February 21, 2012

Because of the importance of clarity in a debate with muddied waters, Peter Gleick admits that he muddied the waters in the interest of clarifying muddied waters.

This is rich:
... 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....

Given the potential impact however, I attempted to confirm the accuracy of the information in this document. In an effort to do so, and in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name....
And then he mixed it all up together for our delectation. Mmmm. Taste it: the Real-and-Fake cocktail. Much better than straight real, which is quite bland. No kick! And "climate change" is so very, very important.

111 comments:

Matthew said...

And yet, he won't never have a job again for being a fraud. He'll probably be able to demand a higher salary for going against journalistic ethics (and his own!)

Crazy how that works.

I always find it hard to trust someone who tells me: "I lied to get this information you should trust."

Dave said...

Add to that the fact that Dr Gleick makes quite a public show about integrity.

paul a'barge said...

Liberals == Dishonesty. Straight up.

Tim said...

Lies in service of the officially designated "truth" are completely forgivable, don't we all know by now?

Let's all watch while nothing, or almost nothing, at all happens to Gleick.

Nothing of sanction, that is. I predict too many will applaud his efforts to defend the "truth" through lies.

Moose said...

fake but accurate?

Matthew said...

Ooh. I haven't heard fake but accurate used in a long time. A+

Maguro said...

Next revelation: Glieck wrote the fake "strategy memo" himself, but it's OK because he wants to save the planet and stuff.

Matthew said...

"I forwarded, anonymously, the documents I had received to a set of journalists and experts working on climate issues."

So, I want those journalists and experts to come forward and admit to having used him as a source, since he's not anonymous any more.

Using fraud to get documents is a kind of theft, and while they could not have known it was stolen, it is their duty to show that their anonymous source has a clear bias which should color the reader's opinion of the received data.

Unless, getting information through dishonest means (Climate Gate) is no longer a no-no.

Matthew said...

Hah. No comments allowed on his blog.

Tim said...

"Crazy how that works."

Indeed so.

Al Gore (and Barack Obama) can lecture us to diminish and impoverish our lifestyles to "save the world" while simultaneously living outsized lives creating ever-growing carbon footprints and we're not to notice.

Can't really blame them though. We let them get away with it, and they're smart enough to notice we're stupid enough to let them.

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves..."

PaulV said...

Gleick likely suffer from Climategate Envy. The memo he said he received was dated after the documents he got by fraud. Slimeball.

Henry said...

Even the fraudulent document hardly makes the case that anything nefarious is afoot. The need to see conspiracy overrides the plain obviousness that a) The public global warming skeptics are very public and b) people who want to influence public policy should go ahead and do so within the bounds of free speech, and free association.

The conspiratorial spin that Gleick imparted and that his downstream agents frenetically rebroadcast needs no content. The theory is the message. "Powerful forces and powerful interests stand in your way" and in the way of all that is right and good. Dissent will not be tolerated.

PaulV said...

CRU emails were gathered for a FOIA request. They were released by whistle blower when CRU violated law by refusing to release them

hawkeyedjb said...

Gleick's (and other Climateers') lack of faith in their own position is revealed by their complete rejection of the scentific method, which is based on doubt, skepticism and constant testing of assumptions and conclusions. They fear inquiry, and utter the mantra "settled science" when they face someone who actually does want scientific inquiry. It's an astonishing rejection of the basic premises of science.

Thorley Winston said...

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, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.

Pet meet kettle.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

How many nails does a coffin lid need to hold it down permanently?

Thorley Winston said...

Hah. No comments allowed on his blog.

I guess that’s part of what they mean by standing by your story.

rehajm said...

Here's today's clean, refreshing breath of climate science air

Kevin said...

Next revelation: Glieck wrote the fake "strategy memo" himself, but it's OK because he wants to save the planet and stuff.

We know from the metadata that the fake Heartland memo was written on the West Coast, where Glieck lives. (The Heartland Institute is in Chicago.)

Glieck was chair of the American Geophysical Union's task force on "scientific ethics and integrity".

Paul Zrimsek said...

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.

From Lucy Ramirez?

Seeing Red said...

--- to attack climate science and scientists and prevent this debate, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved. ---


Prevent the debate about climate science, what the other side was doing was trying to debate climate science but the science was settled.

Transparency of the organizations involved, I'd love some UN/EA and other tranparency.

Aren't those organizations involved? This man has spent a very long time believing something and it's starting to look like his love/work isn't panning out like he thought, so he strikes out in anger his worldview is going POOF!

