I’ve been waiting to write about this because apparently one of the leaked docs may be a forgery, but the fund-raising documents are all on the up and up:
One of Heartland’s fund-raising documents lays out the group’s plans to spend $100,000 per year to develop a curriculum for schools that would call basic climate science into question. (“Principals and teachers are heavily biased toward the alarmist perspective,” one Heartland document laments.”) A senior fellow at Heartland confirmed these general details to Brad Johnson of ThinkProgress. We’ve already seen battles over the teaching of evolution in public schools around the country. It wouldn’t be surprising to see local fights over climate science next.
Paging Dan Rather…
Heartland is writing threatening letters to Charles Johnson and other bloggers. http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/39944_Climate_Change_Denial_Front_Group_Heartland_Institute_Sends_Emails_to_Bloggers_Threatening_Legal_Action
Prepare for incoming lawsuit. What a bunch of assholes.
If there is a concrete Bobo-Exxon connection, the NYT will be very, very, very unhappy about that. But it’s hard to believe that Brooks would do anything quite so stupid.
“David Brooks on Shale Gas.”
Does shale gas work on your voice like the gas you use to inflate toy balloons?
From the LGF link:
Hey dumbasses you just admitted that the documents are real.
What is the BoBo thing? I’m just getting an odd graphic that doesn’t link to anything.
Query when the GOP-controlled HOR will get around to conducting hearings on possible perjury by Climate-Scientists e.g. in writing federal grant applications to study global-warming related issues. Seriously! There is a meme in right-wing circles that climate change is a hoax created simply to get research funding. There was quite a lot of rumbling from influential climate-change denialist ranks a year or so ago about pursuing scientists conducting research that produced evidence confirming anthropocentric warming; but they haven’t (yet) seriously followed up on it. Perhaps they decided to bide their time until after the 2012 elections, when they hoped they would control White House and both houses of Congress, and they could simply get away with shutting down climate research altogether.
It’s just a picture.
David, this is your brain.
This is your brain on shell gas.
Peter Hitchens calls climate scientists* “warmists.”
*actually, like a lot of wingers, he thinks there’s such a thing as climate change advocates. And, I suppose there are. They’re called scientists.
Commenting at Balloon Juice Since 1937
Is Brooks on the shale gas again? I thought there had been an intervention.
I appreciate the way a rebuttal to a published document is prepared before the document is published. It is tough to do point by point rebuttal to facts found so far only in their imagination, but I am sure they are up to it.
See also heliocentrists, evolutionists, and moon-not-made-of-green-cheese-ists.
Skippy the Wondermule
I read a great essay at the Atlantic
it demonstrated clearly that one doc is fake, the rest likely legit. It’s a comprehensive piece of work, well done.
@Skippy the Wondermule: That’s… that’s Megan McCardle’s music!
@RSA: Keep your gubmint hands offa my phlogiston.
My daughter’s chemistry teacher is a climate change denialist. She’s got a PhD in Chemistry and yet exhibits classic Dunning-Kruger…
Of course, what I’ve read is that in technical things, high levels of education make you more susceptiple. Just because you’re an expert in one thing doesn’t mean you are in something unreleated…
Of course, I’m not surprised. She also leads the Christian Fellowship Club and the Young Republicans Club…
I’d bet money she’s a creationist. Denialism, religiousity, creationism and Republicanism have a huge over-lap…