> It's amazing that a person can make the claim that it's ridiculous that there could be any widespread foul play amongst mainstream climate scientists Actuall

> It's amazing that a person can make the claim that it's ridiculous that there could be any widespread foul play amongst mainstream climate scientists Actually I referred to the CRU in particular. You know, the source of the emails. Pointing to share ownership (7%?) by Saudi princes as proof of anything is the scientific equivalent of the boogeyman. > Climate science is a much smaller, much more unified community Some might argue that it's easier to collude the smaller the group gets. My main point is that the so-called Climategate emails demonstrate a failure of the scientific process. Lack of transparency is a huge problem that everyone should be concerned about regardless of their position.