Behind The Controversy, An Effort To Rewrite Curriculum On Climate Change

The New York Times:

Focus on the contents of the internal documents leaked last week from the Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based nonprofit known for attacking climate science, has been largely lost in the wake of the revelation of the leaker’s identity: Peter Gleick, a scientist.

But beyond the controversy and the confession is the fact that Heartland does not deny what the two authentic documents obtained by Dr. Gleick reveal: that the institute is working to influence climate education in the schools.

Read the whole story: The New York Times

Comments

[Jtt]

01:09 AM on 02/27/2012

Ethically if scientists believed the Climate Change projections they should have taken a harder line against denier PACs long ago. Lying to Heartland, and admitting it for the sole purpose of confirming information to release to the public was the correct ethical choice.

How many past injustices have we wondered how people just went along with it and did nothing. Afraid of speaking out, losing their job, imprisonment or whatever instead of doing what is right.

[yeti7]

08:57 AM on 02/27/2012

jtt---so now when the other side starts doing the same just remember who it was that started this "war" and who agrees that it is a noble act of lawlessness.

[Dallas Dunlap]

09:12 AM on 02/27/2012

yeti7 - "Starts doing the same?" You've already forgotten the CRU hack and the widespread republication and distortion of the stolen emails? You guys thought that was just fine.

[Jtt]

12:18 PM on 02/27/2012

Like "Climategate"??? You are a bit late to the party.

The science held up and it will continue to.

[maslin]

03:06 PM on 02/26/2012

'I see Peter Gleick, the man who obtained and leaked the devastating documents from the Heartland Institute, as a democratic hero. I do not think he should have apologised, nor do I believe that his job should be threatened. He has done something of benefit to society.

I believe we have a right to know who is paying for public advocacy. The groups that call themselves thinktanks but look to me more like lobbying organisations working on behalf of corporations and multi-millionaires, exist to try to change public policy. Yet, with a few exceptions, they operate in a vacuum of accountability.

Anyone with democratic instincts should support the demand that the major funders of groups engaged in public advocacy should be made known to the public, whether those groups are leftwing NGOs, rightwing "thinktanks" or self-declared lobbying companies. Yet in most cases no mechanism exists to ensure this happens, so powerful interests – big business, bankers, corporate bosses – are able to steer public debate without having to reveal their identity.'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2012/feb/24/christopher-booker-heartland-climate

Monbiot on Glieck and Heartland.

[maslin]

03:13 PM on 02/26/2012

The piece is on transparency and interests more widely.

[Jtt]

08:33 PM on 02/26/2012

Monbiot has been one of the most reasonable voices throughout this.

[maslin]

11:15 PM on 02/26/2012

Totally agree.

He's great.

[StephenBP]

07:02 AM on 02/26/2012

Here is a great site to get evidence to refute the human caused climate change deniers.

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

A huge amount of human effort is being spent on obtaining and burning fossil fuels, and it has to stop, and it has to stop soon. This is no longer an eight grade testosterone based scoring contest. If humans don't start acting like a sentient species and put aside fear, superstition and authoritarianism, we will have a great chance of leaving future generations a planet incapable of supporting most of humanity.

[OliverTwist]

12:38 AM on 02/26/2012

"But climate scientists who looked at Dr. Wojick’s evaluation of the data say that he is willfully misreading the findings. “You have to be specially trained to be so blind,” said Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist with Goddard Institute for Space Studies."

It is always deceit with these organizations that seek to obscure scientific findings for political purposes - and their favorite form of deceit - presumably because it easily beguiles those without much knowledge - is willful ignorance.

It's too bad.

[traveling1]

12:22 PM on 02/26/2012

I loved that line - “You have to be specially trained to be so blind,” - that's true for more than just global warming deniers.... it fits most Republicans.

[yeti7]

09:39 AM on 02/27/2012

I wonder if wojick has a slander case in these statements?

[ThinkCreeps]

10:43 AM on 02/27/2012

No. The condition for slander are that it is both defamatory and untrue.

[ubrew12]

04:20 PM on 02/25/2012

How about we look at this from another point of view: We invest in our economy with money and labor. We do this selfishly, as we expect a positive return on that investment. When the economy goes belly-up, as it has (and even worse is on the way), its a referendum on the investment process. It is a red-light blaring that 10-30 years worth of investment, under a Supply-Side, increasingly 'free market' philosophy, was, instead, miss-invested. It's a big sign saying, 'turn around'. So when an anonymous donor gives a 'free market' think-tank money to propagandize our kids into thinking science is incorrect, don't we already have the evidence to suggest its the donor and the think-tank that are incorrect? These are, primarily, economic-thinkers, whose economic philosophy has defined the last quarter century. If the economy is a mess, whose credibility is actually at stake? the scientists?

An anonymous donor invested $100k in propagandizing schoolkids about an obscure branch of science. In an America stocked full of 30 years of miss-investments, this latest investment idiocy should not surprise anyone. Its a sign of the willingness of modern capitalism to, rather than grow, merely consume everything around it, including the brains of our children. Based on the investment 'successes' of the last 30 years, is anyone under any illusions how THAT investment is going to turn out?

[jimboy71]

04:48 PM on 02/25/2012

Brilliance.

[toxicity]

05:38 PM on 02/25/2012

"An anonymous donor invested $100k in propagandizing schoolkids about an obscure branch of science."

I suspect Art Pope made this donation.

http://www.artpopeexposed.com/

[Andrew Harvey]

05:08 AM on 02/25/2012

So who's got a link to the actual documents in question. Pointless carrying on about something no one has read.

[Jtt]

06:41 AM on 02/25/2012

I wouldn't assume that.

( http://www.desmogblog.com/heartland-institute-exposed-internal-documents-unmask-heart-climate-denial-machine )

Links to the entire set at the bottom.

[jimboy71]

04:48 PM on 02/25/2012

Read ubrew's post above and learn something.

[ILoveFiction]

02:52 AM on 02/25/2012

Module 7: Have we already passed a tipping point?

Scientists aren't sure.

Stop growing up until they figure it out.

This lesson brought to you by an anonymous donor to the Heartworm Institute. You better believe it.

[yeti7]

09:02 AM on 02/27/2012

Some are saying that it has passed now what ?

[Jtt]

02:42 AM on 02/25/2012

Why didn't the NYT include Mr Wojick connections with the defunct Greening Earth Society in that story ??

He is not even a climate scientist and has NEVER published on climate science.

Why is the NYT giving space to science denial. Thats worthy of Fox.

[Jtt]

02:57 AM on 02/25/2012

https://cspinet.org/integrity/nonprofits/greening_earth_society.html

The NYT is incompetent. HP should start using another source for climate stories.

[yeti7]

09:04 AM on 02/27/2012

You are right the NYT should only allow supporters of the AGW theory in their newspapers.

[Jtt]

02:34 AM on 02/25/2012

Rewriting a science curriculum without even referencing the science. How can they even be listened to.

[DocSkull]

02:43 PM on 02/24/2012

Misleading American school children about science in order to make a buck. That isn't going to go over very well.

[vakh]

11:27 PM on 02/24/2012

Thats precisely what YOU are doing.

[Jtt]

02:35 AM on 02/25/2012

Heartland is a fraud. It is a for profit science denial organization. That was confirmed in the leaked memos - no that everyone didn't already know it.

[Trepasky]

11:09 AM on 02/25/2012

So you failed to read the article?

Or do you think HP is trying to re-write school text books?