Paco Wové said...

Mmmmmm.... truthy.

Robin said...

Gleick shows again, that the people who claim that there is a "consensus about the science" don't want to discuss the science.

The AGW proponents want to make ad hominem attacks on AGW skeptics, forge claims about funding of the skeptics, hide data and methodology from public review, corrupt the peer review/science journal system and poison the debate with lies, fakes and forgeries.

Seeing Red said...

from the article: Why should we now believe exaggerating IPCC models that tell us of "missing heat" hiding in the one place where it cannot yet be reliably measured—the deep ocean?

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


The missing heat is HIDING? What did " Heat" decide to do? Where would it go? Mars? Who knew "Heat" could play Hide & Seek so well?

I'm Mr. Heat Miser, I'm Mr. Sun.....

edutcher said...

Classic Uncle Saul. Any lie in the pursuit of the cause is OK.

Apparently, the science isn't settled.

PS I haven't heard stuff like that since the Lefties were telling us war is too important to be left to the generals.

It should be left to the KGB tools.

Sloanasaurus said...

Notice that the article laments that this situation will once again distract from the real and all important issue of climate change.

The global warming fraud was a masterpiece from the start. Those scientists who perpetrated it for money and for their own fame were able to co-opt the left/liberals and the left wing media through dreams of totalitarian government.

Moreover, the facts were likely to be inconclusive for many year so the gravy train could go on for a long time. The despicable scientists discounted the risk of the totalitarianism... assuming that they would be dead or gone by the time it really took hold.

However, what this team never counted on was the possibility that the facts could turn against them in the short term... which is exactly what it did. Now they have been exposed.

What needs to come next is prosecutions. We need investigations into these scientists to see what frauds they are responsible for. This is not just science. These scientists were giving grave warnings that inaction would lead to disaster, when they knew that their findings were fraudulent. Millions even billions of lives have been affected by this fraud.

Fen said...

"Gleick also claims he did not write the forged memo, but only stole the documents to confirm the content of the memo he received from an anonymous source. This too is unbelievable. Many independent commentators already have concluded the memo was most likely written by Gleick."

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/

Check the link for the whole story, 12 updates so far.

Short version: Gleick just impaled himself with his own sword.

F4GIB said...

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

Kevin said...

Whoever forged the Heartland memo was trying to use the same technique used with the Mohammed cartoons - the actual cartoons were too tame, so the imans protesting the cartoon threw in a fake cartoon of Mohammed having sex with a dog to amp the outrage quotient.

Matthew said...

Confess to the lie to avoid flak for the forgery?

Fen said...

Where are all our MediaMatters stooges today? Still trying to iron out a set of talking points that won't exceed their high threshold for shame?

Lyle said...

I love how this PhD's stupidity is actually solidifying the public reputation of the Heartland Institute.

We all know where the integrity is now.

bagoh20 said...

"And "climate change" is so very, very important."

Agreed, but of even more importance is the incoming earth-killing meteor. It's also very important, and unlike climate change, is absolutely gonna be a bad thing. This is something we may actually be able to do something about. All current climate grants should be redirected toward this threat. Wouldn't it be sad if NASA was all ready to fight the climate, but totally unprepared for a cataclysmic aerospace challenge.

"We are sorry to report that our downward focused technology did not catch the thing that's gonna kill us all."

It will make the entire human race a lost, unknown occurrence that will only be known to aliens from the faint residual signals of a TV show called "Jersey Shore" Apparently a creature called "Snooki" was our religious leader and queen.

garage mahal said...

Surprised Althouse missed this: Operation Badger

The document that has circulated on the Internet described five potential projects the Heartland Institute considered for Wisconsin:

"Recruit and promote superintendents who support Act 10."

"Explain the benefits of Act 10."

"Document the shortcomings of public schools in Wisconsin."

"Expose teacher pay in key districts."

"Create blogs that shadow small town newspaper coverage of the controversy."


Chicago politics!

garage mahal said...

*Operation Angry Badger

Matthew said...

Is that from the real document or the one Heartland alleges is a fraud?

Honest question; I haven't read them.

Levi Starks said...

I did the wrong thing, but for the right reason.

"an honest debate about climate science"
= no debate at all

Patrick said...

rehajm, Thanks for that link.

Robin's point is a good one: AGW proponents are not discussing science, they are making only ad hominem attacks. This memo, which the left thought would devastate the Skeptic's did not deal with the scientific dispute, it dealt with things like nefarious Koch funded strategies for funding and making their positions clear. No science at all.

