The Myth of Neutral Peer-Review ExplodedSubmitted by Hard Work on Wed, 12/09/2009 - 15:48
I agree with Gary North that the biggest aspect of "Climategate" is the revelations that the "scientists", who were busy politically pushing their theory rather than engaging in an actual scientific process, SEVERELY UNDERCUT the idea of neutral peer-review.
North states: "The details of the science are beyond you and me. So are the details of just about everything. The world is complex and growing more complex. What we do understand is deliberate chicanery by experts with a political agenda."
I wholeheartedly agree. These people killed their credibility in a complex world by blatantly turning their actions into propaganda rather than science.
Another thing that I recall from various 9/11 debates is the same call to "show me the peer-reviewed studies" from those backing the "official story". The Climategate issue throws a significant wrench into this argument related to key political issues as it calls into significant question the objectivity and neutrality of those peers who would be performing the review.
Here is the entire North article: