is in this idiot’s “smoking gun” that Heartland was working on science education to offset global warming propaganda! So what. There is no “scientific consensus.” School children should learn both sides of the story.
He really did this to expose the people involved in funding the heartland institute so his pals could harm them and to permit idenity theft of the employees at Heartland. He’s a radical communist and is raging furious that the watermelon plan of taking over the means of production (global oil use, taxation and price controls) for the whole world is exposed.
There is trillions in money for these climate change “scientists” and their alternative energy shake down pals and their global taxation and carbon market pals. He’s a Fascist power monger, greedy bastard.
Another climate criminal caught in a web of lies. It keeps the government grants flowing to their earth-worshiping religion, and every lie is offered on the altar of nobel intentions.
And he’s being hailed as a courageous whistleblower/hero by the warmists. But they still want the email whistleblowers lynched for being dishonest. Meanwhile, Gleick keeps his position at the Pacific Institute.
http://www.pacinst.org/press_center/press_releases/heartland.html
This clown is Nobel Prize material.
Global Warming on Free Republic
Just because someone is a scientist, does NOT make then ethical. No more than any other person. There are a LOT of unethical scientists working for Anthropogenic Global Warming.
““My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts — often anonymous, well-funded, and coordinated — to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate … nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case.”
Attacking climate science is “preventing” debate? I thought it WAS debating. It’s called responding and rebutting. I know it’s difficult for dogmatic priests of a secular doctrine to get their brain around this, but people are allowed to disagree with you, and to say why they disagree with you. That’s what’s called debating. If they are not, you are not “debating,” but monologuing, sort of like a super villain in a comic book.
That says enough for me.
Nothing to darken here. The MAN-MADE global warming/cooling/climate change activist kooks ARE from the DARKSIDE anyway.
