Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Crown Capital Earth Management Fraud Warriors

crown capital earth management fraud warriors

  • Please log in to reply
No replies to this topic

#1    decoco09

decoco09

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:27 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female

Posted 27 March 2013 - 04:24 AM

Crown Capital Earth Management Fraud Warriors - A Little Fraud to Save the Earth?


If the theory of man-made global warming were such a self-obvious truth, the result of scientific consensus, then why do its advocates keep committing fraud to advance it? Even more disturbing, why are some writers willing to defend this behavior?

Quote

The latest embarrassment for global-warming activists came Feb. 20, when Peter Gleick, founder of the Oakland-based Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security, admitted that he committed fraud to obtain documents he thought would embarrass a conservative think tank that has been a leading debunker of some of the overheated claims of the climate-change Chicken Littles.

The memos, which reveal Chicago-based Heartland Institute’s political and fund-raising strategies, provided little to embarrass Heartland, but the subterfuge to obtain them has damaged the reputation of a respected intellectual in the environmental world. Gleick, a MacArthur Foundation “genius” fellow, doesn’t seem brilliant now, having taken a leave of absence from the institute and facing public embarrassment and possible prosecution. (Heartland contends one memo was fabricated, which Gleick denies, but the scandal could get uglier.)

After Gleick admitted and apologized for his action, Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik defended him: “It’s a sign of the emotions wrapped up in the global warming debate that Gleick should be apologizing for his actions today while the Heartland Institute stakes out the moral high ground.”

“Peter Gleick lied, but was it justified by the wider good?” asked James Garvey of the liberal British newspaper the Guardian. He compared Gleick’s action to that of a man who lied to keep his friend from driving home drunk. “What Heartland is doing is harmful, because it gets in the way of public consensus and action,” Garvey argued. “If his lie has good effects overall – if those who take Heartland’s money to push skepticism are dismissed as shills, if donors pull funding after being exposed in the press – then perhaps on balance he did the right thing…. It depends on how this plays out.”






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users