Why is that, I (no longer, really) wonder?

Fen said...

"I also forged Climate date, but for the right reason"

If you are still with Gleick, he knows a Nigerian Princess will to sell you a bridge near some ocean-front property in Arizona...

Larry J said...

Climate change is important. It has many impacts on humanity. The fact that the climate has been constantly changing throughout geologic time is a certainty. During the last Ice Age, virtually all of what is now Canada and some of the northern US was under a thick sheet of ice. Then something happened and the ice melted. Since there were very few people around back then and no factories or SUVs, that massive instance of global warming happened naturally. And it will happen again regardless of what we feeble humans do.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I'm shocked, shocked! To find gambling going on here!

Crimso said...

Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. I'm sure the National Academy is so proud (Feynman was right).

However, he at least is owning up to it, so there's hope for him yet (after he walks barefoot to Canterbury).

BigFire said...

re: Matthew

The smoking gun was with the 'fake' memo. All of the juicy bits, all of the quotations are from that one memo. Which ironically was what tipped off people to suspect Gleick as being the leaker. Now that he's confess of being one, he's still trying to place the blame on anonymous mailer (elf) for that bit.

I'm sorry for not buying that one either.

bagoh20 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
bagoh20 said...

I support Operation Angry Badger. Where do I send my check?

I'm fully aware that this may lead to irresponsible actions like making the public better informed or even trying new policies or curricula to reverse the decline.

wef said...

No, never, never, never use the word fascist to describe the mindset of someone like Gleick. No, not ever. It would be wrong. Yes, wrong to use the word fascist to describe a power-worshiping lickspittle and morally-hollow, sycophantic press lewinsky. No, the word fascist would be inappropriate and unreasonable.

Fen said...

Gleick removed from AGU Task Force on Scientific Ethics page

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/21/gleick-removed-from-agu-task-force-on-scientific-ethics/

Yes, Gleick was actually on an Ethics board.... I wonder how many of those other names are hacks and frauds?

pst314 said...

Sloanasaurus 10:03 AM "The scientists discounted the risk of totalitarianism... assuming that they would be dead or gone by the time it really took hold."

I think it's worse than that: They didn't worry about totalitarianism because they expected to be privileged members of the Apparat.

The twentieth century has shown that our academic elites have a disturbing tendency to support totalitarian systems, all the while posing and preening as courageous defenders of liberty. And even when they are not advancing totalitarianism, they usually prove to be the most craven of cowards.

MadisonMan said...

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

AJ Lynch said...

I am not proud of much in my life but I am proud I never fell for the global warming BS.

Fen said...

Steve McIntyre at ClimateAudit has the timeline
timeline of Gleick's fraud

Matthew said...

This should be late night comedy. It has a stuck up, pompous guy on an ethics committee admitting to unethical behavior. It's perfect comedy.

It won't be though.

He should be savaged by journalists and scientists. He has done a disservice to his cause; they should disown him and his tactics.

That won't happen either. Such is life.

Henry said...

BagoH20 wrote: I support Operation Angry Badger. Where do I send my check?

I'm fully aware that this may lead to irresponsible actions like making the public better informed or even trying new policies or curricula to reverse the decline.


Exactly.

MadisonMan said...

but of even more importance is the incoming earth-killing meteor.

But even MORE important than THAT is the next big New Madrid earthquake. Plan for it now. There was a pre-shock today in downstate IL.

traditionalguy said...

The Stork brought him this baby. That's his story and his lawyers coached him to stick to it.

But the busted doofus couldn't stop there. He added a "fake but accurate" remark and a Big Oil made me do it in defense plea.

Matthew said...

Journalists believed someone said their goal was “dissuading teachers from teaching science."

They really do think the right are mustache twirling villains, don't they?

MikeR said...

I am awed by desmogblog.com (who was one of the ones who broke the original story):
"Whistleblower Authenticated Heartland Documents".
"So, while admitting that he impersonated a third party in order to induce Heartland to confirm its own ongoing questionable conduct, Gleick has effectively caught Heartland squarely in the headlights, proving that the Institute has dissembled and lied."

:O certifiably delusional

Christopher in MA said...

"Chicago politics!"

Yes, garbage, we know. "SQUIRREL!!!!"

Even for a shameless asshat like you, that's weaksauce. You aren't even pretending to be honest anymore, are you?

Original Mike said...

"Recruit and promote superintendents who support Act 10."

