Evaluation shows "Faked" Heartland Climate Strategy Memo is Authentic

authordefault
on

A line-by-line evaluation of the Climate Strategy memo, which the Heartland Institute has repeatedly denounced as a โ€œfakeโ€ shows no โ€œobvious and gross misstatements of fact,โ€ as Heartland has alleged. On the contrary, the Climate Strategy document is corroborated by Heartlandโ€™s own material and/or by its allies andย employees.

It also uses phrases, language and, in many cases, whole sentences that were taken directly from Heartlandโ€™s own material. Only someone who had previous access to all of that material could have prepared the Climate Strategy in its currentย form.

In all the circumstances โ€“ taking into account Peter Gleickโ€™s explanation of the origin of the Heartland documents, and in direct contradiction of Heartlandโ€™s stated position โ€“ DeSmogBlog has concluded that the Climate Strategy memo isย authentic.ย 

Judge forย yourself:

Januaryย 2012

Confidential Memo: 2012 Heartland Climateย Strategy

Given the increasingly important role the Heartland Institute is playing in leading the fight to prevent the implementation of dangerous policy actions to address the supposed risks of global warming, it is useful to set priorities for our efforts inย 2012.

DeSmogBlog:ย  Heartland has in fact played an increasingly important role in attacking the science of global warming.ย  After the UK Royal Society publicly attacked Exxon for its financial support of the leading climate-change-denying think tanks, the Competitive Enterprise Institute stepped back as the most prominent and public policy house. That opened ground for the Heartland Institute, which launched its International Conference on Climate Change series (the โ€œDenial-a-paloozaโ€) inย 2008.ย 

Heartland material about climate change also regularly employs terminology such as โ€œdangerous policy actionsโ€ and โ€œsupposed risks of global warmingโ€.ย  One of Heartlandโ€™s long-standing arguments is that addressing global warming will have catastrophic consequences for theย economy.

This document offers such a set ofย priorities.

DeSmogBlog:ย  It is entirely logical that Heartlandโ€™s Board would want to consider setting priorities for its anti-global warming activities at its first meeting of the calendar and fiscalย year.

I propose that at this point it be kept confidential and only be distributed to a subset of Institute Board and senior staff.

DeSmogBlog:ย  Peter Gleickโ€™s explanation that he received this memo in hard copy form by anonymous mail is consistent with it not having formed part of the complete package given to the Board.ย  It appears that Gleick must have scanned the printed document to create the electronic version that he could distribute with the later material he obtained fromย Heartland.

If the document had been given to all Institute Board members and formed an element of the complete package, Gleick would presumably have received it twice โ€“ the second time when he requested and was sent the Boardย documents.ย 

Assuming the Climate Strategy memo was not shared with the Instituteโ€™s entire Board, it would be extremely embarrassing for the memoโ€™s author and inner circle recipients to admit they had withheld it from other Board members.ย  This would create a powerful incentive for the author to deny this documentโ€™s authenticity: the implied insult to Board members that Heartland treats as second-class could be more damaging to Heartland than the public embarrassment of its inflammatory subjectย matter.

More details can be found in our 2012 Proposed Budget document and 2012 Fundraising Strategy memo. In 2012 our efforts will focus in the followingย areas:

DeSmogBlog:ย  Peter Gleick now confirms that he received these documents by email directly fromย Heartland.ย 

Yet the Institute has refused to acknowledge their authenticity, even going so far as to accuse the DeSmogBlog and other sources of publishing โ€œstolenโ€ documents without admitting their origin. Given the overlap between these documents and the Climate Strategy, it will be hard for Heartland to continue to disavow the latter as โ€œa fakeโ€ now that the main tranche of documents has beenย authenticated.ย ย 

Increased climate projectย fundraising

Our climate work is attractive to funders, especially our key Anonymous Donor (whose contribution dropped from $1,664,150 in 2010 to $979,000 in 2011 – about 20% of our total 2011ย revenue).

DeSmogBlog:ย  Various documents confirm there is an โ€œAnonymous Donor.โ€ย  The contribution figures in brackets are confirmed in the Heartland Budget document and corroborated in Table 5 at page 21 of the 2012 Fundraising Plan document.ย  Table 5 shows that in 2010, $964.150 received from the Anonymous Donor was allocated to โ€œGlobal Warming Projects.โ€ย  In 2009, the sum of $1,732,180 was allocated to Global Warming Projects and in 2008, the sum ofย $3,300,000.

The general financial downturn in 2008 may well explain the subsequent year-over-year decline in donations from the Anonymous Donor. (The other conclusion would be that the Anonymous Donor thought Heartland was notย effective.)

