This is really the first breakthrough of this story into the mainstream media:
While few U.S. politicians bother to question whether humans are changing the world’s climate — nearly three years ago the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded the evidence was unequivocal — public debate persists. And the newly disclosed private exchanges among climate scientists at Britain’s Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia reveal an intellectual circle that appears to feel very much under attack, and eager to punish its enemies.
In one e-mail, the center’s director, Phil Jones, writes Pennsylvania State University’s Michael E. Mann and questions whether the work of academics that question the link between human activities and global warming deserve to make it into the prestigious IPCC report, which represents the global consensus view on climate science.
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report,” Jones writes. “Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
In another, Jones and Mann discuss how they can pressure an academic journal not to accept the work of climate skeptics with whom they disagree. “Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal,” Mann writes.
“I will be emailing the journal to tell them I’m having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor,” Jones replies.
Note the bolded section.
Global warming alarmists are fond of talking about their “scientific consensus” on anthropogenic global warming. And as the Washington Post notes, the “scientists” (i use the scare quotes because real scientists invite criticism and peer-review of their findings and research) caught up in this scandal were the ones responsible for controlling the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or the IPCC.
The group that, along with Al Gore, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.
Not only were these “scientists” acting to keep any global warming skepticism out of the IPCC reports, they were keeping the work of global warming skeptics from being published anywhere through bullying and intimidation.
And the Washington Post doesn’t even mention the worse parts of the emails (which you can download for yourself here). There are multiple instances of people being encouraged to delete data and reports rather than turn them over to the public for scrutiny. There are also attempts to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests aimed at getting some of this information disclosed so that it could be reviewed by objective experts.
Perhaps worst of all are the blunt discussions about manipulating data to achieve desired results.
These “scientists” caught in this scandal were employed in a effort to deceive the public. To keep we citizens of the world in the dark about the reality of their research in order to serve a larger political end. Which was the use of their phony, cooked research to enact a myriad of new taxes, regulations and a generalized expansion of government power.