A Dear John Letter From The Heartland Institute's Joe Bast?

From BigCityLib comes this gem from Bast: Joe Bast's Response to Scholars Feeling Pressure After Attacks on Heartland.

Since this is denial-world, everything is appropriately topsy-turvey. The "attacks" he is talking about are not plural but singular, and is the disastrous billboard campaign, which even Heartland has admitted was a mistake - though not very sincerely, and Bast clearly doesn't agree; he is still defending them here.

Bast is writing to his pet scholars, and begins

For 28 years, The Heartland Institute has tried to stay "above the fray," producing high-quality research and commentary and staying focused on the issues, even as the political dialogue became more and more polarized and corrosive. Almost alone among think tanks, we focus on communicating with people who do not already agree with us. We rely on research and reason, not rhetoric and emotion, and still do.

It is pretty hard to reconcile those claims about reason and research rather than rhetoric and emotion with the billboard campaign. Bast doesn't even try to; he just says the billboards were "punching back", errrm, i.e. using emotion and rhetoric. Never mind; his job depends on him being able to believe incompatible things.

There are also (in another fine display of rhetoric and emotion) a couple of paragraphs of attacks on Peter Gleick, then some ranting about the mainstream media, then the obligatory attack on Michael Mann.

It doesn't look convincing to me. But Lindzen and Landsea [*] are still onboard (current URL here, webcited here in case that changes). Pielke is gone, though, so belated credit to him.

[*} See comments. BCL thinks this is Heartland's fault, not Landsea's. Looking again 6h after first posting, Landsea is now gone entirely.

More like this

Actually, Landsea had two entries on their list, and they pulled one after he demanded it. I've emailed them about the second. I think that's an error on HI's part, not Landsea's.

[Ah, interesting, I'll note that -W]

"then the obligatory attack on Michael Mann."

You sometimes get the impression when you read the denialists that there are only a handful of climate scientists in the world, and, if not for them, there would be no global warming issue.

[The personalisation is important; its hard to hate anonymous people, or even people with real names that you know nothing about. So a few stock hate figures are required. However, that is for Joe Public. Bast seems to have forgotten that he is, nominally, writing to intelligent people who have a clue -W]

Roger now says that he's fine with being on Heartland's list since they've added some additional text noting that their list includes 'experts' that Heartland 'recommend as reliable sources of research and commentary'

[He was out when I looked. Maybe he'll go back on. Who knows? -W]

By Marlowe Johnson (not verified) on 17 May 2012 #permalink

For some reason, Lnadsea was on the list twice.
They removed the first one fairly quickly, but missed the second, although it seems to be gone this AM.

Notwithstanding Napolen, there's no reason malice cannot accompany incompetence. Amusingly, the 2009 version described Roger S. Pielke, Jr, while showing a picture of RPS, Sr. See Fake science, ... pp.51.-52

BTW, another one of Heartland's Global Warming fakexperts, Alan Caruba, a contributor to Heartland's E&CN and founder of the National Anxiety Center, has a dandy article there, right now, "Climate Nazis."

Somehow, I suspect he may not wish to be removed from the list.
H/T J Bowers

Note: Landsea was immediate and direct in being asked to be removed. Pielke was less so.

BCL found that at least one person (Jacoby) did not know they were on the list and had not given permission, and there may be a second. (van Kooten)

By John Mashey (not verified) on 17 May 2012 #permalink

Harry and WMC,
Re: MM and other targets of the Two Minutes Hate.

Too many targets would highlight how few experts say anything that the septics can listen to. Lindzen vs. Hansen makes a more compelling story than Lindzen vs. NAS,NRC,AGU etc. etc.

[Ah, good point. Sometimes it needs to be a Vast Conspiracy, but yes at other times it needs to be just a few Key Evil Folk -W]

By blueshift (not verified) on 17 May 2012 #permalink

BCL, I just checked (Any field checked and "global warming") and Landsea did not show up. Pretty much the usual motley crew of misfits, wannabes and hacks. No Jr.

By Rattus Norvegicus (not verified) on 17 May 2012 #permalink

I always liked how the NCSE's "Project Steve" handled this with regard to evolution: if creationists presented a list of 200 supposed scientists who doubted evolution, they could respond with a list of a thousand supporters who were just the ones named Steve.

It's Stoat's turn to look in on the Chicago circus before it folds its tents- the first one was enough to confirm the anthropological basics on this strange postmodern tribe.

At this rate Heartland may soon turn to some more profitable sort of griftmanship.

Re:- the 'project Steve' idea.
I t might be useful to have a 'climate Mike' list of scientists other than Mike Mann who support AGW.

Funny! It's amazing how often utter bull-stuff is combined with massive self-deception.

By PurpleOzone (not verified) on 19 May 2012 #permalink