DeSmog

Heartland Institute Condemned for "Major Ethical Transgression"

authordefault
on

Here is a brief taste of some of the emails that have been flying this week to the Heartland Institute in protest over their distribution of a purported scientific paper that announces 500 Scientists with Documented Doubts about Man-Made Global Warming Scares.

Notwithstanding these requests – and many more, as well – as of 4 p.m. EST on Friday, May 2, 2008, the offending article remained on the Heartland website with the names all still attached. There is no apology, clarification or correction. It’s as if Heartland President and CEO Joseph Bast just doesn’t care about the accuracy of his output or the credibility of his organization ….

Dear Mr. Joseph Blast,

Please remove my name from your list of climate skeptics.

While I believe that there are a lot of unknowns, especially how much sea level will rise in coming decades, it is clear that the earth is warming and apparent that humans are playing a role.

My actual area of expertise is sea level rise impacts, and the coastal system is hard wired everything else being equal so that sea level rise causes beach erosion and wetland loss.

Stephen P. Leatherman

Chair Professor and Director

International Hurricane Research Center & Laboratory for Coastal Research Florida International University

My work in no way casts doubt on the reality of human-caused global warming. The true state of the science is that we know of no natural process or cycle that could explain the bulk of the current global warming and many associated changes. The recent IPCC report is clear on this issue. It is not appropriate for my name to be listed in support of the assertion being made by the Heartland Institute.

Jonathan T. Overpeck

Director

Institute for the Study of Planet Earth, University of Arizona

I recently learned from a colleague that I am listed on your (the Heartland Institute’s) website as one of 500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares.

Please remove my name from the list of “coauthors” on your website. I do not agree with the conclusions attributed to my name, and in no sense did I “coauthor” anything on your website.

Jeff Severinghaus

Professor of Geosciences

Scripps Institute of Oceanography

University of California, San Diego

P.S. Using my name (and many others) in this way is a major ethical transgression.

Dear Sir,

It has just been drawn to my attention that my name is included on a list of 500 “co-authors” of a report published on the www by your organization.

I have read that report and the list of conclusions reached and I find that I disagree most strongly with these conclusions.

Quite apart from my disagreement about the conclusions reached, however, it is QUITE UNACCEPTABLE to have one’s name associated with such a report as a “co-author” without one’s explicit prior agreement.

I ask, therefore, that my name be removed from that list FORTHWITH.

Please acknowledge receipt of this e-mail and also confirm that my name has been removed from this list.

Prof. Brian Huntley

Institute of Ecosystem Science

School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences Durham University

Hi:

Apparently I am listed on the Heartland list as someone whose work casts doubt on whether greenhouse warming is occurring.

I am loath to give Heartland any publicity, but I am prepared to state for the record that I, personally, do not believe that my published work supports the idea that current greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere are not the main driver behind the observed 20th century warming trend. My work does document times in the 120 000 years when temperatures appear to have been higher than at present, but I do not regard these results as undermining the international consensus as to the reality of changes over the last century.

Yours sincerely

Matt McGlone

Science Team Leader, Biodiversity & Conservation Landcare Research

Canterbury, New Zealand

Dear Dr Bast,

It has come to my notice that my name appears on a list of so-called co-authors to an article accessible on your website in which it is claimed that current global warming and associated problems are not primarily caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

I ask you to please remove my name from the list of 500 supposed authors of this article. The article is, in my view, an example of very bad science as it is eclectic, and further twists evidence, ultimately citing published work in the opposite sense. The ethics of it all are also problematic, as the article is quite obviously construed to serve the interests of a narrow group. That is not what science should be about. Further, it is well known that prospective co-authors must be asked first about the inclusion of their name on an article, before it is published. And posting on the Web constitutes publication. You are thus contravening good practice in a number of ways.

I know quite a few people on your list, and am absolutely convinced that none of these would wish to be associated with your article.

Concerning the removal of my name, I will regularly check and will contact you again if I find it has not been done. Then I might be slightly less polite.

With best regards,

Jan Kramers

Institut fuer Geologie

Universitaet Bern

 

Related Posts

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.
on

Brazilian meat giant JBS invested just 0.03 percent of annual revenues into climate measures, researchers found.

Brazilian meat giant JBS invested just 0.03 percent of annual revenues into climate measures, researchers found.
on

Fossil fuel interests are deploying unprecedented strategies to hide evidence of companies’ deception and block liability lawsuits before they reach trial.

Fossil fuel interests are deploying unprecedented strategies to hide evidence of companies’ deception and block liability lawsuits before they reach trial.
on

Federal lawsuit alleges EPA’s rules on ethylene oxide and chloroprene emissions rely on weak industry estimates rather than real-world data on risks to health.

Federal lawsuit alleges EPA’s rules on ethylene oxide and chloroprene emissions rely on weak industry estimates rather than real-world data on risks to health.