What the hell is wrong with that?

"Explain the benefits of Act 10."

What the hell is wrong with that?

"Document the shortcomings of public schools in Wisconsin."

What the hell is wrong with that?

"Expose teacher pay in key districts."

What the hell is wrong with that?

"Create blogs that shadow small town newspaper coverage of the controversy."

This one I don't understand.

garage mahal said...

but of even more importance is the incoming earth-killing meteor.

LOL. Like we would trust SCIENTISTS to tell us a meteor is about to his us. I go to wattsupwiththat.com for my science. It gives me info that the Lamestream media refuses to!

Dudley Do-right said...

The fault is in ourselves. We willingly listen to liars telling lies. It's got something to do with "fairness"; we think we should give them a fair hearing. Yet they've proven themselves liars again and again.

Stumbled across something in Ezekial this morning that's relevant. One of the reasons the Almighty got fed up with (and promised to destroy) His people, the Israelites, is that they listen to lies. In that case the lies of diviners and false prophets; people proven untrustworthy in the past We've got the same thing going here....in spades (no racism intended).

William said...

He did this in order to foster transparency. WTF. I can't imagine tactics more likely to foster cynicism and distrust. The fact that he still retains the belief that the worthiness of his ends justifies any shortcut to get there, only increases one's suspicions and distrust.....I have no expertise to judge the claims and counter claims of the AGW debate, but the AGW supporters are patently acting in bad faith. They argue with the stridency and velocity of bigots.

Dudley Do-right said...

Hey garage,
Your comments would make more sense if you turned your avatar around.

Wrong end of the cow...

garage mahal said...

What the hell is wrong with that?

Their goal is to destroy public education. They never speak of success stories, do they? Just horrible fucking people.

Brennan said...

He's reportedly lawyered up with a white collar criminal defense attorney. Also, Chris Lehane is providing communications services pro-bono.

Lehane is a well known Democratic Strategist and a proven liar. Not just an accidental liar. But a bonified, intentional, fired for it before, liar liar.

Crimso said...

"Wouldn't it be sad if NASA was all ready to fight the climate, but totally unprepared for a cataclysmic aerospace challenge."

What do you mean "if?"

Matthew said...

What could an attorney do if charges get brought?

He admitted to a crime; I believe a "statement against interest" is specifically listed as a hear-say exception, so his only out is for no prosecution to be brought.

Mary Beth said...

If it was mailed to him, did he save the envelope it came in?

bagoh20 said...

"LOL. Like we would trust SCIENTISTS to tell us a meteor is about to his us."

If they told us, that the meteor was a small one like the millions of meteors that have always impacted, but that this one was special because it was due to our overuse of magnets that attracted it, and that therefore it would be extra special bad, then yea, I would question the title "scientist" and if that title makes the holder incapable of lying or stupidity. If he worked was in any way associated with the U.N., I'd just ask him who's paying him.

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... Their goal is to destroy public education. They never speak of success stories, do they? Just horrible fucking people..."

Translation: don't question anything we do.

Crimso said...

"Like we would trust SCIENTISTS to tell us a meteor is about to his us."

Except, of course, that danger is known to be a fact (not a theory or a computer model). See Tunguska or Shoemaker-Levy 9.

Original Mike said...

"Steve McIntyre at ClimateAudit has the timeline
timeline of Gleick's fraud"


Thanks for the link, Fen.

Original Mike said...

"Their goal is to destroy public education."

You got evidence of that? A forged memo, perhaps?

Seeing Red said...

---Their goal is to destroy public education. They never speak of success stories, do they? Just horrible fucking people.----


My niece just learned that The Crusades were the Christian's fault.

That is not proper history.

Successes? Kids today couldn't pass tests from 50 or more years ago.

Phoenics is replaced by whole language, math is replaced by new math, that doesn't work, so new new math replaces math, the false religion of MMGW is preached, and history is distorted.

Let's see, I've covered English, Math, Science and History.

FAIL FAIL FAIL

Where's Romney on this climate stuff? Holding his fire until he gets the nom and thinks he's safe?

Maybe more people would give him a 2nd look if he wasn't such a coward. What's the matter, can't stand the heat? Sure, they'll spin it, but if he can't handle the slings now, his presidency will be death by 1000 cuts.

Seeing Red said...

Phonics - I really need my caffeine, family talk was a vacay in Phoenix.

furious_a said...

re: Lucy Ramirez...

