Education

Does Think Tank‘s ’Fakegate’ Reveal Agenda to Spread Global Warming Skepticism in Schools?

Is The Heartland Institute Trying to Deny Climate Data or Show Both Sides in Its Climate Change Curriculum?

  • A leak of internal strategy documents from the free market think-tank The Heartland Institute reveals what some believe is an agenda setting out to bring skepticism to climate change data.
  • Some of this plan involves a K-12 climate science curriculum that shows conflicting data to that which shows man-made global warming. Heartland sees this presentation as showing both sides of the climate science story.
  • “Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective.” — Heartland
  • Peter Gleick, a climate activist who is the president of the Pacific Institute, admitted to deceitfully obtaining the documents and is now under investigation.

Last week, internal documents of a free market think-tank were leaked. These documents confirmed what some already held about The Heartland Institute: some believed it has a climate denialism agenda; that it was advocating against man-made global warming. But is it really?

Some of the documents, which were later admitted to have been taken under a false identity by Peter Gleick of the Pacific Institute, hold a plan for climate science education in schools. Many have taken this as proof that Heartland was planning to spread climate denialism in schools.

(Related: ‘Serious lapse’ of my judgment and ethics: impostor who took think tank’s global warming docs revealed)

Brad Plumer, in a post on Ezra Klein’s Wonkblog for the Washington Post, wrote that Heartland’s“skeptical teachings [...] could find plenty of fertile soil” in America’s educational atmosphere with the National Science Teachers Association finding in 2011 that 54 percent of teachers said they had parents who presented them with a questioning view of man-made global warming. He also reports one teacher from California saying “I teach that we are always evaluating and learning. Nothing is in stone… I teach both sides.”

Teaching both sides is exactly what The Heartland Institute has said it is doing. In the New York Times’ Green blog, David Wojick, who consults for the Department of Energy and helped create the K-12 climate science curriculum, is reported as saying:

“My research field is the logic of complex issues and I have studied the climate debate for 20 years,” Dr. Wojick, who has a doctorate in the philosophy of science, wrote in the e-mail. “There are many elementary debates in the science that need to be understood. Of course if you do not believe this then we have nothing to discuss.”

Asked to specify what those points of debate are, Dr. Wojick wrote at length:

“Regarding the warming issue, it is scientifically fascinating. There are 5 different systems for estimating global temperatures, with a 6th in development. The problem is that these systems contradict one another. While all show some warming it occurs in different amounts and most importantly at very different times. Science needs something specific to explain but we just do not have that with warming. For example, HadCRU, UAH and RSS show no warming for the last 10-15 years, while GISS and BEST show steady warming,” he said, referring to the systems.

“So has it warmed or not, we do not know. It is a grand challenge. This is scientifically fascinating and should be taught,” he concluded.

It’s this conundrum — conflicting data — that lead Wojick to help Heartland with the curriculum. Many mainstream climate experts hold that the data available shows without a doubt that the Earth is warming and that human activity has contributed to it. For example, the Times reports Gavin Schmidt, a climate scientist with Goddard Institute for Space Studies, as saying the curriculum was “using details to obscure” the science and that Wojick was being “blind” to the data.

The Heartland Institute’s president Joseph Bast has confirmed that all the documents released are authentic, except for a memo that he was was forged. Gleick has denied altering any of the documents in the leak that he called “a serious lapse in his judgement and ethics.”

Reuters reports that Gleick is now being investigated by the Pacific Institute, a climate research organization of which he is the founder and president:

The Oakland-based institute revealed its inquiry into the widening controversy in a terse statement posted on Wednesday on its website, hours after the San Francisco Chronicle said it was discontinuing an online blog that Gleick had been writing for the newspaper.

“The Board of Directors of the Pacific Institute is deeply concerned and is actively reviewing information about the recent events involving its president … and documents pertaining to the Heartland Institute,” the board statement said.

