re: #160 Charles

Actually, you can’t tell that they weren’t using some kind of version control from the stolen files. Those files were assembled deliberately by the thief, to cherry-pick the most damaging stuff.

Which, IMO, argues for transparency. This would all be a non-issue if places like CRU put up their numbers along with the data and methods used for processing them. It would also make the results something that others could replicate. There’d be nothing to steal. There’d be nothing to give any plausibility to cherry picked data if all of the data are available.

With all that is at stake I don’t see a justification for keeping sources and methods in this field secret. As for the potential that detractors would then use the information to make exaggerated claims about what was done and why, that has been an ongoing aspect of science for a very long time and scientists should have nothing to fear in the bargain.