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.

Comments

Key climate-related takeaways

[AdamHaun]

The most damning part of the climate strategy document wasn't the curriculum stuff, it was this:

Expanded climate communications
Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in-house
experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences,
and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of
rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts).
Efforts at places such as Forbes are especially important now that they have begun to allow high
profile climate scientists (such as Gleick) to post warmist science essays that counter our own.
This influential audience has usually been reliably anti-climate and it is important to keep
opposing voices out. Efforts might also include cultivating more neutral voices with big
audiences (such as Revkin at DotEarth/NYTimes, who has a well-known antipathy for some of
the more extreme AGW communicators such as Rornm, Trenberth, and Hansen) or Curry (who
has become popular with our supporters). AVe have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in
2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature station data.

In other words, they don't want a debate.

The budget document says that their key projects are (in order of funding): eliminating or reducing FDA approval requirements for new medicines, opposing the Wisconsin recall elections (i.e. anti-union activity), opposing global warming, supporting charter schools and the privatization of education, supporting fracking, and a couple of Chicago-specific items. The Wisconsin work goes by the name Operation Angry Badger, for no apparent reason.

The fundraising document is the most interesting, and describes an "Anonymous Donor" who once gave them half of their money but is now merely the largest donor. This donor is particularly interested in climate change, and has earmarked the majority of his donations for related projects.

Heartland has an anonymous donor who has given as much as half the organizations’ entire
budget in some past years, and currently gives about one-fifth of total receipts. Renewing
him each year and keeping him informed and engaged is a major responsibility of the
President. We regularly solicite his ideas for new projects

There's a description of their anti-IPCC report project:

Heartland sponsors the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an
international network of scientists who write and speak out on climate change. Heartland pays a
team of scientists approximately $300,000 a year to work on a series of editions of Climate
Change Reconsidered, the most comprehensive and authoritative rebuttal of the United Nations’
IPCC reports. Another $88,000 is earmarked for Heartland staff, incremental expenses, and
overhead for editing, expense reimbursement for the authors, and marketing.

NIPCC is currently funded by two gifts a year from two foundations, both of them requesting
anonymity. In 2012 we plan to solicit gifts from other donors to add to what these two donors are
giving in order to cover more of our fixed costs for promoting the first two Climate Change
Reconsidered volumes and writing and editing the volume scheduled for release in 2013. We
hope to raise $200,000 in 2012.

Again with the anonymous donors.

There's a long description of the anti-AGW curriculum project. It was proposed by a consultant who works with the Department of Energy, Dr. David Wojick. Wojick studies science education, and his knowledge of national test requirements and contacts in educational organizations are described as his key attributes. He is not described as a climate scientist.

Many people lament the absence of educational material sui

Re:So...

[GameboyRMH]

Knock yourself out buddy:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/

Re:So...

[epiphani]

Fred Singer was actually one of those same people denying that smoking caused cancer.

It's the same asshole liars.