Here is what Heartland’s internal document (via DeSmogBlog, one of the first blogs to publish the leaked documents) said about the curriculum:

Heartland has tried to make material available to teachers, but has had only limited success. Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective. Moreover, material for classroom use must be carefully written to meet curriculum guidelines, and the amount of time teachers have for supplemental material is steadily shrinking due to the spread of standardized tests in K-12 education.

[...]

Dr. Wojick proposes to begin work on “modules” for grades 10-12 on climate change (“whether humans are changing the climate is a major scientific controversy”), climate models (“models are used to explore various hypotheses about how climate works. Their reliability is controversial”), and air pollution (“whether CO2 is a pollutant is controversial. It is the global food supply and natural emissions are 20 times higher than human emissions”).

In what it is calling “Fakegate” — actually coined by the Telegraph columnist James Delingpole – Heartland has also noted that Gleick was removed by the ethics task force of the American Geophysical Union and resigned from the National Center for Science Education.

In addition to strategy documents, Gleick was able to obtain fundraising and budget information about the Institute by posing as someone else to a Heartland employee who turned over the information. Gleick has said his “judgement was blinded by his frustration” over the attack on climate science.

Comments (63)

1 2
  • joey59
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 3:26pm

    Was’nt there a time when we were shown/taught both sides of an idea or a past event, with the intent being that we could make OUR OWN judgement or conclusion? This culture of primarily teaching biased, one sided information to undisciplined minds has left us with a society where most people cannot think for themselves. They literally have one track minds and refuse to be shown the possibility of an alternative train of thought. I refuse to let this happen to my grandchildren and will spend my remaining days as part of that segment of our society that’s working towards reversing this national disaster.

    Report Post »  
    • jzs
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 4:03pm

      We should also teach both sides of the issue about whether astronauts actually landed on the moon, or whether it was all staged. Kids should hear both sides.

      Report Post » jzs  
    • joey59
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 4:51pm

      Thanks for your confirmative comment. Being of the generation that was taught that there are two sides of info and that both should be researched, I have the answer on the moon landing.

      Report Post »  
    • Pigpen
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 8:01pm

      JOEY59, what JZS means to say is, “Shut up and get back in line, peasant! If we want you to think, we’ll TELL you what to think! Without us, the intellegentsia, the technocrati, dare I say illuminati?,… you ignorant hicks would still be going to Church, having kids before you were 40 yrs old, and eating at McDonalds…”

      Report Post » Pigpen  
    • littlefish
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 7:15pm

      I didn’t know science “answers” were either one side or another . . . .
      I thought that kind of faith was more likely found in the philosophy department . . .
      like creationism and astrology

      Report Post » littlefish  
    • wvernon1981
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 7:18pm

      With climate science and other sciences, you aren’t able to make a good judgement abou the validity of competing hypothesis unless you are an expert. The amount of knowledge we have in specific domains is so great, one needs to be an expert to understand the merits of the arguments for and against the different hypothesis.

      Report Post »  
    • Fear The Voices
      Posted on February 27, 2012 at 9:15pm

      JZS – Kids should be taught the difference between propaganda and fact. They should be taught to be able to think and evaluate things for themselves. Instead of parroting talking points drilled into their heads by teachers and their celebrity manipulators.

      You just beautifully illustrated the criticism we make of your wonderful public indoctrination.

      Report Post » Fear The Voices  
    • Boson Higgs
      Posted on May 4, 2012 at 3:13pm

      JZS makes the elementary mistake of confusing FACTS for ARGUMENTS. It is a problem which is shared by children and the ill-logical. There are no “sides” to a fact; it is either true or false. Only a fool or an idiot would try to argue about a fact. The a quite provable. For instance, it is a fact that the Earth was so warm 1,000 years ago that Greenland had virtually NO glacier cover and the Arctic ice cover disappeared. Yet, the Earth recovered and mankind continued to thrive. These are fact which even JZS would admit are true, if he were a rational, educated person.

      Report Post » Boson Higgs  
  • mdavid
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 3:14pm

    Gleick better get jail time for corporate espionage. Leave it to the MSM to water down his crimes and in some cases praise his unlawful behavior – apology or not.

