Skip to main content


Hero scientist, Peter Gleick, a water and climate analyst is the one responsible for exposing the Heartland agenda to spread misinformation and lies and subvert any real action for the climate change crisis.  He did so at considerable risk to his career and personal reputation.

Peter Gleick - World Economic Forum Annual Meeting Davos 2009
Peter Gleick, President, Pacific Institute, USA, speaks during the session 'The Politics of Water' at the Annual Meeting 2009 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 31, by Remy Steinegger 2009.

In the latest revelation, Peter Gleick, a water scientist and president of the Pacific Institute who has been active in the climate wars, apologised on Monday for using a false name to obtain materials from Heartland, a Chicago-based think tank with a core mission of dismissing climate change.
The admission – nearly a week after Heartland's financial plans and donors' list was put online – looked set to further inflame the climate wars, in which a network of fossil fuel interests, rightwing think tanks and politicians have been working to block action on climate change.
This has now gone nuclear as Gleick has taken on a top Democratic operative and crisis manager, Chris Lehane. Lehane, who worked in the Clinton White House is credited for exposing the rightwing forces arrayed against the Democratic president. He was Al Gore's press secretary during his 2000 run for the White House.
"Heartland has been subverting well-understood science for years," wrote Scott Mandia, co-founder of the climate science rapid response team. "They also subvert the education of our school children by trying to ;'teach the controversy' where none exists."

He went on: "Peter Gleick, a scientist who is also a journalist just used the same tricks that any investigative reporter uses to uncover the truth. He is the hero and Heartland remains the villain. He will have many people lining up to support him."

Now we will have the national discussion about climate change that is needed.  I doubt that Lehane will let this fall by the wayside.

Peter Gleick is President of Pacific Institute.  You can send your support for him here.  Just click contact link.

Originally posted to DK GreenRoots on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:00 AM PST.

Also republished by Climate Hawks.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  It's time (17+ / 0-)

    we reward whistle blowers.  We need them.  Hats off to Peter Gleick and those who line up to support him.

    Be the change you want to see in the world. -Gandhi

    by DRo on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:06:58 AM PST

  •  Looking forward to see indignation... (11+ / 0-)

    ... from the Rupert Murdoch apparatus that interfered with the voice mail of a missing 13 year old girl and may have prevented her from being rescued.

  •  DON'T APOLOGIZE DAMMIT! (9+ / 0-)

    Jesus!, isn't it just fucking typical to APOLOGIZE for a damn good covert op that gets results.

    "Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected."


    Fuck that.

    He ought to be standing up proudly and declaring that the war is on.

    "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

    by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:38:25 AM PST

  •  "taken on" Lehane, as in "hired" or "confronted"? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WarrenS, MGross, RunawayRose

    it is not explicitly clear which.

    It seems curiosity has killed the cat that had my tongue.

    by Murphoney on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:39:03 AM PST

  •  What kind of a society do we live in (11+ / 0-)

    ... if liars can claim victimhood for being exposed as liars?  If Heartland's donors were funding an educational organization, wouldn't they be proud to trumpet their involvement?  Why would they scurry into the shadows like cockroaches the minute the light comes on?

    Because they're lying, misinforming the American people, contributing to the worst catastrophe mankind has ever faced, and they're doing it for short-term profit.

    Why is Glieck the bad guy for exposing the lies and the liars, again?

    When Free Speech is outlawed, only outlaws will have Free Speech.

    by Dallasdoc on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:40:40 AM PST

    •  Gleick is not bad guy and we need to have his (10+ / 0-)

      back on this...because the pushback will be ferocious.

      •  Gleick needs to stop being a wimp and... (4+ / 0-)

        ... go into warrior mode.

        THIS is disgraceful: "Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected."  I read those lines and they made me so mad I could just spit nails.  

        What he should have said is, "I have only just begun to fight!"

        Fuck!, I am so fucking sick of people who can barely throw a punch before they feel compelled to apologize!  What I want to see is them going for the jugular, going for the kill, and then pissing on the enemy's corpses.  And if they have to apologize for anything, they can apologize for the pissing but not for the corpses.   Did Obama apologize to Bin Laden's family?  Hell no.

