Environment & Energy

CHIMO

(9,223 posts) Mon Feb 27, 2012, 08:28 PM Feb 2012

Peter Gleick lied, but was it justified by the wider good?

A lie is a lie. There may be other considerations, but that's main motivation behind the condemnation of Peter Gleick, the scientist who used an assumed name to obtain documents produced by the Heartland Institute.

He's been criticised for a lack of scientific integrity, and those who fund his post are "concerned about any allegations of unethical conduct". Everyone is having a go at Gleick, including Gleick: he called his actions a lapse of "professional judgment and ethics". Are his actions wrong just because he lied?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/27/peter-gleick-heartland-institute-lie

1 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Peter Gleick lied, but was it justified by the wider good? (Original Post) CHIMO Feb 2012 OP

The irony is that a lot of climate denial is about selling lies. JDPriestly Feb 2012 #1

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)

1. The irony is that a lot of climate denial is about selling lies.

Reply to CHIMO (Original post)

Mon Feb 27, 2012, 09:42 PM

Feb 2012

So those who deny the human factor in causing the current climate change are lying in the first place.

I don't condone lying, but then how do you counter an organization that exists to propagate lies?

Reply to this discussion