Fakegate: Gleick fesses up

So now we know who solicited and distributed the Heartland Institute documents.

Peter Gleick has issued a statement (emphasis mine):

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. 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 but assumed it was sent to me because of my past exchanges with Heartland and because I was named in it.

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. The materials the Heartland Institute sent to me confirmed many of the facts in the original document, including especially their 2012 fundraising strategy and budget. I forwarded, anonymously, the documents I had received to a set of journalists and experts working on climate issues. I can explicitly confirm, as can the Heartland Institute, that the documents they emailed to me are identical to the documents that have been made public. I made no changes or alterations of any kind to any of the Heartland Institute documents or to the original anonymous communication.

I will not comment on the substance or implications of the materials; others have and are doing so. I only note that the scientific understanding of the reality and risks of climate change is strong, compelling, and increasingly disturbing, and a rational public debate is desperately needed. 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. Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected.

Gleick has ruined his personal reputation by his actions, but more importantly, has further sullied the already embattled climate ‘science’ lobby. Andrew Revkin said it best:

One way or the other, Gleick’s use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others. (Some of the released documents contain information about Heartland employees that has no bearing on the climate fight.) That is his personal tragedy and shame (and I’m sure devastating for his colleagues, friends and family).

The broader tragedy is that his decision to go to such extremes in his fight with Heartland has greatly set back any prospects of the country having the “rational public debate” that he wrote — correctly — is so desperately needed.

DeSmogBlog is calling Gleick a whistleblowing hero, but their own reputation is so tarnished it likely won’t be enough to save his position at the Pacific Institute. Many of the scientific associations and groups to which Gleick belongs will have to  jettison him too, or risk having their own ethics called into question.

Fakegate isn’t quite over yet. Gleick has not admitted to writing the fake memo, so there’s that loose end to tie up.

The green movement hasn’t suffered an own goal this serious since the 10:10 splattergate movie.  On Valentines Day just last week, Peter Gleick was a respected scientist and activist and the Heartland Institute was a privately-funded bogeyman that warmists claimed distributed untold amounts of money into a ‘well-organized climate denial machine.’

Seven days later, we know Peter Gleick is a radical activist who abandoned any pretense of ethics to bring down the ‘opposition’ that frustrated him, and that Heartland’s actual budget is tiny when compared to the big green NGO’s.

Nice work, hippies.