    Report Post » mdavid  
  • the blazer
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 2:32pm

    Wanna guess why the 2 sides don’t get together in a public forum and debate the issue?

    “… nearly two years to the day after similar emails ignited the Climategate scandal.
    Three themes are emerging from the newly released emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data. …
    ‘… One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process,’ writes Phil Jones, a scientist working with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change …
    ‘Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden,” … “I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data.’
    ‘Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. …’”

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2011/11/23/climategate-2-0-new-e-m

    Report Post »  
  • Byrdi
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 1:50pm

    Canada has gotten out of the Kyoto Treaty. The parliament in the UK just actually listened to a well known scientist, former IPCC member, who debunks the alleged alarmists on climate change. I am hoping the world rejects this so called science before the world goes bankrupt over a scam.

    Report Post »  
  • momsense
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 12:17pm

    Considering just how the East Anglia University deleted, doctored or omitted some of the data that would have caused questions about global warming, I think a little skepticiam is a healthy thing. I also have to question was it about science or about grant money?

    Report Post »  
    • wvernon1981
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 7:21pm

      Several academic inquiries cleared the scientists of all allegations of academic fraud.

      Report Post »  
  • purecolorartist
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 11:40am

    Maybe he should get this year’s (Peter Gleick’s) “2012 Climate B.S.* ” award which the Pacific Institute issues every year. Look it up…Ha ha ha!

    Report Post » purecolorartist  
  • Listen_then_think
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 11:35am

    Someone SHOULD be teaching skepticism about man made global warming. I teach my children not to take someone elses word for it, find out on your own. I you just swallow anything others vomit, that makes you a bird or a liberal.

    Report Post »  
    • MammalOne
      Posted on February 28, 2012 at 12:30pm

      Do you teach your children to be skeptical of the claims of christianity?

      Report Post » MammalOne  
  • acovenantinblood
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 10:59am

    “…some believed it has a climate denialism agenda; that it was advocating against man-made global warming.”

    But on the other hand some believe that their is an agenda to push man made climate change. If it were true they would let us have the debate.

    Report Post » acovenantinblood  
  • DieBambi
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 9:39am

    Foxnews.com has an article this morning about climate change causing a drought that caused the decline and eventual demise of the Mayan Empire. I guess our coal fired plants, trucks, SUVs, etc, caused global warming centuries ago too.

    Report Post » DieBambi  
    • TulsaYeeHaw
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 10:38am

      Here I thought that the peace loving, never scalped their neigbor tribe and enslaved their women, advanced until the white man showed up indians were using anti-matter power. Never knew it was coal.

      Hmmmm. Learn something everyday :)

      Report Post »  
    • littlefish
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 7:20pm

      The Mayans were heavy breathers and farters . . .lots of methane and C0 2 . . ..
      Course there were those pesky aliens from alpha centaura . . . .messin’ with our dna

      Report Post » littlefish  
  • kfrederic
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 8:48am

    I was priviledged to have a 20 minute conversation with Lord Christopher Monckton last fall. It‘s sad the climate bigots aren’t inclined or even forced to hear the facts. Climate change is a natural phenomemon and the is no credible evidence that man has any noticeable or lasting effect. Climate change is not a reason to change behavior other than to rethink how governments fund “research” and the UN.

    Report Post » kfrederic  
    • G-WHIZ
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 11:31am

      In a couple of milion years, a scientist will be looking at thin layers of sedimentary rock in the north-american regeon. He/she looks at it and finds a small inter-layer of a slightly radioactive unknown substance…and postulizes about what civalization was composed of radioactive particles in their makeup. I hope with all that I ‘m made-of , that this does not come to pass. (:o

      Report Post »  
  • Theodwulf
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 5:42am

    On the topic of AGW , the Blaze has always ben behind the curve… http://wattsupwiththat.com/

    Report Post » Theodwulf  
  • shogun459
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 3:07am

    They were teaching us that HUMANS CAUSE GLOBAL COOLING in the 70′s then it got warmer and we saw the Con.
    Now a new generation that hasn’t been taught to ask questions is being told by the same people that the “World has a Temperature” now it’s cooling again and everytime the same people say HUMANS are HURTING the planet.
    The EARTH is a rock, It’s ours we live here, get over yourself and get a real job.