He has promised an increase in 2012 – see the 2011 Fourth Quarter Financialย Report.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This statement is corroborated by the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at page 20 under the heading โ€œ4. Anonymous Donorโ€:

Because the Anonymous Donor has given a large percentage of the Heartlandโ€™s budget in past years, it is useful to single out his expected gift at the beginning of theย year.

In 2011, he gave Heartland $979,000, less than any year since 2005.ย  In January 2012, he pledged $1 million.ย  We project that he will give $250,000 more over the course of theย year.

Table 6 at page 21 confirms the Anonymous Donorโ€™s million dollar pledge for the first quarter of 2012, of which $194,000 is allocated for the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) Project, $44,000 for the (Anthony Watts) Weather Stations Project, and $100,000 for the Global Warming Curriculumย Project.

Further corroboration is found in the 2012 Proposed Budget which states at pageย 3:

Anonymous Donor:ย  We expect the Anonymous Donor to contribute $1,250,000 in 2012 in gifts for budgeted projects, 28 percent more than he contributed in 2011, but still less than he contributed in any other year since 2004.ย  He already pledged to give $1 million inย January.

We will also pursue additional support from the Charles G. Koch Foundation. They returned as a Heartland donor in 2011 with a contribution of $200,000. We expect to push up their level of support in 2012 and gain access to their network of philanthropists, if our focus continues to align with theirย interests.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This appears to be a misstatement but only as to timing: the budget and fundraising documents confirm that the Charles G. Koch Foundation gave $25,000 in 2011, and that Heartland expected that figure to jump up to $200,000 in 2012. For example, the Fundraising Plan which states at pageย 7:

โ€œThe Charles G. Koch Foundation returned as a Heartland donor in 2011.ย  We expect to ramp up their level of support in 2012 and gain access to the network of philanthropists they workย with.โ€

The same document states at pageย 13:

NIPCC is currently funded by two gifts a year from two foundations, both of them requesting anonymity.ย  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.ย  We hope to raise $200,000 inย 2012.

See also the 2012 Proposed Budget at page 4 where a table of Projected Income from Lapsed and First-Time Donors by Project allocates a budget of $200,000 to the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) and a budget of $200,000 to the Global Warming Curriculumย Project.

Heartland donorsโ€™ apparent appetite for anonymity โ€“ and Kochโ€™s toxic profile as a major funder of anti-democratic and anti-climate science activism โ€“ would explain why the 2012 Fundraising Plan does not explicitly mention the source of the large infusion of precisely $200,000 in 2012.ย  DeSmogBlog also assumes that the reference to a $200,000 contribution (and not $25,000) in 2011 was probably a slip-up by the Climate Strategy memoโ€™s author, who probably meant to refer to a promise made in 2011 in thatย amount.

A disavowal from the Koch Foundation suggests that Heartland will have to abandon its hopes of a $200,000 payment from Koch inย 2012.ย 

Other contributions will be pursued for this work, especially from corporations whose interests are threatened by climateย policies.

DeSmogBlog: The Heartland 2012 Fundraising Plan explicitly states at pageย 12:

While ideologically motivated individual donors are apt to contribute for general operating, corporations and (increasingly) foundations want project-specific proposalsโ€ฆDuring 2012 we plan to fundraise for 10 new or relaunched projects designed to attract newย donors.โ€

Table 3 at page 6 identifies โ€œTarget Groups for Potential Major Donorsโ€ which include โ€œOfficers, PR and GR officials at corporations with an interest in free-market policy messages on topics covered in Heartland publications.โ€ย  (Heartland has numerous publications concerning global warming.) The sources for that target group include โ€œMedia coverage of corporations and industries underย attack.โ€

Development of our โ€œGlobal Warming Curriculum for K-12 Classroomsโ€ย project.

Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmistย perspective.

DeSmogBlog:ย  The word โ€œalarmistโ€ is part of the Heartland lexicon.ย  It is their terminology for real climate scientists.ย  The word appears continuously in Heartland publications concerning climateย change.

To counter this we are considering launching an effort to develop alternative materials for K-12ย classrooms.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This statement is corroborated by the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at pageย 18:

H.ย  Global warming curriculum for K-12 Schools
Many people lament the absence of educational material suitable for K-12 students on global warming that isnโ€™t alarmist or overtly political. โ€ฆ Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective.ย ย โ€ฆ

The 2012 Fundraising Plan then proceeds to detail how Heartland will arrange for the preparation of alternative materials for K-12ย classrooms.

We are pursuing a proposal from Dr. David Wojick to produce a global warming curriculum for K-12ย schools.

DeSmogBlog:ย  The 2012 Fundraising Plan states at pageย 18:

Dr. David Wojick has presented Heartland with a proposal to produce a global warming curriculum for K-12 schools that appears to have great potential forย success.