        The climate deniers are setting the world up for a dieoff that will be equivalent to the outcome of a nuclear war.  For this they deserve to be treated like war criminals, and anything less than a United Nations tribunal, ending up with being put before a firing squad, is merciful.  

        Gleick needs to take a few lessons from Seal Team 6 and apply them, nonviolently but relentlessly.  

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 06:19:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  My husband's like that sometimes (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WarrenS, G2geek

          He's always the one to take the blame, to apologize first, to admit he made a mistake. Drives me crazy. Some years ago we were rear ended by a guy who was driving too fast. The impact pushed our car up off the street and on to the sidewalk. My husband jumps out and starts apologizing to the other driver. "Honey, shut up! He hit US!"

          Climate deniers are hitting us and hitting us and hitting us. They are condemning our children to a world where between half (good outcome) and 97% (bad outcome) of them will die from climate related causes in the next 30-50 years. I think that's worth fighting for. I wish President Obama would think about his kids on this issue. If it was me, I'd declare marshal law and arrest the lot of them and disappear them into Gitmo.

          I know which side I am on: the one that does the math.

          by Grassroots Mom on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:09:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Mr. Gleick has already proven he's no wimp just (3+ / 0-)

          by bringing this to light. That took courage that most people don't have. To call him names because he doesn't fit your idea of a warrior is just wrong.   He is fighting the good fight in his own way. We need to have his back, not be taking potshots at him.

          Just give me some truth. John Lennon--- OWS------Too Big To Fail

          by burnt out on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:16:02 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  by apologizing, he allows the enemy to... (0+ / 0-)

            .... go on the attack and make HIM the issue rather than making THEM the issue.  

            It's a strategic fail.  Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

            And I'll call 'em as I see 'em.  

            "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

            by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 04:14:48 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I hate arguing with someone I agree with 99.% of (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              the  time and I do get your point but I also call them like I see them and attacking those who  fight the same enemy, though it be in a different way, is not helping.

              Just give me some truth. John Lennon--- OWS------Too Big To Fail

              by burnt out on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 05:35:16 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  And I don't much like going on the.... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                burnt out

                ... attack against people who are on our side.  

                But here we have an absolutely masterful gray op that resulted in a huge hit against an enemy that seeks to plunge the world into a catastrophe that's equivalent to a nuclear war in terms of total death toll.  And then the guy who's at the center of it comes out and takes credit for it.   So far, so good.  If the story had ended there, I'd be in the bleachers cheering loudly too.

                But instead he tells the world how he did it: by using a fake name to request more documents.  That's already a problem; we call it an "OPSEC break": he broke operational security, thereby tipping off the enemy to key operational details.  This enables this particular enemy (Heartland) to protect themselves in the future, and more to the point, it enables our enemies in general to do so.  The result is to shut down an entire avenue of attack in the future.  

                And then worst of all, he goes into apology mode, as if to say that what he did was wrong!  The moment he does that, he enables the enemy to turn and attack him, and make him (rather than them) the issue.  That has the potential to destroy the value of the information that was released.  

                I wouldn't be so bloody vociferous about this but for the fact that I've run more gray ops and covert ops in general in my lifetime than just about anyone on this site who doesn't work for CIA.  I know the territory like my own fingerprints, and I know how to make these things succeed without the participants getting exposed, much less "blamed."  I know how to do these types of ops so the entire focus of the media or the public is on the target, not on the people who conducted the operation.  

                I've done this stuff so many times it isn't even funny, and some of the stuff I've worked on has made news, has gotten rightwing terrorists investigated and prosecuted, and has had impacts on policies.  So I have more than sufficient standing to speak about these things.   And believe you me, my rants about Gleick's retreat barely scratch the surface of what I'd have to say about it if I didn't restrain myself.  

                I wish it was possible to train people in this stuff quickly, and then hold something like training sessions for people in Gleick's position.  But part of it is a kind of innate sensibility that is very hard to teach.  And then there's the actual effort it takes to fully secure an operation, and protect those involved, and line up channels for the effective release of information, and so on: all of which take a lot of work, and someone without the core mindset usually finds the amount of work involved to be excessive.  

