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.

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.

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

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.

Nigel Lawson's An Appeal to Reason examines the worst predictions of the effects of climate change and offers a measured assessment of how we could--and even should--realistically respond.

The examples of rigidly enforced conformity could fill several volumes, and no amount of criticism from outside the environmental citadel is likely to break though the walls. So, is there any chance that reform will come from within?

The United States hasbeen so successful in improving environmental quality in recent years that we should be celebrating, not despairing.

Giving Al Gore the Nobel Peace Prize has subordinated science to hype.