Crovitz ponders the fallout of “Climategate,” which began with the disclosure of emails and other documents showing how leading global-warming scientists had evaded peer review and refused to disclose data.
L. Gordon Crovitz
Over the past week there have been resignations and investigations of top scientists in England and the US. This event amounts to a peer review of a putative scientific “consensus” by bloggers. The story so far has played itself out largely on blogs, often run by the same scientists who had a hard time getting printed in the scientific journals. “Climategate” has provided a voice to the scientists who had been frozen out of the debate. While this episode raises disturbing questions about scientific standards in highly political areas such as global warming, Crovitz says it’s remarkable to see how quickly corrective information can now spread.
Crovitz writes ‘Information Age’ for the Journal.
Opinion summaries provided by Opinion Source, an organization with which Safe Democracy is associated