    Report Post » shogun459  
    • wvernon1981
      Posted on February 26, 2012 at 10:31pm

      Which data set shows cooling?

      Report Post »  
    • Boson Higgs
      Posted on May 4, 2012 at 2:57pm

      N.O.A.A. website shows that world-wide sea-levels are the same now as they were five years ago.
      Look it up.

      Report Post » Boson Higgs  
  • Texas.7
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 1:10am

    Just read on Drudge that now the World Bank of all things, wants to take control of how governments use the ocean resources to “protect it”. It would affect oil drilling, fishing where the locals thrive on fishing for food, and any other activity they deem necessary to “protect” it.

    Hillary will fit in just fine, the World Bank may become either a new UN, or double the power of the UN when we move to a world currency- or when the World Bank takes up where the Fed leaves off if it is dismantled.

    Report Post »  
  • pdw
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 12:48am

    76 is a blink of the eye but it was warmer when I was growing up in Michigan than it is now. If the ice is melting just where and how will it raise the water? Drop an ice cube in your class and let it melt, the water level will be lower after the ice melts. If just once they would try NOT to scare people and then say they have to give our tax dollars away to their friends then just maybe we would begin to start to believe them?

    Report Post »  
  • piper60
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 12:27am

    omg

    Report Post » piper60  
  • SerikFox
    Posted on February 25, 2012 at 12:00am

    Well no duh. I’m a senior this year and I can say this: you’re a few years late on this story. Funny thing about it though; it‘s so blatantly false the way they teach it that it’s almost like they want you to not “believe in global warming”. My personal favorite is when “facts” (progressive word for: lie) actually contradict each other. On the same page. Not joking. 6 times in one unit was the record (6 separate contradictions on 6 separate pages). I also love the “touchy-feely” path that education has gone down. Btw, “love” is a touchy-feely word that means “deeply despise with a passion”. The only thing I wonder about all of it, is “if I sent the information I’m taught “for my enlightenment” in school to the blaze, would it be a news story?”. Probably not. But I’m still tempted to try sometimes.

    Report Post »  
    • Rayblue
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 12:40am

      You’re young. You have a bright mind. Push it to the limit.
      We honor the brave and steady.

      Report Post » Rayblue  
    • Texas.7
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 1:20am

      There is hope for our youth!!!

      I love your humor too, “I also love the “touchy-feely” path that education has gone down. Btw, “love” is a touchy-feely word that means “deeply despise with a passion”.

      Report Post »  
    • shogun459
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 3:08am

      If the lie can’t fool this kid, I guess it says a lot about the basic intellegence of the teachers.

      Report Post » shogun459  
    • Mannax
      Posted on February 25, 2012 at 5:03am

      Send a copy of it to them. It can’t hurt.

      Report Post »  
  • marion
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 11:07pm

    Part of the Progressive Movement doctrine is to take a topic, subject, or object, and make it something it isn’t, but at the same time, have it be something that cannot be definitively proven right or wrong. Global warming cannot be proven or disproved, there are way too many variables scientists can’t predict, so it becomes a moot point, the one that speaks louder is the one that wins. What about bottled water? Take the most common molecule and sell it for $1.00 or above, when you can get it out of a tap for 1000 gallons for about $2.50 in an expensive location (That’s at least $8000 per unit, talk about profit). Heck, I have seen bottled water with ingredients include chlorine added for purity….go figure. Someone talked about polar bears becoming extint because of melting ice, they were all going to drown. Coca Cola Bottling company got sucked into that one for a short couple week period, then turned around and finally saw the light that the population is three times what it was 25 years ago….some scam, they had children crying at schools and during commercials over this. Their latest was birth control. Look up Margaret Sanger, see this is one of Hillary Clinton’s favorite people to look up to as a role model, then recognize she started stuff all the way back in the 30s, and it was so fantastic the Germans used it as part of the basis for genocide. When facts are wrong, they need to be corrected quickly, don’t give them a chance to make wrongs fact.

