Following the refusals of Freedom of Information requests for the release of data that underpins global warming alarmism, a 'whistle-blower' at the UEA has apparently released a treasure trove of emails and files that pose serious questions about the credibility of the claimed climate science consensus. The leaked emails reveal how a 'Team' of international scientists exaggerate and defend climate science on behalf of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
 
ABD Environment spokesman Paul Biggs said,

“There are two scandals here. The first is the tone and content of the UEA emails. The second is the fact that the mainstream media has avoided exposing the leaked emails and their significance. This perhaps isn't surprising, given the fact that a number of journalists are exposed in the emails as willing conduits for misinformation.”

Biggs continues,

“The ABD's long held belief that the science is far from 'settled' has been vindicated. The claim that there is a 'consensus' is driven by a relatively small group of activist scientists who have a stranglehold on the IPCC and the scientific process in general. Sceptics are often criticised for not publishing their work in peer reviewed journals, yet behind the scenes the consensus side of the argument are busy trying to ensure that sceptical papers are rejected, whilst their own have an easy ride without having to disclose supporting data. Clearly, computer modeled climate alarmism doesn't stand up to scrutiny, so scrutiny must be avoided at all costs. Indeed, 'Team' scientists are revealed as questioning their own data in private and trying to anticipate criticism from sceptics. It follows therefore, that any climate treaty signed, either at Copenhagen in December or subsequently in 2011, will lack a sound scientific basis and political feasibility, with global governance via the UN being the main agenda behind climate alarmism.”