The controversy of the Hadley Climate Research Unit has made clear that it is time for climactic science to clean house, and investigations should extend beyond the United Kingdom.

The University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit's e-mail account was hacked earlier this month, exposing communications among CRU faculty members and researchers that reveal their willingness to distort climate-change data.

The institution of science has no place for hiding data, shaping data to conform to pre-existing beliefs,undermining the peer-review process, or any other of the shady activities that the Hadley Center Climate Research Unit scientists allegedly engaged in.

The Climategate scandal erodes the credibility of both the scientists involved and the institution of scientific research.

Climate Research Unit e-mails suggest that its scientists have been suppressing and misstating data.

Both my own research and reading in the literature suggests that EPA has serious problems in the way it employs scientific information when it assesses both the potential benefits, and potential costs of existing and proposed public policies.

Climate science has become one of the most distrusted occupations; it is fast becoming known for reporting exaggerations and bending the truth.

Since the beginning of the climate change story more than 20 years ago, it has been hard to sort out whether the IPCC represents the “best” science, or merely the findings most compatible with the politically driven climate policy agenda. Both sets of Climategate emails have lifted the lid on the insides of the process, and it isn’t pretty.