Peter Gleik phished some genuine files from the Heartland Institute. The files revealed what everyone knows, what no one has ever denied, and what the Heartland Institute has frequently announced: That the Heartland Institute is funding science that is skeptical of global warming, though its funding is ludicrously tiny, while Peter Gleik received half a million dollars to attack skeptics and help the warming cause.
He then created what he probably considered to be a truthful summary of these files and fraudulently attributed his summary to the Heartland Institute. Doubtless he thought of the summary as fake but accurate. The summary, however, is written from within the left worldview, not from the Heartland Institute worldview. It contained numerous tells, lines that gave away its true authorship, among them its description of Gleik as a climate scientist, rather than a political activist, and gave away much about the minds of leftists.
I hear a reader saying: “Surely it gives away much about Peter Gleik, not all leftists?”
But all important leftists are one leftist, since it is mandatory for all leftists to think alike about almost everything, whereas the right is a loose amalgamation of every interest group that is being stomped on by the left. Ordinary leftists at the bottom might have deviant thoughts on one issue or another, but a higher level leftist that gets half a million dollars to help the warming cause is going to be believe exactly and precisely what every leftist is supposed to believe on every single issue with absolute and genuine sincerity – or something that he is incapable of distinguishing from absolute and genuine sincerity. If you are remotely capable of having a deviant thought on any issue whatsoever, you do not get half a million dollars.
Now a lot of people say the fake memo cannot be Gleik’s work, because you would have to be a gibbering idiot to write such nonsense, to imagine that anyone would believe the Heartland Institute would have written such nonsense – but being a leftist, or at least being a highly paid leftist, requires you to make yourself as dumb as a post. If it was not Gleik’s work, it was work approved by Gleik, or credulously believed by Gleik, therefore, he really was that stupid – or rather it is mandatory for all leftists, no matter how clever to make themselves that stupid.
There are several lines in the memo that reveal it to be a fake, the most quoted being:
His effort will focus on providing curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain – two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science.
Obviously climate skeptics do not believe that teachers who teach global warming are teaching science, but rather believe that teachers are teaching dogmatic worship of the goddess Gaia. The line presupposes that science is official truth, whereas skeptics believe that science is knowledge derived from the scientific method.
But what is more revealing is what was not there. The killer line from the climategate files was
trick to hide the decline
Which self summarized what was revealed – that warmists cherry picked data that supported their position, and suppressed or “corrected” data that contradicted their position, with the result that all their alleged data was poisoned by “corrections” and cherry picking.
The Warmist response to this was to say that it was totally legitimate and completely ethical for scientists to make up data to show things that they knew to be true, and delete data that appeared to show things that they knew to be false.
Now since denialgate was intended as response to climategate, one might have expected the fake memo to contain the phrase “Trick to hide the X”, where X is one of the many things that warmists believe is happening, such as melting glaciers, but skeptics have noticed is not happening.
That it does not contain that line reveals that warmists don’t think “trick to hide the X” is incriminating – but the lines that it does contain reveal that they think that failure to believe in official truth is incriminating.
The skeptic analysis of the climategate files was that warmist scientists were cooking the data to conform to peer review. Gleik’s analysis of the Heartland documents is that the Heartland Institute is heretically refusing to believe the official consensus.
Tags: not the cognitive elite