So, CAGW activism isn't political huh...

[Crick]

So, Heartland claims the strategy document was forged. Gleick claims it was not. I believe Gleick.

 

[IanC]

So, Heartland claims the strategy document was forged. Gleick claims it was not. I believe Gleick.

The fact that the document was created at a different time, place and manner, from the others, that it makes errors about things like the purpose of Koch funds, and that Heartland has unequivocally denied authorship while seeming to concede the authenticity of the other documents, should lead any honest observer to at least reasonable doubt.

Mr. Littlemore contends that this is a distraction from larger issues, but I cannot agree. The foundation of journalism is accurate sources. Anyone who considers themselves to be in the business of informing the public about the truth should care very deeply when faked documents make it into the public record. They should especially care if their own work has been the vehicle.

Dismissing the possibility of fakery--and the obvious questions about who might have perpetrated it--does not help us focus on the "real issues". I'm afraid "Fake but accurate" just won't do. Nor will trying to shift the burden of proof to the people who are pointing out solid reasons for concern. Instead, the stubborn willingness to ignore obvious problems becomes the story--something that Dan Rather learned to his dismay in 2004.

is it possible that the fake memo wasnt produced by Gleick? perhaps. but you are ignoring the stench around the whole fiasco simply because you would prefer to believe.