    Report Post »  
  • RightThinking1
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 10:38pm

    To paraphrase John Derbyshire; I do trust science…, but I do NOT trust scientists.

    Report Post »  
  • AxelPhantom
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 10:22pm

    In science it is your job to be a skeptic….to question your own biases, the validity of your own results and the legitimacy of your experiments. Too many scientists these days run their experiments with prejudice, interpret the results with a fi$cal eye, and are willfully ignorant of their own biased premises. When millions in grant money is at stake others in the peer community are far too willing to scratch one back in the hopes that eventually someone will scratch theirs. Science has been contaminated like everything else with greed, power and politics and can no longer be afforded the same respect it once was.

    Report Post »  
    • MammalOne
      Posted on February 28, 2012 at 12:35pm

      Do you know this because you‘re a scientist or are you just saying this because it feels right and you’ve heard someone say it before?

      Report Post » MammalOne  
  • purecolorartist
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 9:59pm

    I’ve been following this and the thing that jumped out at me in the actual fake email is this quote:
    “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.”
    “dissuading teachers from teaching science”?????
    This is totally counter to what the Heartland Institute is all about. I watched the videos of their Climate Change conferences. They are totally for teachers teaching real science.
    This quoted statement alone convinced me that the email in question was forged.

    Report Post » purecolorartist  
  • The-Monk
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 9:17pm

    I just came from the Blaze article, about the guy who painted the Obama Hope poster getting in trouble, to this article. I “hope” to be reading more stories about these progressive commies getting nailed for their lawlessness. Makes my day more joyful.

    Report Post » The-Monk  
  • BurntHills
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 8:33pm

    thanking God that our American family’s children have always been taught to recognize the democrats as communists and liars. they know ”global warming” is really Mother Nature’s “THE SEASONS” —- and they will never be conned by these filthy global communist animals.

    Report Post » BurntHills  
  • Razorhunters
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 8:30pm

    can you say indoctrination…

    yes , i know you can.

    Report Post » Razorhunters  
    • Chuck Stein
      Posted on February 24, 2012 at 9:05pm

      Growing up in Massachusetts, I was subject to indoctrination — a lot of it. Back then, though, they never had the temerity to use science for political purposes. Science was a sort of sanctuary from politics. The Left has destroyed that sanctuary. They make every aspect of life have a political agenda. To those who “hate politics”, please note that it is the left that has made everything political — not those who point out the politics that has infiltrated what is inherently non-political.

      Report Post »  
    • Razorhunters
      Posted on February 24, 2012 at 9:14pm

      has been and is a tragedy…
      am just glad that more americans
      are waking up to the abuse.

      peace and long life…

      Report Post » Razorhunters  
  • lukerw
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 8:29pm

    Real Sceince is… formulating the 100% Reproducible — Anything else is… Speculation or Opinion!

    Report Post » lukerw  
  • Itsjusttim
    Posted on February 24, 2012 at 8:29pm

    If Global Warming is people getting steamed, then I believe in Global Warming.

    Report Post » Itsjusttim  
    • MS Patriot
      Posted on February 24, 2012 at 9:35pm

      typical socialist agenda. Do not allow for an alternate belief or idea be taught in school. First they made it impossible for creationism to be taught as an opposing theory to evolution.

      Now the socialist will fight to keep there golden horn of plenty protected from anyone who might question global warming.

      Can someone please tell me how studying 60 years of weather, you can make a determination on planet temperature when you have supposed millions of years of data that is not included.

      60 years is but a blink of the eye in the history of our planet and it’s global temperature, but none seem to question it?

      Report Post »  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love