creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Deb Saunders
Debra J. Saunders
24 May 2012
In the House, Is 80 Over the Hill?

When Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., lost the GOP primary to challenger Richard Mourdock this month, Beltway … Read More.

22 May 2012
Democrats' War on Money

Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, N.J., came across as a moderate, sensible Democrat when he said on "Meet … Read More.

20 May 2012
FTC vs. Skechers: Overhyped Meets Overkill

The Federal Trade Commission announced Wednesday that Skechers USA Inc. will pay $40 million to settle … Read More.

Global Warming and Earthly Lies

Share Comment

Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute and a prominent climate change expert, admitted Monday that he lied. Gleick pretended to be someone else in order to obtain documents from the Heartland Institute, which has challenged mainstream scientific consensus on the role of man in global warming.

Last week, Gleick was the chairman of the American Geophysical Union's Task Force on Scientific Ethics. Now he isn't. As New York Times blogger Andrew C. Revkin weighed in, "Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins and threatens to undercut the cause he spent so much time pursuing."

Bravo to Gleick for admitting that he lied "in a serious lapse" of his own and "professional judgment and ethics." At least he had the integrity to own up to his mistake.

But Gleick doesn't look all that noble when you look at his excuse. In a statement released on The Huffington Post, Gleick said he lied because he wants "a rational public debate." That's sort of like Newt Gingrich saying that his extramarital affairs were partially driven by how passionately he felt about this country.

Heartland President Joe Bast accused Gleick of "stealing" internal documents to "embarrass a group that disagrees with his views." Enviros love the karma here. In 2009, someone leaked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit that uncovered the vindictive and censorious side of the global-warming community. Climate change activists were reduced to complaining that the emails were leaked. Now Heartland has had to take a bite of that bitter apple.

In addition, Heartland spokesman Jim Lakely charges that one of the leaked documents — a two-page strategy memo — is "a complete fake." It uses the sort of language a true believer in global warming might think skeptics use.

The Atlantic's Megan McArdle "is inclined to believe" Heartland on this.

But Gleick did not admit to faking the memo. Chris Lehane — the former Al Gore flack who is representing Gleick pro bono — notes that the two-pager contains "previously unknown facts" since confirmed. Lehane says Heartland should "get off its Trojan high horse and come clean by explaining the identity of its secret large donor."

The folks at the Heartland are particularly indignant about Gleick's vaunted rationale — that he was "frustrated" at skeptics' efforts to "prevent this debate" — because Heartland invited Gleick to a debate. Gleick declined the offer.

He isn't talking to the media. A representative told me that Gleick would speak to Heartland only if the organization released the names of anonymous donors. That tells me Gleick doesn't really want a debate; he wants a monologue.

Indeed, in 2001, Gleick told U.S. News & World Report, "The debate is over."

This is how the global-warming community operates. Activists accuse skeptics of being anti-science and dishonest under the apparent belief that they are honest and analytical. They're filled with their integrity until they get frustrated. They say that they only want to debate, except the debate is over. Then they wonder why skeptics don't believe them.

Email Debra J. Saunders at dsaunders@sfchronicle.com. To find out more about Debra J. Saunders and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
No, that"s not how the "global warming community" operates, whatever that is. Jeez, every time I start thinking this writer is starting to hit the target she goes and blows it with a silly piece like this.

There is no global warming community. There are scientists worldwide who don't even know each other and then there are plain old people with common sense, you know, people who genuinely are "conservatives, who also don't know each other, who simply don't want to see the planet get cooked just because a tiny group of people want to keep reaping short-term profits by dumping garbage into the atmosphere.

Unless you think the rise of the level of the ocean and the deterioration of the ice caps is also some kind of conspiracy, if you are using the brains God gave you, you are going to have to conclude that something is causing all that ice to melt. You may not be sure how much of that is due to the increase to civilization-generated greenhouse gases and how much is due to natural planetary cycles, but that"s where being a conservative comes in, isn't it?

Conservatives don't deny possibilities that are realistic and just go on saying let's keep letting the good times roll, have fun now, and let other people worry later about the future. Especially when, if those who think we JUST MIGHT be cooking the planet happen to be right, there is no turning back any time soon if they ARE right. What we do now will take centuries to reverse if we are lucky, and perhaps a lot longer if we are not, if global warming is being caused by greenhouse gases as A LOT of (probably most) legitimate scientists and A LOT of other people (maybe most too) think is true.

So Gleick is arrogant in his certainty and clearly crossed the line here. Big deal. Lot's of other professionals do the same thing every day, and they pay the price. Gleick will too, we can count on that. But what he and others do in their zealotry has nothing to do with the underlying issue. That involves too many people all over the planet who look at the big picture and draw their own conclusions.

Ms. Saunders should get her head out of the shallow gossip and think about offering up some real food for thought if she wants her writing about this subject to be worth anybody's read.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Wed Feb 22, 2012 10:03 PM
This global warning climate debate is a complete waste of time. Consider if the cells in your body regenerate q 7 years, why is it so difficult to comprehend the earth too, regenerates itself? With only a cursory interest, anyone will find the earth and our climate is cyclical from before the time of recorded man. Land masses move, bodies of water come and go, deserts become seas and seas become deserts. Fertile land becomes barren, ice masses melt, seas become ice masses. All life residing on our earth adjusts to and follows the pattern of climate change moving and settling near food and water sources.
Our climate will change with or without interference from man. Maybe we're bringing the cycle on a little faster, but man cannot control nature. We have survived and will continue to survive by adapting and following the rhythm of nature. This global warning debate is like shaking our fists to the heavens and ranting at the Gods. It's going to happen anyway no matter which side of the argument we take.
Comment: #2
Posted by: demecra zydeem
Thu Feb 23, 2012 8:39 AM
Demecra

Wow, you put it better than I have ever seen before. "...shaking your fists to the heavens and ranting at the Gods." I tell you when you are awful, so I'm telling you when you are great. You have my ear on this one.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Tom
Thu Feb 23, 2012 9:43 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Debra J. Saunders
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Oliver North
Oliver NorthUpdated 25 May 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 25 May 2012
David Limbaugh
David LimbaughUpdated 25 May 2012

10 Aug 2010 A Question of Citizenship

6 Jul 2010 Pete Stark's Latest Rant

23 Jul 2009 Boxer and Feinstein Play Military Hawks