Gleickgate

" 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." Well, Peter Gleick, that is an admission of fraud and theft. The documents reveal no wrongdoing by the Heartland Institute and merely confirm what we already know about them. They are a registered charitable educational institution supported by like minded people just like all other such organizations. This is not whistleblowing but an invasion of privacy. The subsequent spreading of these documents around the internet is bullying and detrimental to the reputations, not only of the Heartland Institute but to those in the climate alarmist camp. It shows they will stoop to criminal acts in a misguided effort to discredit their adversaries. It shows that they do not believe in the strength of their scientific case otherwise such egregious actions would not be 'necessary'. Science is settled through peer reviewed research as presented and argued in scientific journals. The research consists of observations and experiments with reported results and interpretations clearly available to all for further input, modification and eventual agreement. A consensus is formed not by counting heads in favor of a theory but by the agreement of the theory with observations of reality. Confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance resonate in the scientific journals and it is the interplay between the two that eventually ferrets out the truth about the way reality works.
Peter Gleick's "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," is no excuse for criminal acts and as Andrew Revkin has said:  "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)."

Peter Gleick, who speaks on ethics, has shot himself in the foot and undermined his own integrity. Why listen to a hypocrite who changes his mind at his convenience?

The personal tragedy that is Peter Gleick is a sad commentary on the climate wars debate. Reality is the ultimate judge and so far reality trumps the theory that human induced CO2 is the cause of the modern warming.

Here is how 'climate scientists' manipulate data to prove their point. Talk about honesty and integrity in climate science. It is easy to see who doesn't have it.