Heartland Institute Warming Skeptics Victimized by Fraud But Still Blamed by NYT Environmental Reporter Revkin
Andrew Revkin, former environmental reporter for the New York Times, and now “Dot Earth” blogger for the paper, showed a stark double standard in his reporting Wednesday on a batch of documents obtained by fraud from the Heartland Institute, a group skeptical of human-based global warming hysteria. Revkin even blamed the victim of the fraud for failing to condemn the previous leak of the "Climategate" emails.
At first glance the incident is similar to Climategate -- the leaked emails from the East Anglia Climatic Research Unit that rocked the scientific world in November 2009 and helped erode support for apocalyptic predictions of global warming. The Climategate emails included some shockingly shoddy science and venomous attacks on climate-change dissenters by ostensibly objective climate scientists, and documented attempts to avoid legal Freedom of Information Act requests.
Yet while Revkin's reporting has constantly spotlighted the Heartland Institute and other groups for taking corporate funding, he seems to assume climate-change scientists, who receive government funding while actively avoiding legal FOIA requests, are somehow immune to vested interests, such as keeping up the (now fading) drumbeat of a climate crisis.
Revkin's Climategate post on Dot Earth (written back when he was a fulltime reporter) took a dim view of the release of the emails, assuming illegality although the leaker has never been identified, leaving open the possibility an internal whistleblower was responsible.
The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won't be posted here. But a quick sift of skeptics' Web sites will point anyone to plenty of sources.
In a July 2010 post he even asked,“Was the East Anglia Incident a Crime?”
But Revkin showed none of that moral disapproval in his Wednesday reporting, when it came to the undeniable theft from the Heartland Institute, a group skeptical of global warming:
A blog storm began building Tuesday and broke on Wednesday as environmental groups posted a batch of documents -- ranging from tax forms to lists of donors to a 2012 Heartland “climate strategy” -- that appeared to expose the group’s game plan, budgets and backers in remarkable detail.
Late on Wednesday, Heartland posted a statement asserting that the strategy document was a “total fake” and the others, while appearing to be authentic, might have been altered and were, in any case, obtained through criminal means.
Revkin quoted Heartland: “Identity theft and computer fraud are criminal offenses subject to imprisonment. We intend to find this person and see him or her put in prison for these crimes....honest disagreement should never be used to justify the criminal acts and fraud that occurred in the past 24 hours.” He then accused Heartland of hypocrisy, while signaling to readers that he agrees with the global warming alarmists:
Wouldn’t it have been great if a similar message had some from the group and its allies after the mass release of e-mails and files from the University of East Anglia climatic research center in 2009 and last year -- documents that skeptics quickly and repeatedly over-interpreted as a damning “Climategate”? That hasn’t been Heartland’s approach.
And it certainly isn’t Revkin’s approach now.
Update 15:02 | Matthew Sheffield. The full text of the statement from Heartland is below:
Yesterday afternoon, two advocacy groups posted online several documents they claimed were The Heartland Institute’s 2012 budget, fundraising, and strategy plans. Some of these documents were stolen from Heartland, at least one is a fake, and some may have been altered.
The stolen documents appear to have been written by Heartland’s president for a board meeting that took place on January 17. He was traveling at the time this story broke yesterday afternoon and still has not had the opportunity to read them all to see if they were altered.Therefore, the authenticity of those documents has not been confirmed.
Since then, the documents have been widely reposted on the Internet, again with no effort to confirm their authenticity.
One document, titled “Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climate Strategy,” is a total fake apparently intended to defame and discredit The Heartland Institute. It was not written by anyone associated with The Heartland Institute. It does not express Heartland’s goals, plans, or tactics. It contains several obvious and gross misstatements of fact.
We respectfully ask all activists, bloggers, and other journalists to immediately remove all of these documents and any quotations taken from them, especially the fake “climate strategy” memo and any quotations from the same, from their blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.
The individuals who have commented so far on these documents did not wait for Heartland to confirm or deny the authenticity of the documents. We believe their actions constitute civil and possibly criminal offenses for which we plan to pursue charges and collect payment for damages, including damages to our reputation. We ask them in particular to immediately remove these documents and all statements about them from the blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.
How did this happen?The stolen documents were obtained by an unknown person who fraudulently assumed the identity of a Heartland board member and persuaded a staff member here to “re-send” board materials to a new email address. Identity theft and computer fraud are criminal offenses subject to imprisonment. We intend to find this person and see him or her put in prison for these crimes.
Apologies:The Heartland Institute apologizes to the donors whose identities were revealed by this theft. We promise anonymity to many of our donors, and we realize that the major reason these documents were stolen and faked was to make it more difficult for donors to support our work. We also apologize to Heartland staff, directors, and our allies in the fight to bring sound science to the global warming debate, who have had their privacy violated and their integrity impugned.
Lessons:Disagreement over the causes, consequences, and best policy responses to climate change runs deep. We understand that.
