\n\n* The consensus is not scientific as much as it is political.
\nWhat we find out from the emails is that Jones and a number of others were using underhanded manipulations to suppress scientific publications that disagreed with the CO2-caused AGW theory. There is no scientific consensus if all the science isn\u00e2\u0080\u0099t being considered.
\n* There\u00e2\u0080\u0099s a difference between \u00e2\u0080\u009cglobal warming,\u00e2\u0080\u009d \u00e2\u0080\u009canthropogenic (caused by humans) global warming,\u00e2\u0080\u009d and \u00e2\u0080\u009canthropogenic global warming caused by CO2.\u00e2\u0080\u009d
\n*
\n* The Climategate files don\u00e2\u0080\u0099t call global warming into question, but they make some of the science of anthropogenic global warming more suspect, and they make it clear that \u00e2\u0080\u009cforcings\u00e2\u0080\u009d other than CO2 have not been fairly considered.
\n* There has clearly been significant warming in the last 400 years -- since the \u00e2\u0080\u009cLittle Ice Age\u00e2\u0080\u009d. That\u00e2\u0080\u0099s how we know it was the Little Ice Age.
\n* There is good reason to believe that humans may be accounting for some warming -- and some cooling, for that matter. But we don\u00e2\u0080\u0099t know how much.
\n* The case for all or most of the warming being due to CO2 was not as unquestionable as it was presented to be, and from the Climategate files we know that even that case was being slanted significantly.
\n* There is more than one \u00e2\u0080\u009csmoking gun\u00e2\u0080\u009d email (see here, here, here, here, here, and more)
\n* \u00e2\u0080\u00a6 but the program codes are much more significant than the emails
\n* \u00e2\u0080\u00a6 and the program codes will be yielding new surprises for a while to come.
\n
via Pajamas Media \u00c2\u00bb Fast Facts About Climategate.
\n" }