I'll take a stab at actually answering the question: Yes, absolutely it was justified to leak these e-mails because the implications of this issue are huge for the economy and the livelihood of millions.
Some people may think that the science is settled and any questions are trivia but not everyone thinks that way and there are experts in the field among them. We read of these experts and efforts to suppress their opinions in the e-mails and we read of efforts to cook the data in them. We're being asked to impose what are, in effect, huge taxes on the economy with this science given as a justification. We're entitled to a full examination of the science and how it was approached and these e-mails are revealing in that regard. Larry Seltzer Contributing Editor, PC Magazine larry_selt...@ziffdavis.com http://blogs.pcmag.com/securitywatch/ PS - If you haven't guessed it already, I think that climate science is largely full of crap. Put aside for the minute that the models can't explain why we've had *cooling* for the last 10 years; why would you think that you can look at ice cores and use them to recreate temperatures to within fractions of a degree? You can only prove the accuracy of such methods by comparing them with actual temperatures and, of course, we can't do that. I've had the sense for a long time that these guys know a whole lot less about this stuff than they claim to. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.