Here is a letter submitted to the British Parliament in regards to the Investigations that were being formed to examine the principle scientists exposed by the climategate emails.
Uncorrected Evidence 39
It is unfortunate that the investigations were carried out by individuals who were heavily influenced by the people and institutions that were being investigated. The inevitable whitewashes that transpired added yet another black eye to climate science. One can only hope that the recent grilling by the parliament of Muir Russell and Oxbridge (the investigators) over their incompetence will lead to a real inquiry into the malfeasance disclosed by the release of the climategate emails. One that will look into the issues brought up by this letter from the IoP, and many other concerned groups and scientists around the world.
Uncorrected Evidence 39
1. The Institute is concerned that, unless the disclosed e-mails are proved to be forgeries or adaptations, worrying implications arise for the integrity of scientific research in this field and for the credibility of the scientific method as practised in this context.
2. The CRU e-mails as published on the internet provide prima facie evidence of determined and co-ordinated refusals to comply with honourable scientific traditions and freedom of information law. The principle that scientists should be willing to expose their ideas and results to independent testing and replication by others, which requires the open exchange of data, procedures and materials, is vital. The lack of compliance has been confirmed by the findings of the Information Commissioner. This extends well beyond the CRU itself - most of the e-mails were exchanged with researchers in a number of other international institutions who are also involved in the formulation of the IPCC's conclusions on climate change.
....
5. The e-mails reveal doubts as to the reliability of some of the reconstructions and raise questions as to the way in which they have been represented; for example, the apparent suppression, in graphics widely used by the IPCC, of proxy results for recent decades that do not agree with contemporary instrumental temperature measurements.
....
12. The second of the review's terms of reference should extend beyond reviewing the CRU's policies and practices to whether these have been breached by individuals, particularly in respect of other kinds of departure from objective scientific practice, for example, manipulation of the publication and peer review system or allowing pre-formed conclusions to override scientific objectivity.
....
It is unfortunate that the investigations were carried out by individuals who were heavily influenced by the people and institutions that were being investigated. The inevitable whitewashes that transpired added yet another black eye to climate science. One can only hope that the recent grilling by the parliament of Muir Russell and Oxbridge (the investigators) over their incompetence will lead to a real inquiry into the malfeasance disclosed by the release of the climategate emails. One that will look into the issues brought up by this letter from the IoP, and many other concerned groups and scientists around the world.