[Craig Loehle] Those defending the IPCC team seem to be taking the stance that these emails are no big deal, and nothing illegal. Here is why I think it matters:
1) Actively subverting FOIA intent
2) Admitting a) Hockey stick flawed & Steve is right, b) hide decline was dishonest, c) climate models are pretty bad, and d) cherry picking results like Japan hurricanes to emphasize a pre-ordained message
3) Trying to manipulate (and probably succeeding) who gets to be IPCC author
4) Trying to manage the message (PR concern)
5) Viewing science results as helping or hurting “the cause” — Mann especially
All the above subverts the official messages of “overwhelming consencus” and “science is settled”, world’s best scientists just doing their science, and that it would be “absurd” to see a conspiracy.
[Craig Loehle] My favorite one so far is where they admit tuning the models to 20th Century climate, which in debates (e.g., one I had in person with Michael Schlesinger and others at Judith’s) is strenuously denied.