Were the Heartland documents faxed anonymously from a FedEx/Kinkos in Abilene, TX? I bet Halliburton set Gleick up with fraudulently-attained fakes.

""Barefoot to Canterbury"? More like ""Walk on his knees to Rome."

Shorter Garage: "Over here! A distraction!"

Hoosier Daddy said...

"... ---Their goal is to destroy public education..."

Then again with the child abuse cases and lunch room Gestapo, your side seems to be doing a good enough job on their own.

furious_a said...

Their goal is to destroy public education.

Day late and dollar short -- teachers' unions succeeded at that years ago. So long as it was they who remained squatting atop the rubble.

Revenant said...

It is pretty clear that Gleick wrote the document he claims was mailed to him.

jimspice said...

I don't see anything wrong with this tactic. Let's see: "May I please have your top-secret documents?" "Sure here ya go." However, Gleick was the wrong person to do it; as an active participant in the debate, he needs to stay above the fray. But I'd give it a go. I have no reputation to sacrifice. Given the gravity of the situation, I'd call it no holds barred.

By the way, I really wish people used their real names here. Then history, and your grandchildren, could assign blame accurately.

Fritz said...

MadisonMan said...

Sunlight is the best disinfectant.


But bleach and gamma rays do a pretty good job, too.

Sigivald said...

efforts to muddy public understanding about climate science and policy?

Well, if "muddy" means "information We don't like", sure.

Just reinforces that I won't trust any of them to tell me the color of the god-damn sky, let alone their models of climate change.

Maybe someday their models will start predicting things, and then I'll take them seriously.

Matthew said...

"I don't see anything wrong with this tactic. Let's see: "May I please have your top-secret documents?" "Sure here ya go.""

-- That's not what happened. He misrepresented himself as someone else (a specific person, not a general entity).

Or, do you now agree that O'Keefe's stings of Acorn, Sen. Landreiu (was it?), etc. were all legitimate tactics? At least he didn't impersonate a specific individual.

Matthew said...

Imagine someone pretending to be a person in another company and obtaining financial information like was done here.

Is there any question that would be corporate espionage and illegal?

Crimso said...

My name is Donald Andrew Burden, Ph.D. I see that my profile no longer displays my name. I am quite happy to be judged by history as my conscience is clear. You see, I am somewhat militant about what constitutes proof in science. You must be that way if you are to be a responsible peer-reviewer; but it is much more important to be that way regarding your own work (Popper has a great quote on that point).

Original Mike said...

"By the way, I really wish people used their real names here. Then history, and your grandchildren, could assign blame accurately."

Given the propensity of the Left to target people they disagree with, it's not such a good idea. I try not to say anything that I would be embarrassed about if my name were on it, I have no interest in playing the game the way the Left plays it.

Rabel said...

Gleick is a prophet. Here's the title of a blog post on Huffington he made last July. It's the same thing his lawyer told him today.

"It's Hotter Than It Used to Be; It's Not as Hot as It's Going to Be"

Robert Burns said...

It is odd that Peter Gleick was head of the AGU task force on scienitic ethics. More detail on what happened here http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/20/breaking-gleick-confesses/#more-57113 and here http://climateaudit.org/2012/02/20/peter-gleick-confesses/#comments

Jay said...

jimspice said...
I don't see anything wrong with this tactic. Let's see: "May I please have your top-secret documents?" "Sure here ya go."


Except that isn't what happened as one of the memo's was fake and he presented it as coming from HI.

By the way, I really wish people used their real names here. Then history, and your grandchildren, could assign blame accurately.


I'd love to point out the willful ignorance and lies you post here to the next generation of history authors.

Fen said...

Garage: Their goal is to destroy public education.

According to the fake-but-accurate forged memo.

You must have to avert your gaze a every mirror, Garage.

Mark Nielsen said...

Garage: "Like we would trust SCIENTISTS to tell us a meteor is about to his us"

Hey GM, how much mathematics do you know? Are you aware of how many variables there are in predicting an exact course for a comet or meteor? That's why you'll only hear them state a probability for something like a meteor strike.

But at least in that situation we understand what the variables *are*. With "climate science" we don't even know that. And the variables we *do* know are far too numerous to assemble a model capable of meaningful predictions. Yet you never hear the uncertainty mentioned in the press releases of the warmists. The meteor watchers deserve my trust. The warmists deserve my contempt for giving a bad rap to mathematical modelling.

Fen said...

Soros Whore: I don't see anything wrong with this tactic

Other than its a violation of California state law to pretend you are a Heartland employee when requesting they resend you meeting notes to your "new" email address.

