Continuation of the older threads. Please scan those (even briefly) to see whether your point has already been dealt with. Let me know if there is something worth pulling from the comments to the main post.Read the rest of the post at the source…
In the meantime, read about why peer-review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for science to be worth looking at. Also, before you conclude that the emails have any impact on the science, read about the six easy steps that mean that CO2 (and the other greenhouse gases) are indeed likely to be a problem, and think specifically how anything in the emails affect them.
RealClimate's Comment Policy
If you've attempted to post a comment at Real Climate under this story, and had it, in your opinion, unreasonably rejected or snipped, please repost it and any additional commentary below in the comments. Please take a look at Guidelines for Comments if you haven’t yet.