This excerpt of a comment by climatehawk1 gets to an important point that usually doesn’t get enough attention and deserves to be promoted:
If Gleick’s reputation is “in ruins,” what about Heartland’s, inasmuch as they have engaged in very elaborate, systematic, long-running misrepresentation?
Scientists are held to an impossibly high standard, while Heartland and others are able to get away with murder (figuratively speaking of course). If Heartland were judged the way Peter Gleick is being judged their reputation would be so tarnished it would be less that worthless.
A double standard if I ever saw one.
UPDATE:Naomi Klein summed it up perfectly in a tweet:
And what about the fact the Heartland Institute impersonates a scientific organization every day?