Jean Chemick also forgot to report that Michael Mann’s “open letter” was compiled and distributed by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
In Climatewire‘s “Scientists note irony — Heartland didn’t denounce ‘Climategate’ hacking”, reporter Jean Chemnick writes:
…”Although we can agree that stealing documents and posting them online is not an acceptable practice, we would be remiss if we did not point out that the Heartland Institute has had no qualms about utilizing and distorting emails stolen from scientists,” they said.
The scientists point to a statement released by Heartland President Joseph Bast after emails were stolen from a server at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia and released to the public.
Bast said in November 2009 that the emails appeared to show “a conspiracy to falsify data and suppress academic debate in order to exaggerate the possible threat of man-made global warming.”
“The content of the emails doesn’t surprise me or other skeptics in the warming debate,” Bast said at the time. “We have been saying for many years that the leading alarmists have engaged in academic fraud, do not speak for the larger scientific community and are exaggerating the scientific certainty of their claims.”
He added that because the case for carbon reduction rests on findings vetted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the IPCC’s integrity was now in doubt, “that entire movement stands discredited”…
Dear Jean, please check out “ScottishSceptic: Climategate vs. deniergate, fake-gate or sucker-gate” where the differences are ably laid out in tabular form so even the MSM can understand them.
Click for “Mann ‘Open Letter’ to Heartland Traced to Union of Concerned Scientists.”
The best part is that the climate hysterics shot themselves in the foot by showing how little money is actually spent at Heartland vs. the billions spent by government scientists marching to the drumbeat of zero growth anti-humanism. Bit of an oddity that despite the control of most industrial nation governments and universities, and the overwhelming bulk of the media, that they cannot force the public to believe. Apparently the public can smell equine excrement even when wrapped with phony consensus.