                Sure Gleick's a hero for doing the op and releasing the stuff, granted.  But for goodness sake don't blow it after the fact!  Take a hint from Anonymous: keep the threat active, keep the enemy guessing, keep 'em scared and on the defensive and on the run.  (I do not approve of Anon's actions against the military and law enforcement agencies, and I have also made loud noises around here to that effect; though I do approve of their hits on certain private-sector targets such as H.B. Gary, and I make loud noises around here about those too.)  

                Never give in, never give up, never cry Uncle, and always stay in attack mode.  Whether the battleground is GOTV, whether it's protesting the TBTFs, whether it's covert/gray ops, or the media, or whatever: staying in attack mode is essential to victory.  And when it comes to the climate crisis, victory means averting literally billions of painful and tragic deaths.  The stakes could not be higher.  

                "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

                by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 06:13:41 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm hopelessly outmatched discussing covert ops (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  with you so I won't even try to go there. I bow to your knowledge and wisdom in that area. I even admit that you have convinced me that Mr. Gleick made a couple mistakes. So if your comments in this post were meant to educate , then you have succeeded. But you are obviously intelligent enough to have done that without making a personal attack on the man who this diary was all about. And that's the point I've  been trying to make. On the other hand I guess I should be happy that you restrained yourself. Anyway, nuff said, as always, appreciate your viewpoints, even on the rare occasion when, like now, you're wrong. : )

                  Just give me some truth. John Lennon--- OWS------Too Big To Fail

                  by burnt out on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 07:52:00 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  heehee.... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    burnt out

                    .... we'll see whether I'm wrong or what:-)

                    I'll readily admit that my attack on Gleick for his apparent retreat was largely an emotional reaction of being bloody pissed off for all the reasons I've described.  

                    But anyway, I wrote to Michael Mann, he of the hockey stick curve, to ask him to please tell Gleick to go into warrior mode and stop apologizing.   But I also asked Mann to tell me in blunt terms if I was "not even wrong" about this and there's something more strategic at work.  So we'll see.  And if it turns out I'm wrong (or "not even wrong") about this, that'll be reflected in my postings.

                    I'm not attached to my hypothesis.  I wish it was wrong.  I'd love to wake up tomorrow to discover that Gleick managed to lure the enemy into a fatal trap where they are presently being eaten alive by poisonous ants.  But anyway, we'll see.  

                    "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

                    by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:23:28 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  In fact, he's a good guy. (6+ / 0-)

        He's a brilliant scientist - recognized as a MacArthur "genius" award winner, among other things - who is waging a lonely battle to inform people about the growing threats to the most fundamental of live-giving properties of the Earth: fresh water.

        I know Peter personally, and he's a stand-up guy as well. Let's just trust and accept that he has good reasons for his public statements, and then "get his back," as 48forEastAfrica just said. Peter's battles are our battles, and he's just opened himself up to the right-wing cans of whoop-ass.

        If you don't stick to your values when they're tested, they're not values. They're... hobbies. -- Jon Stewart, Jan. 22, 2009

        by pat208 on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 07:24:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I... (3+ / 0-) going to use your framing in a LTE.  Gracias.

      Freedom isn't "on the march." Freedom dances.

      by WarrenS on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 08:43:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If only you understood the irony in your signature (0+ / 0-)
  •  I sent him... (10+ / 0-)

    ...the following email:

    My heartfelt gratitude for your act of courage and principle in exposing the Heartland Institute's agenda.

    Please do not apologize for doing the right thing.  They are the ones who owe an apology to America and the world.

    There will be many who will send you hatred and abuse.  How I wish that our nation had not come to this state of affairs.

    Thank you once again.

    Warren Senders

    Freedom isn't "on the march." Freedom dances.

    by WarrenS on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 06:20:16 AM PST

    •  Perfect Warren, and I think it will be much (6+ / 0-)

      appreciated.  He is brave by any standard..may even be in danger.  The bastards are holding on to their money with tight fists.

      •  ".... holding on to their money." Bingo! (4+ / 0-)

        Now we see where the wimpy disgraceful apology came from.

        Someone is in a position to threaten his organization's funding.

        I'd be willing to bet dollars to proverbial donuts that it's all about the funding.  

        If he hadn't debased himself and by extension the entire cause, by that groveling apology, I'd be standing up right now and singing the praises.  Hell, he's local to me so I'd be volunteering to install his organization's next PBX for cost of parts and donated labor (muscles & money where mouth is).  

