Who peer-reviews the peer-reviewers?

[gcb]

No, I don't think it's a conspiracy theory in the "control the world" sense.  It may just be two guys with questionable data trying to cover their asses.  The fact that they're considered preeminent in their field just makes it more insidious.

But there are more that two scientists that believe global warming is going on - are they all covering up this fraud?

[Soul Crusher]

But there are more that two scientists that believe global warming is going on - are they all covering up this fraud?

This is like Dominoes, once the first domino falls, so do the rest.  Or better yet, a House of Cards built on a tooth pick.  Most of the scientists who piggy backed off of this used these few scientists' data as the foundation for their own.  Thus, its been tainted from day one. 

And there are literally trillions at stake here. 

Goldman Sachs is heavy into the carbon trading scheme.

GE is looking for massive govt handouts for green nonsense

Seimens the same thing. 

Al Gore has a partnership interest in firms that trade carbon.

These scientists and universities are trtying to get millions and millions in grants to study this crap.

Etc etc.   

[gcb]

This is like Dominoes, once the first domino falls, so do the rest.  Or better yet, a House of Cards built on a tooth pick.  Most of the scientists who piggy backed off of this used these few scientists' data as the foundation for their own.  Thus, its been tainted from day one. 

And there are literally trillions at stake here. 

Goldman Sachs is heavy into the carbon trading scheme.

GE is looking for massive govt handouts for green nonsense

Seimens the same thing. 

Al Gore has a partnership interest in firms that trade carbon.

These scientists and universities are trtying to get millions and millions in grants to study this crap.

Etc etc.   

Ummm, no - that's not how scientists work. Most data and theories are peer reviewed and they often meet a lot of skepticism from the science community at first. A lot of scientists do their own research to come to the same conclusions. If you don't believe me just look up cold fusion.

There is also trillions at stake to not do anything.

[Al Doggity]

That's the point, we don't know.  Maybe just the prestige of being considered a premier mind in the field.  But getting to the bottom of it is hard as hell because they shroud themselves in secrecy.

Why did it take a filing under the freedom of information act to get them to release data?  Which now has "disappeared".  Why shun dissenting scientific views?

That's like saying "Why did it take an email or a phone call" to get that info. FOIA is just an official request.

It's the people being accused of perpetrating the fraud that are saying the emails were taken out of context, lol.  Yeah, guess we should take their word for it.  That's almost as dumb as each one peer reviewing the others work whilst excluding others.

We don't have to take their word for it,, but the common sense approach is simply to evaluate their explanations on on their own merits.

[Soul Crusher]

Al:  The scientist stepped down in the UK and they are investigating the guy at Penn State.

This seems like it was Al Gore peer reviewing RFK Jr. 

You cant do that have any credibility on this issue.