Dr. Wojick is a consultant with the Office of Scientific and Technical Information at the U.S. Department of Energy in the area of information and communicationย science.

DeSmogBlog:ย  The 2012 Fundraising Plan states at pageย 18:

Dr. Wojick is a consultant with the Office of Scientific and Technical Information at the U.S. Department of Energy in the area of information and communicationย science.

His effort will focus on providing curriculum that shows that the topic of climate change is controversial and uncertain – two key points that are effective at dissuading teachers from teachingย science.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is corroborated by the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at pageย 18:ย 

Dr. Wojick proposes to begin work on โ€œmodulesโ€ for grades 10-12 on climate change (โ€œwhether humans are changing the climate is a major scientific controversyโ€), climate models (โ€œmodels are used to explore various hypotheses about how climate works.ย  Their reliability is controversialโ€), and air pollution (โ€œwhether CO2 is a pollutant is controversial.ย  It is the global food supply and natural emissions are 20 times higher than humanย emissionsโ€).

We tentatively plan to pay Dr. Wojick $100,000 for 20 modules in 2012, with funding pledged by the Anonymousย Donor.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is corroborated by the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at pageย 18:

We tentatively plan to pay Dr. Wojick $5,000 per module, about $25,000 a quarter, starting in the second quarter of 2012 for this work.ย  The Anonymous donor has pledged the first $100,000 for this project, and we will circulate a proposal to match and then expand upon thatย investment.

Wojick, who by the way has no background or expertise in climate science, has confirmed independently that he has been engaged to do thisย work.

Heartlandโ€™s suggestion that climate change is controversial and uncertain bears no relation to the true state of science, which is perhaps why the author of the Climate Strategy Memo admits (in what may be a Freudian slip) that those โ€œtwo key points โ€ฆ are effective at dissuading teachers from teaching science.โ€

Funding for parallelย organizations.

Heartland is part of a growing network of groups working the climate issues, some of which we support financially. ย We will seek additional partnerships in 2012. At present we sponsor the NIPCC to undermine the official United Nationsโ€™ IPCC reports and paid a team of writers $388,000 in 2011 to work on a series of editions of Climate Change Reconsidered. Expenses will be about the same in 2012. NIPCC is currently funded by two gifts a year from two foundations, both of them requestingย anonymity.

DeSmogBlog:ย  The 2012 Proposed Budget states at pageย 7:

The two tables below summarize the multi-year budget for the project and personnel costs for the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international group of scientists that produces critiques of the reports of the United Nations’ IPCC.ย  Heartland hosts and funds the effort.ย  A growing number of scientists have been recruited by Craig Idso to be contributing authors and editors of NIPCCโ€™s major reports, a series titled Climate Change Reconsidered.ย  Two volumes have been published soย far.

Further, the 2012 Fundraising Plan states at pageย 13:

Heartland sponsors the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international network of scientists who write and speak out on climate change.ย  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 Nationsโ€™ IPCC reports.ย ย 

The use of โ€œrebuttalโ€ in this context certainly supports the interpretation that the NIPCCโ€™s purpose is โ€œto undermine the official United Nation’s IPCCย reports.

Another $88,000 is earmarked this year for Heartland staff, incremental expenses, and overhead for editing, expense reimbursement for the authors, andย marketing.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is corroborated in the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at pageย 13:

Another $88,000 is earmarked for Heartland staff, incremental expenses, and overhead for editing, expense reimbursement for the authors, andย marketing.

Note that the political โ€“ rather than scientific โ€“ nature of the NIPCC‘s work has been well-documented elsewhere.

Funding for selected individuals outside ofย Heartland.

Our current budget includes funding for high-profile individuals who regularly and publicly counter the alarmist AGW message. At the moment, this funding goes primarily to Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), Fred Singer ($5,000 per month, plus expenses), Robert Carter ($1,667 per month), and a number of other individuals, but we will consider expanding it, if funding can beย found.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is corroborated by table 3 at page 7 of the 2012 Proposed Budget which describes Craig Idso as a Senior Editor, Center for the Study of CO2 and Global Change; Fred Singer as Co-Editor, Science and Environmental Policy Project; and Robert Carter, Co-Editor, James Cook University and Institute for Public Affairs,ย Australia.

Note that Heartlandโ€™s propensity for inadvertent misstatement spills into its own budget documents. For example, Heartland’s Budget speaks of paying โ€œSusan Crockfordโ€ for a chapter โ€œ2.2 Terrestrial Animals,โ€ at the University of Victoria in โ€œAustralia.โ€ Crockford is in fact a professor at the University of Victoria in British Columbia (which Joe Bast ought to realize is in Canada). Crockford advertises herself as an expert in โ€œthe evolution and history of the domestic dog.โ€ There is no mention in the Heartland material of any qualifications relevant to climateย change.

