Heartland Institute Tricked Video Subject in "Unstoppable Solar Cycles"
The principal subject of a Heartland Institute DVD that challenges the science of global warming says she was tricked into participating.
Rie Oldenburg, curator of the Narsaq Museum in Southern Greenland, says she was told that she was contributing to a video on Norse history. But she was horrified to learn that the interview was used to contribute to a DVD that denies the human contribution to climate change.
The video, Unstoppable Solar Cycles: The Real Story of Greenland, was produced by the Idea Channel, an advocacy organization that exists to promote the free-market economic theories of Milton Friedman. Idea Channel spokesperson Christina Belsky said last week that the video was funded by a private donor and by the Heartland Institute, which has been distributing it to high schools in Canada and sending it out, unsolicited, to other individuals. Belsky said the Idea Channel also plans to rework the material and send out a new version to schools in the United States through another right-wing advocacy organization called Izzit.org.
When informed about the full content of the DVD (which the Idea Channel had never brought to her attention), Rie Oldenburg said, "I am somewhat horrified." The Narsaq Museum had just helped convene an environmental seminar intended to call people's attention to the dangers of human-caused climate change, she said.
Oldenburg said the video team had called her on short notice and had provided nothing in writing as to their intentions. She said they also told Ingibjorg Gisladottir that they were shooting the video for the Discovery Channel.
The Heartland Institute has taken over from the Competitive Enterprise Institute as the leading American think tank in the battle to deny global warming. Heartland sponsored the Denial-a-palooza in New York in March this year and has been the leading distributor of a bogus scientific paper that purports to include the work of 500 highly qualified scientists in denying climate science. Although dozens of scientists have condemned Heartland and the paper, and have demanded that their names be withdrawn - a demand that Heartland has now rejected.
Unstoppable
Of course this article misses the whole point. Rie Oldenburg was included to give historical perspective on Greenlands climate.Whether she believes in man caused global warming is irrelivant. One cannot ignore the rest of the video and the facts presented by the scientists just because Rie feels duped. She runs a museum. What would she know about climatology or astrophisics?
fists raised, at the mention of GW
Wow, he's talking about your Troll:
>>>>>
That's the aristocracy of deniers, but the core community of letter-to-the-editor blitherers and online trolls who surface, fists raised, at the first mention of global warming, Al Gore, or even a nasty weather report, have a variety of motivations. While their continued belief is fed by the stream of disinformation from groupslike the Heartland Institute and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, there's evidently an array of unsettling psychological factors that draw individuals to this nonsense...
"Note to climate change deniers: It's real, you idiots"
by Patrick Metzger
May 5th 2008 @ 3:30PM
www.greendaily.com/2008/05/05
Its a Myth you Idiot
Your case would be a bit more believible if there was some global warming happening.
BTW:
Take another look at the MSM. They are begining to cover their asses big time now.
They see reality emerging.
Some day.... Way in the future, you will as well.
Though you will never admit it.
You know, Troll,
we almost had a civilized conversation going there for a few minutes. What happened?
Fern Mackenzie
Well
Seems I am not allowed. (Wonder what that really means eh)
I have in the past attempted to post links only to have them censored presumably because they were too damaging to the delicately crafted mind set of the little AGW flock.
So I gave up trying.
Now I simply encourage people to go out and read.
That will quite sufficiently take care of the brainwashing.
Hell … Even Time Magazine wrote a fair and balanced article lately illustrating Myth that Polar Bears are threatened. Of course nothing could be further from the truth.
But then Truth is only a secondary consideration in the advancement of a good Leftist movement.
Google it if dare.
Fair and balanced?
Hmmm ... fair and balanced. Where have we heard that before. Oh yes, I remember! That fount of impeccably objective journalism .. Fox News!!
Still waiting, troll, for all those MSM stories wherein reporters are covering their butts and backtracking. Links aren't necessary, just cites. And no, the TIME story won't cut it. A quote from Inhofe, and lack of scientific certainty about the status of the bears, does not mean TIME reporters doubt AGW. (Inhofe's idea of a global warming expert is Michael Crichton, a writer of science *fiction*.)
Dream on, little Troll.
Dream on, little Troll. Please provide specific examples where the MSM is backing off and "covering their asses," as you so crudely put it.
I'm still waiting
for the deluge of peer-reviewed papers in respected academic journals that prove the theory of AGW to be erroneous.
