Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS


Do hacked e-mails expose scientists or skeptics?

Given the furor surrounding the pirated e-mails coming out of the University of East Anglia, what's the real takeaway lesson? Does it say more about the way renowned climate scientists work, or how climate skeptics have operated in shaping the public debate over global warming?

Posted by Washington Post Editor on November 23, 2009 12:55 PM

Science calls for us to be open minded

The scientists at the University of East Anglia who sought to curtail opposing thoughts were acting out of selfish reasons, seeking to justify their own positions on climate change. The same can be said for those who have used this forum to make personal attacks on members of this Planet Panel.

Posted by Rick Edmund, on November 26, 2009 9:19 AM

An admission that the science is sound

The fulminations of climate skeptics in the wake of the release of electronic documents stolen from the University of east Anglia demonstrates more clearly than ever that the skeptics don't understand either climate science or the scientific method.

Posted by David F. Hales, on November 25, 2009 12:43 PM

Potential impact on public's integreity of science

It would be a mistake in my opinion to address this issue along the lines of the question. It is larger and more important than so called "renowned scientists" and skeptics.

Posted by William O'Keefe, on November 24, 2009 1:24 PM

A minor tempest

This little tempest should remind us that like the rest of us, renowned climate scientists are people with a normal quotient of character failings. Albert Einstein reportedly treated his first wife badly, but that certainly has no bearing on the genius of his scientific achievements -- any more than Pablo Picasso's private behavior devalues his astonishing art.

Posted by Robert J. Shapiro, on November 24, 2009 11:48 AM

A passionate debate can bring benefits

Passion is a good thing when it drives people to work hard and overcome obstacles. Passion is a bad thing when it causes you to close your mind to other points of view, no matter how strongly you disagree with them.

Posted by Pam Faggert, on November 24, 2009 11:27 AM

E-mails not a surprise to scientists

This is a fascinating development, not because it sheds light on climate change, but because it pulls back the curtain on scientific research in a highly politicized environment.

Posted by Bernard Finel, on November 24, 2009 11:08 AM

Convincing skeptics

The impressive thing about this conspiracy is that they managed to convince the planet's glaciers, sea ice, and hydrological cycles to play along.

Posted by Bill McKibben, on November 24, 2009 10:58 AM

A purposeful distraction

The widely posted Climate Research Unit e-mails are being misrepresented by climate change deniers as evidence that the science supporting human-caused global warming is fatally flawed or, worse, corrupt.

Posted by Donald F. Boesch, on November 24, 2009 7:35 AM

Don't judge a book by its cover

The story here is a simple one and it could apply to any one of us. Think of all the e-mails you have written over the past 10 years.

Posted by David Hone, on November 24, 2009 6:03 AM


Make a Comment  |  All Comments (25)

Contact Us
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company