:Let's start from the beginning.  Is there any reason that a wikipedia entry "Climategate" should redirect to this page, with no opportunity to create a page by that name?  Climategate scandal redirects here also.  Climategate science offers  Climatic Research Unit documents, as well as this, but does not discuss the perceptions of scientific scandal.  This controversy may or may not rival Cyril Burt's peccadillo, or perhaps even the Piltdown Man, but there is no option to deny the possibility.  Let's start from the beginning, and create an NPOV page entitled Climategate - which, after all, refers only to a perception, and a real perception, but not to a reality - which can provide links to the hacking/leaking of emails, and to the documents themselves.   Dave Souza's comment is tendentious, and the Nature editorial [] is contrary to fact: "The core science supporting anthropogenic global warming has not changed. This needs to be stated again and again  ... climate legislation had hit a wall in the US Senate, where the poorly informed public debate often leaves one wondering whether science has any role at all."  In fact, shouting anything again and again is characteristic of Goebbels rather than Galileo.  Those who presume to be promoting "science" are in fact fighting a rear guard action, retreating from inch after inch of furiously defended territory.  The Null Hypothesis has not been falsified.  Scientific Method trumps "science".  Let's have no more cross-burnings on the lawns of scientific skeptics (or, more simply, scientists).