Not fake, no, not really - Josh 149

(Click the image for a larger version)

Everyone is writing Open Letters these days - so I thought I would have a go.

Cartoons by Josh

Comments

[Mac]

The point about UCS involvement is that UCS originally stated in their own press release that this open letter was written by the signatories. Now that clearly wasn't true. The open letter's author was a UCS press secretary, who probably also authored the UCS press release. So we have contradictory stances by UCS.

It is that contradiction that that gives rise to other concerns that there is lot more involvement of these parties in aspects of Fakegate.

Who knew what and when?

Who did what and where?

Fakegate had the potential to a be a lot more damaging than simply a PR disaster for warmists.

[Maurizio Morabito]

I for one believe this Open Letter fiasco demonstrates none of the Distinguished Climate Scientists (nor Mr Huertas) have anything to do with the fake Heartland document, since they are clueless about the Document Properties of a PDF file.

Had they made up the Heartland memo, their names would have shined under Properties for sure, perhaps even the address of their Epson scanner 8-)

If we combine this with Excel-challenged Phil Jones, well, some questions should be asked about what mental power is needed to become a Distinguished Climate Scientist...

[Maurizio Morabito]

Forgot 'notify'

[Mac]

Fakegate is not simply about the fake document and who faked it, but it also about the response to the release of these documents including the fake.

I could understand that UCS may have openly circulated a proposed open letter for signatories, coordinating a response, but that is what we are not told by UCS.

UCS stated in their press release, (in all probability written by Mr Huertas), that the signatories had written this letter and it had been sent to the Guardian for general publication. UCS in the press release were simply commenting on those two events.

At no time did UCS reveal that their own press secretary was involved in writing this open letter, helping to draft a response, gain signatures and coordinating efforts to publish.

Why was that? Why didn't UCS reveal that connection?

It left the impression that these scientists in the US acted on their own initiative, drafted a document and got it published in a UK newspaper thru their own efforts; and it was only then that UCS picked up on the story of angry climate scientists.

Now that is an untruth, a piece of news fabrication, a faked response.

Fakegate has the potential to be more damaging than a PR disaster.

[j ferguson]

Maxc,
good explanation of the objection to the authorship of the response, thanks. I do get it now.

[Mac]

Quote Jim Hoggan, DeSmog, June 2009, "it is infuriating - as a public relations professional - to watch my colleagues use their skills, their training and their considerable intellect to poison the international debate on climate change."

Never a truer word said.

It is a pity Mr Hoggan, DeSmog, UCS, the Guardian, the BBC have all pissed in their own well over Fakegate.

[Ben Pile]

So it's settled then. It was Gleick.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/-the-origin-of-the-heartl_b_1289669.html