As a commenter pointed out, the real scandal is the state of the data. University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit researchers were very reluctant to give anyone their raw data and now it is clear why: It would have been like opening a door and showing a giant mess. I wonder if the frustrated programmer who had to work with the data finally decided enough was enough. He was tired of his bosses (research scientists, such as Phil Jones) using his work to deceive the rest of world on a very important issue. Maybe he felt guilty. And decided to put an end to it. He could have easily told someone outside how to gain access. In the Ranjit Chandra case, one of his employees was the first whistleblower.
Professor Michael Mann of Penn State University, whose veracity has been called into question by the scandal, says he’s glad that he’s being investigated.
“I would be disappointed if the university wasn’t doing all [it] can to get as much information as possible” about the controversy, Mann tells the Daily Collegian.
It doesn’t matter. It’s the very definition of ‘consensus’ and ‘science’ that is at stake. They are already of guilty of playing fast and loose with that without the email leak. The rest us forgot to pay attention when they quietly changed the definitions on us, using a wink-wink-nod code to fool the public. The email is just the tipping point, when we all noticed. We want our words back, and things will never be the same.