Slashdot Mirror
Leaked Heartland Institute Documents Reveal Opposition To Science
New submitter bheerssen writes with an excerpt from an article by The Bad Astronomer: "The Heartland Institute — a self-described 'think tank' that actually serves in part as a way for climate change denialism to get funded — has a potentially embarrassing situation on their hands. Someone going by the handle 'Heartland Insider' has anonymously released quite a few of what are claimed to be internal documents from Heartland, revealing the Institute's strategies, funds, and much more."
At least one site has the documents in question.
I could not have described the Global Warming Alarmists and the Democrat Party 's position any better! Very insightful.
I know, on one side we've got loads of data, models, research... On the other side, denial.
And that's where you ran off the rails. One side has data, models, and research, and they've drawn conclusions from it. The other side (the ones you say that have nothing but "denial") says the data, models, and research is not comprehensive enough to support the grandiose claims being made, and they have their own data, models, research, and conclusions which conflict with the AGW proponents.
Now if this were *real* science, one side or the other would be able to unequivocally silence the other with incontrivertable facts. But that's *not* the case because the AGW proponents can't *prove* their case any more than the opponents can disprove it. Their data have at times been suspect, their models are gross oversimplifications of the real world, and their research -- as is the case with all grant-funded research -- is subject to potential ideological and financial bias in either direction.
What turns me off from the whole AGW camp is their smug elitism, claiming they've got all the data and all the answers and how dare you question them. Science is *about* defending your claims, and incredible claims require incredible evidence. Every time an AGW supporter says "but we have all we need to know," I just tune them out. You *don't* have all the data. Your models *aren't* accurate simulacrums of our biosphere. Your research *is* subject to bias. If you'd just admit it then perhaps you'd gain more supporters. Instead, you get more shrill every time somebody doesn't immediately toe the AGW line regardless of *why* they're skeptical.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Actually, if you dig into the emails, and the data, and the programs, you will find they are EXACTLY what climateaudit said they were. Anyone saying they are 'out of context' is desperately trying to hide the real context that AGW is a fraud and always has been.