Bob Carter (who really IS from Australia) confirmed the information about him in the 2012 Proposed Budget during an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald.

Expanded climateย 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 blogย posts).

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is corroborated by Heartland’s website which lists James Taylor as a Senior Fellow. Taylor does, indeed, write periodically in Forbes. Heartland also appears to have a close relationship with WUWT, which is weather forecaster Anthony Watts website, What’s Up With That. For example, when Peter Gleick publicly acknowledged his role in getting Heartland to hand over their Board package, the Institute chose to use WUWT to release their reaction, even in priority to publishing the information on their ownย website.

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 ourย own.

DeSmogBlog:ย  Dr. Peter Gleick, who explained the origins of the leak of Heartland documents, is also a frequent contributor at Forbes. And again, throughout this document, as on its website and in other documents, Heartland uses the adjective โ€œwarmistโ€ to indicate someone who gives an accurate interpretation to the human cause โ€“ and likely effects โ€“ of globalย warming.

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 Romm, Trenberth, and Hansen) or Curry (who has become popular with ourย supporters).

DeSmogBlog:ย  This is mostly editorial comment, although Forbes has distinguished itself on many previous occasions by choosing to concentrate on material that suggests there is still some debate over the causes of climateย change.

Andrew Revkin commented on his blog that he felt this reference undermined the credibility of the Climate Strategy memo, saying, โ€œIt (the strategy document) always seemed dubious, given that the document said it might be worth ‘cultivating’ me as a ‘neutral’ voice. After all, it wasnโ€™t too long ago that the group called me โ€œa noted ally of the alarmist camp.โ€ Certainly, it would be embarrassing for a former New York Times environment reporter to be labelled โ€œneutralโ€ by an organization such as Heartland. But Revkinโ€™s attack on Peter Gleick tends to corroborate the Climate Strategy memoโ€™s assessment, especially given that Revkin failed, in the same article, to offer any direct criticism of an organization that has dedicated itself for years to climateย disinformation.

We have also pledged to help raise around $90,000 in 2012 for Anthony Watts to help him create a new website to track temperature stationย data.

DeSmogBlog: This is corroborated in the 2012 Fundraising Plan which states at pagesย 19-20:

Anthony Watts proposes to create a new Web site devoted to accessing the new temperature data from NOAAโ€™s web site and converting them into easy-to-understand graphs that can be easily found and understood by weathermen and the general interested public. โ€ฆThe new site will be promoted heavily atย WattsUpwithThat.com.

Heartland has agreed to help Anthony raise $88,000 for the project in 2011.ย  The Anonymous donor has already pledged $44,000.ย  Weโ€™ll seek to raise theย balance.

Further, Anthony Watts himself has confirmed the details of this project, but he later stated that the rounding up from $88,000 to $90,000 indicated that the document is a fake, saying the Climate Strategy, โ€œgets the operational details (budget) wrong โ€“ especially the points about my project, rounding up to $90,000 from a very specific budget number of $88,000. This suggests trying to inflate the number for a purpose. Thereโ€™s no evidence of rounding budget numbers in any other document in the set.โ€
Wattsโ€™ criticism of the $2,000 variance is patentlyย absurd.

Finally, we will consider expanding these efforts further, or developing new ones, if funding can beย obtained.

DeSmogBlog:ย  This seems unlikely to represent an โ€œobvious and gross misstatement ofย fact.โ€

SUMMARY:

The foregoing analysis demonstrates that the Climate Strategy Memo is an accurate executive summary of the information contained in budget and fundraising documents that were to be put before the Board at its Januaryย meeting.

DeSmogBlog therefore sees no basis whatsoever for Heartlandโ€™s assertion that the Climate Strategy memo is a โ€˜fakeโ€ which contains โ€œobvious and gross misstatements ofย fact.โ€

ย 

Related Posts

Analysis
on

Oil patch advocate Lisa Baiton called for more extraction and less regulation at Vancouver address that didnโ€™t once mention climate change.

Oil patch advocate Lisa Baiton called for more extraction and less regulation at Vancouver address that didnโ€™t once mention climate change.
on

PA-based CEO Toby Rice hobnobbed with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Now heโ€™s poised for pipelines, exports, and profits.

PA-based CEO Toby Rice hobnobbed with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago. Now heโ€™s poised for pipelines, exports, and profits.
on

Longtime DeSmog reporter and author of The Petroleum Papers will play a key leadership role as we investigate a global resurgence of climate obstruction.

Longtime DeSmog reporter and author of The Petroleum Papers will play a key leadership role as we investigate a global resurgence of climate obstruction.
on

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.

Victoria Hewson called the 2050 ambition a โ€œhuge own goalโ€ while working for a Tufton Street think tank.