Fern Mackenzie
Unsurprising Chicanery
If the Heartland has to resort to such chicanery and trickery to get 'support', it sounds like there isn't much willing support for their ideological pseudo-science.
I suspect that the Heartland people have got so used to lying that they no-longer notice it, or consider it to be unethical.
This chicanery is highly reminiscent of the deceitful tactics used by Martin Durkin in his mockumentary 'Great Global Warming Swindle' to trick Carl Wunsch, except that Durkin selectively edited Wunsch to falsely imply that Wunsch agreed with the usual denial suspects Fred Singer, Tim Ball & etc., who appeared with doctored charts in that travesty of a documentary.
Hmmmmm
Seems to be a clear double standard here.
Brain dead cultists can call anyone a lier here including respected scientists and researchers.
However if a Realist even suggests that there may be some hypocracy in a post, they are censored.
Well I guess you guys have to protect the brainwashed little flock from the truth lest the SCAM be revealed.
You guys have the nerve to critisize after such crap is produced as Al Gorf's Inconvienient hypothysis.
LOL....
a few laughs
Thank heavens the MSM have stopped taking Heartland, CEI, and the other science deniers seriously, so we no longer have "on the other hand" stories. Took them long enough. Now the only coverage HI and CEI get comes from reporters looking for a few laughs.
trickery
and it fits with how little evidence or background their 'experts' require, to be called one:
See
'Global Warming Expert: Tom Harris'
http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/expert.cfm?expertId=378
envoteam@gmail.com
If there was actually a legitimate debate
about the science they wouldn't have to continually misrepresent, lie and make shit up out of thin air like this.
But they do, because it's not at all about the science, but about how they feel the science undermines their libertarian ideology.
Legitimate Debate?
Actually.
If there was not a legitimate debate, there would be no deluge of peer reviewed papers that do not support the AGW theory.
There would be no question in anyone’s minds.
There would be no need for 50 billion dollars in AGW Agenda funding.(which still has proven nothing BTW)
There would be no need for a 300 million dollar Goracle campaign to protect the dogma.
There would be no need for propaganda blog sites like RC and Desmog to reinforce the myth.
There would not have been 500 in attendance at the NY Climate conference.
There would not be over 400 names of respected scientists on the Inhofe list.
You guys would not have to work so hard at smearing honest researchers.
There would be no copenhagen accord.
But you know, it is really all irrelevant.
If the damn planet keeps ignoring the commands of the GCMs to warm up even a little, it really does not matter.
Reality will force all the AGW pundits out of the Virtual Climate Change bubble into the SUN anyway.
Deleted Post
Troll: You'll notice the post previous to this one - the one in which you accuse people you hadn't even heard of before yesterday of being willing to lie for convenience - has been deleted. Last warning. Next time, all your stuff goes down.
Not very consistent, are you?
"Troll: You'll notice the post previous to this one - the one in which you accuse people you hadn't even heard of before yesterday of being willing to lie for convenience - has been deleted. Last warning. Next time, all your stuff goes down."
Little-more, you pompous windbag. How many of VJ's or Ian Forrester's comments have you censored? Not a day goes by when they don't shriek that someone is a "liar" -- or worse. They've have repeatedly done this, and yet you never seemed to be concerned about it.
You certainly are a hypocrite.
Not surprised Richard
Don't be rediculus.
Censorship is the last resort of a cult with nothing left to say.
Pathetic
Bla bla, bla bla, bla bla....
Just the sound of one troll typing again.
Another brilliant display
Another brilliant display here of the lack of knowledge about the scientific process and probability theory.
On the other hand, it seems our little Troll has learned how to use a spell checker. Let's hope the next lesson will be sentence and paragraph structure!
Interesting
Looks as though the HI is taking a page from the Intelligent Design playbook. The people who were tricked into being interviewed for that travesty of a documentary, Expelled are crying "FOUL!" as well!
As for the list of 500 co-authors, the HI has pulled a neat little trick here. They fail to specifically state in the heading of the "full document" that the 500 scientists are co-authors of various papers that they have cited in Unstoppable. But using the word by itself leaves the impression that the scientists listed are somehow involved with that book, rather than with specific peer-reviewed papers which draw very different conclusions from those of Avery & Singer. Not bad for a bunch of scientifically-challenged ideologues!
Fern Mackenzie
word games
I get it. Hilarious. Yes, that list includes people who are "coauthors", in that they have authored something in the past, probably not alone. Like, "Are you two married?", "Yes, but not to each other."