Remember the claim by Heartland Institute about the Chinese Academy of Science’s turning to climate scepticism?
Sceptics across the world crowed this development as an important turning point. Conservative commentator Andrew Breitbart breathlessly reported the claim on Breitbart.com:
Lakely said that this could mark the turning point in the climate change debate, and that a global consensus was beginning to form against regulation of emissions. “The latest observable climate data, new studies from scientific academies around the globe, the peer-reviewed studies one can find in Climate Change Reconsidered, and its translation and publication by the prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences is making life difficult for those who declare with certainty that man is causing catastrophic global warming,” he explained. “That’s the way it should be. No scientific discipline is ever ‘settled’ — especially a discipline as young, as complicated, and as diffuse as climate science. The Heartland Institute is proud to support and promote the pursuit of the classic scientific method that follows the data and continually asks questions about what is happening to the climate of our planet.”
In case people try to claim it was all a simple misunderstanding, let’s have a look at how climate sceptics tried to spin the story:
In response the Chinese Academy of Science came out with what is perhaps the most strongly worded rebuttal from a professional body I’ve ever seen.
The not only demanded Heartland apologise, but called them out for their lack of “academic integrity.”
In response, Heartland Institute have tried to disappear their false claim down the memory hole be removing it from their site (see above).