Read the following (allegedly) from the Libertarian "Think Tank" called "The Heartland Institute," and think back to how outraged the Global-Warming Deniers were in falsely claiming that the climate scientist at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) were keeping out opposing views of those deniers. "Eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct."
Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow highprofile climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own. This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate and it is important to keep opposing voices out.
Here's what The Heartland Institute has written on its website:
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.
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.
Read the whole article: "Heartland Institute Responds to Stolen and Fake Documents."
Here's my take on that Heartland post. That post says that documents were emailed by Heartland. Now, if Heartland's explanation is correct, at least you'd think Heartland would say that it fully understands how anyone would think the documents are Heartland documents since they came from Heartland via email. I also wonder if Heartland itself waited until East Anglia confirmed the authenticity of every email before Heartland commented negatively about those emails. I also wonder if, in the face of East Anglia's statements and the outcomes of the investigations, Heartland has retracted every statement Heartland has made about those emails. Is the Heartland's public position now that all of the "Climategate" hubbub was the total smokescreen that it was? I'm sure they won't get far attacking every site that took Heartland emails for Heartland emails if Heartland itself didn't wait concerning the East Anglia emails and hasn't done a complete retraction.
Well, we'll see how the original-source journalist(s) respond. They won't reveal their sources. However, someone along the line may obtain and reveal email-server logs substantiated by the server host that might not jibe with Heartland's version. It could go the other way though.
Heartland didn't release the full email-headers concerning the emails in question. Why not? If they are going to go to court over this, they'll have to open those up in public anyway.
Do you think the libertarians will be yelling and screaming about the (alleged) censorship efforts of The Heartland Institute? You know they won't. What's really important though also to note is that the (alleged/reported) statement by that Institute is not subject to interpretation or being taken out of context the way the libertarians took the East Anglia emails and twisted them to suit the libertarians' twisted, selfish, greedy, anti-environmental purposes.
Well, that's the best anyone can do. We'll see.