But honest disagreement should never be used to justify the criminal acts and fraud that occurred in the past 24 hours. As a matter of common decency and journalistic ethics, we ask everyone in the climate change debate to sit back and think about what just happened.
Those persons who posted these documents and wrote about them before we had a chance to comment on their authenticity should be ashamed of their deeds, and their bad behavior should be taken into account when judging their credibility now and in the future.
The Heartland Institute is a 28-year-old national nonprofit organization with offices in Chicago, Illinois and Washington, DC. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our Web site at http://www.heartland.org or call 312/377-4000.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
Different documents are they not?
Submitted by octavioj on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 3:07pm.
These documents do not say they are fudging the data, do they?
Earth to Revkin: There is no global warming
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 3:09pm.
The University of East Anglia's notorious CRU, together with British government meteorological offices, recently released a report stating that there is no evidence of global warming for the past 15 years.
Do you trust the science, Andrew? Can I interest you in some tulip futures?
Genuine science
Submitted by deadeyedan on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 4:28pm.
Watch the MSM carry this one to the stratosphere. They will not investigate how fraudulent it is nor will they acknowledge that the ClimateGate instigators were avoiding Freedom of Information Act requirements which do not apply at all to Heartland.
They are attempting to create some sort of parity between the deniers of AGW and deniers of the Forces of Nature (themselves). Hopefully it will bring closer attention to the implications of their "hide the decline" proclamation which is one of the many they claimed was taken out of context.
The plain fact was that Nature denier Phil Jones wanted to use data from known sources of heat island effect to mask the sources of contemporaneous proxy data as had his co-conspirator "Mike" (Michael Mann) in an article in Nature.
And all of that was chicanery to hide what U. of Oklahoma scientist David Deming had found among his e-mail back in 1995 - that the Nature deniers were trying to "get rid of the Medieval Warm Period" from the climate record.
GLOBAL WARMING - authoritarian, rather than authoritative, science
CLIMATEGATE (now I & II) - the revelation that the pseudo-scientists at East Anglia University know just as much about the atmosphere as Harvard law professors know about the Constitution
see here:
Submitted by dmacleo on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 3:53pm.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/15/notes-on-the-fake-heartland-document/
lot of good info.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/02/15/some-notes-on-the-heartland-leak/
Wikileaks, leaking Good...Warming hysteria!! leaking a crime
Submitted by upcountrywater on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 4:08pm.
So sorry you invested in carbon..... ya kook.
You Didn't Build That.
some secreted documents are more equal than others --Orwell
Submitted by lrgon on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 4:29pm.
The pilfered documents called the Pentagon Papers were cheered by the leftists in the media for doing society a great service. I won't argue one way or the other as to the service it supposedly rendered to society nor argue the merits of the Papers' chief pilferer - Daniel Ellsberg. That he stole them and then took them to the NYT for publication is still looked upon as a great patriotic act of sorts by the left and some from the right.
Along comes a 21st century computer hacking of East Anglia emails exposing the interdepartmental emails to the world wide web. The web of lies begins to strangle the "warmists" with their own tangled web of deception.
We are in fact in a war of ideas, a war of words, a war of ideology and a war of the Net. The liars and their chief antagonist - the devil - appears on Act I, scene II after God creates the world and Adam and Eve. He launched his conspiracy at God and man.Ever since then It's been a pretty rough road for mankind since man has this propensity to fall for every devilish trick in the book.
The Pentagon Papers didn't end phony wars and Climategate hasn't ended the threat from the global warming alarmists. We have one in the White House and plenty more around him pushing "green energy" while stupid Republicans sit around not capable of knowing how to defund any of this. Is that a conspiracy by both parties to destroy our economy?
None of the annointed three GOP contenders have a clue either or so it appears they don't. The guy with the message and the plan that does want to cripple the warmists' favorite bureaucracies- the EPA and Dept. of Energy - gets no respect nor even hardly a mention. He's one of those "unpersons" that George Orwell wrote about in his novel 1984. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
Fakegate
Submitted by dbo on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 4:29pm.
Revkin has already stooped to the Dan Rather defense-fake but accurate.
It's for the cause man
Submitted by acumen on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 8:15pm.
It's for the cause man.
Imagine that, an institute hired by energy companies
Submitted by gs-425 on Thu, 02/16/2012 - 10:12pm.
to actually advocate for conflicting data to be compared side by side. Oh the horrors.
That's always a problem with
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Fri, 02/17/2012 - 1:01pm.
That's always a problem with modern liberalism. No action is right or wrong in of itself. It always needs context for judgement. So illegal email hacking is good or bad depending on whose getting hacked.
In the case of illegal hacking, or leaking, such as top secret defense files, Sarah Palin's emails, or climate skeptics' emails, they ignore the illegality and jump straight to whatever dirt they can dig up. If it's celebrity texts or climate scientist's emails, it's stop everything, These files were illegally obtained. It would be wrong to scrutinize them.