Why do you think Gleick's confession is so weasely? It was edited by his attorneys because he could easily be sent to jail.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

California Penal Code Section 528.5.

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public offense punishable pursuant to subdivision (d).

(b) For purposes of this section, an impersonation is credible if another person would reasonably believe, or did reasonably believe, that the defendant was or is the person who was impersonated.

(c) For purposes of this section, “electronic means” shall include opening an e-mail account or an account or profile on a social networking Internet Web site in another person’s name.

(d) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(e) In addition to any other civil remedy available, a person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of subdivision (a) may bring a civil action against the violator for compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief pursuant to paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subdivision (e) and subdivision (g) of Section 502.

(f) This section shall not preclude prosecution under any other law.

Jim S. said...

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....

Anyone else notice the similarities between this and the Killian documents? Rathergate?

Matthew said...

Why do anonymous sources keep showing up and being discredited almost universally in stories attacking groups and people on the right?

The so-called McCain affair -- anonymous sources.

Rathergate -- anonymous sources.

This -- anonymous sources.

Journalists: Check your sources.

Rusty said...

Seeing Red said...
from the article: Why should we now believe exaggerating IPCC models that tell us of "missing heat" hiding in the one place where it cannot yet be reliably measured—the deep ocean?

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


The missing heat is HIDING? What did " Heat" decide to do? Where would it go? Mars? Who knew "Heat" could play Hide & Seek so well?

I'm Mr. Heat Miser, I'm Mr. Sun.....



Well. If we have to get physics and sciency and stuff, the default position of nature is toward cooling. That entropy shit and all that.

Crimso said...

"That entropy shit"

I never thought about it, but that's probably why it's designated "S."

Joe said...

Agreed, but of even more importance is the incoming earth-killing meteor.

That has nothing on having a neutron star form relatively nearby.

Of course, the sun will overheat the earth in a few billion years and billions of years beyond that the universe will decay, so any effort will be in vain.

Paul Zrimsek said...

The missing heat is HIDING? What did " Heat" decide to do? Where would it go?

Rockford, Illinois.

Original Mike said...

Entropy. I hate that shit.

bagoh20 said...

"Entropy. I hate that shit."

That needs to be on a t-shirt covering my man-boobs.

Chip Ahoy said...

Thank you. Your comments have helped me understand this item.

Crimso said...

Original Mike's Law: the amount of hate for a system in Original Mike's heart is directly proportional to the number of states the system can be in.

Unknown said...

I followed the thread in HuffPo and went to a blog from some off the wall retired USAF Colonel who had a leadline on his blog "71 year old military retiree threatened". Turns out he has his panties in a bunch because he sent a letter to Heartland accusing a Mr. Bast of being a traitor to his country. Bast responded in rightful anger, threatening an FBI report. I am offended because I am a 65 year old military retiree and it pains me to see such a display of infantile stupidity.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

The science is settled. I saw it on TV.

Tyrone Slothrop said...

Joe said...

Of course, the sun will overheat the earth in a few billion years...


Oh, billions. I'm so relieved. I thought you said millions.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

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, and by the lack of transparency of the organizations involved.

I can't find the quote anywhere, but does this remind anyone else of the Black Panther Party scene from Forrest Gump where the anti-war guy hits Jenny, then afterward tries to excuse it by blaming it on Johnson and the war?

MikeR said...

"When skeptics complain that global warming activists are apparently willing to go to any lengths--including lying--to advance their worldview, I'd say one of the movement's top priorities should be not proving them right. And if one rogue member of the community does something crazy that provides such proof, I'd say it is crucial that the other members of the community say 'Oh, how horrible, this is so far beyond the pale that I cannot imagine how this ever could have happened!' and not, 'Well, he's apologized and I really think it's pretty crude and opportunistic to make a fuss about something that's so unimportant in the grand scheme of things.'
"After you have convinced people that you fervently believe your cause to be more important than telling the truth, you've lost the power to convince them of anything else."

(McMegan)

n.n said...

His argument is akin to climatic variance. Over a sufficiently long period of time, it is effectively a zero-sum process... or so we hope. Unfortunately, while Gleick presumes to up the ante, the Earth has already called his bluff, and he will realize negative progress.

Eric said...

Next revelation: Glieck wrote the fake "strategy memo" himself, but it's OK because he wants to save the planet and stuff.

That would be better than the current Lucy Ramirez defense.