        This is just downright depressing and maddening.  Somehow either we get the Compromisers or we get the Rock Throwers.  What we need are Warriors who do not compromise, do not waver, and do not back down, but who go to war nonviolently using every method and every tactic this side of the law plus sit-ins.  Where are we going to find them?    

        "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

        by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 07:01:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  you've got it all wrong. I meant the ones who fund (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WarrenS, RunawayRose, burnt out

          climate denial propaganda are the ones who are holding on to the profits they are making from wrecking the planet.
          No wonder there aren't more whistle blowers..wrath from both sides...geez.

          Gleick has legal and probably physical dangers now. I'm sure his attorneys are in agreement with the apology and may have advised it.

          •  we don't know that, do we? (0+ / 0-)

            It's not as if he prefaced that remark with " lawyers have advised me...."

            Now what happens is that the enemy gets to make HIM the issue.  

            That's called snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

            As for physical danger, if that's the issue he shouldn't have come out and claimed responsibility for the leak.  

            Sorry, but I think we have the right to expect more from the presidents of well-funded nonprofits, for example leadership rather than duck-and-cover.  

            "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

            by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 04:17:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  we know that he has legal stands to (0+ / 0-)

              reason that if you have legal counsel you use their advice.  It's doubtful he would go against their advise...they wouldn't represent him.   The enemy gets to make it an issue if we don't have his back.   We become our own enemy.   I think he handled it perfectly.  

              •  so here's what I did. (0+ / 0-)

                I just wrote to Michael Mann, he of the hockey-stick curve, asking him to please tell Gleick to go into warrior mode and pull his apology.

                I also asked Mann to tell me in blunt language if I'm "not even wrong" about this.  Presumably he of all people would be in a position to know if there was something more at work here than an ill-considered retreat.  

                So we'll see what happens, and the outcome will be reflected in my further posts about this.

                "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

                by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 09:16:53 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

    •  hi Warren! If you saw what I was about to send... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      OleHippieChick, WarrenS

      .... your hair would curl.  

      I'm bloody pissed off about that apology.  Here's what he said:  "Nevertheless I deeply regret my own actions in this case. I offer my personal apologies to all those affected."

      Apologies to all those affected?  To the monsters who are pushing us toward a dieoff equivalent to a nuclear war?  

      What, Gleick deeply regrets that he's put their careers at risk?  Because if you look at his bio, it's clear he's also part of the 1% in terms of lifestyle, so maybe a little class sympathy for his fellow 1%-ers who won't be able to enjoy quite so many perks and privileges after they get knocked off their pedestal?  Because to those who have spent their lives cushing along on all the cushy advantages, it's all an abstraction in the end?  Two or three billion more deaths just being more fodder for nonprofiteering?  

      Shit.  He deserves a nonviolent whipped-cream pie in the puss, to make him stop taking himself so seriously.

      Anyway, I'll take your example under advisement and remove some of the fiery language from my own email, and hope he gets plenty more of the "don't apologize" emails where those came from.

      But really, what these types need are fewer soirees, charettes, salons, and other "beautiful people" events, and a stint in a ditch with a shovel in hand, wondering how they're going to make rent, and whether they're going to have heat or meat this month.  Then maybe they'll get a little dose of the warrior spirit and stop apologizing to people who are the moral equivalent of Nazis.    

      "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

      by G2geek on Tue Feb 21, 2012 at 06:53:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Rule of law much? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OleHippieChick, BachFan

    It does not matter what you think of Heartland.  I oppose essentially everything they say or do.  But if you act in violation of laws concerning fraud you should expect consequences.  Each of us that chooses to violate some law(s) as an act of civil disobedience must balance these issues.

    Gleick's actions as I understand them were not protected by any whistle blower cover.  The man has apologized and we should grant him agency concerning this, especially since he is a noted spokesman on scientific ethics and integrity.

  •  Steve McIntyre has a post (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OleHippieChick, MGross

    on the Heartland documents written just before Dr. Gleick's apology appeared.  Well worth your time.

  •  "Anonymous Email?" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You realize there's a relatively decent chance Mr. Gleick may been the source for what appears to be a fabricated document, right?

    At the very least, he owes us as much as he knows about this alleged source.

    This is like the Killian memo hoax all over again...

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site