Someone asked my opinion on the theft and revelation of data and emails related to climate change research. From my brief readings, it appears that some academics were blocking the views (preventing publication) of others they disagreed with, as well as -- perhaps deleting "inconvenient" data.
Since the blocked people were climate change skeptics (not anti-deconstructivist poets), this is a big deal for NON-academics.
My opinion is that this kind of sabotage, censorship, backstabbing and favoritism occurs all the time (just look at the editors of a journal and how many of their students and colleagues publish there...)
My opinion is that this is going to give WAY too much impetus to the "climate change is not happening" crowd.
And, you may ask, how can I trust the CC scientists, now that they are revealed to be "typical" humans? Because the gains (in career, fame, money, etc.) to ANYONE able to show that climate change is NOT happening, is all a hoax, etc. are extreme. With that kind of reward on the table (from Exxon?), anyone with a plausible analysis showing that it's not happening would be a rockstar.
But there isn't anyone, because climate change IS happening.
Bottom Line Academics are people too. Some will sacrifice their integrity for fame or to support their opinions. They are not scientists as much as hacks. Scientists, like good intellectuals anywhere, are willing to consider all views and potentially change their own opinions in the face of new and useful evidence. That's the standard I aspire to, at least.