The Heartland Institute’s recent Unabomber billboard and accompanying essay was filled with false allegations and errors, continuing Heartland’s long history of dishonesty.
The Unabomber billboard continues a long and dark history of institutional hypocrisy by The Heartland Institute.
Contrary to conservative media’s reporting, wind farms affect local nighttime temperatures, not global warming.
The Heartland Institute’s recent statements are filled with irony and hypocrisy, a point made abundantly clear by an official letter from the Climate Scientist Legal Defense Fund and by the admission of responsibility by Peter Gleick.
The illegally hacked and published CRU emails do not contain enough context to draw any firm conclusions about much of anything – real investigations, where complete records are examined and the principles are interviewed about meetings, phone conversations, and white-board conversations are required. And all such investigations have found that the so-called Climategate emails show no evidence of misconduct or conspiracy.
After two years of fermenting in the back of the fridge, the Climategate hacker pulled out a rank and moldy pile of leftover emails out just in time for the second anniversary of the original illegal CRU email release.
The Heartland Institute has a history of distorting climate science and lying about climate scientists. Their latest climate-related media advisory is no exception.
Mann's critics not appeased by NSF investigation, extend unfounded "whitewash" accusations to NSF itself
The OIG confirmed Penn State’s result that Michael Mann was not guilty of research misconduct. So where are all Mann’s critics admitting they were wrong about him?
In his Washington Times op-ed titled 2012 GOP guide to the climate debate,” commentator Steve Milloy made a large number of claims that are demonstrably wrong – 18 at last count. But one of his claims relating to the illegal hack and release of climate scientists’ emails dubbed “Climategate” casts a shadow over all the […]
As a result of the unauthorized publication of nearly 1100 private emails from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in November, 2009, five separate inquiries were empaneled to look into whether or not the CRU researchers had committed research misconduct, broke Freedom of Information laws, or inappropriately biased the results of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report […]
When the CRU emails were published, Pennsylvania State University (PSU) received many emails and letters accusing paleoclimate researcher Dr. Michael Mann of various types of research misconduct. PSU assembled the various informal accusations into a set of four allegations and began an internal investigation into Mann’s activities. Three of the four allegations were dismissed by […]
For the second time in two weeks, an investigation has found that there was neither a conspiracy to deceive the public nor any scientific misconduct present in the scientific research of the scientists of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA). These scientists were at the center of the controversy […]