Oops. Did I say Exxon? I meant leading proponents of AGW theory at East Anglia University.

Caught. Outright. Inappropriately. Fudging. Temperature. Data.

So that their climate models would arrive at pre-determined results.

And that isn't all. In addition to cooking their numbers to overstate warming trends they were also caught trying to suppress the work of other scientists that did not agree with their theories on global warming.

That still isn't all. When other scientists came calling for their raw data and methodologies to review it and see if they could duplicate the results and conclusions.....because that is what real scientists do....the High Priests of Anthropogenic Global Warming denied them the data and even discussed deleting the data (which was already under a FOI request) rather than let the data get into the hands of those outside the church.

You will just have to follow this on the blogs or at Fox News because the vaunted Fourth Estate, the bedrock of our informed electorate...which can assign eleven reporters to go through Sarah Palin's book page by page but won't do the same for Harry Reid's Health Care Bill.....has taken a total pass on this story. One exception: CBS News has covered this. Not on their broadcast news, though. On one of their online blogs. Kudos to Declan McCullagh who may be out of a job by now, for all I know.

This story is already days old and as of this morning there is still nothing in the local paper (Hearst) on what should be considered a major scandal. Fudging information that could possibly cause the mis-direction of trillions of tax dollars used to be a major scandal, anyway. Not on the order of Halliburton stock going up two points but still major.

Want to follow this in detail? Go to the blog "Watts Up With That?"

Want a quick rundown of bullet points? Here they are:

1. The scientists colluded in efforts to thwart Freedom of Information Act requests(across continents no less). They reference deleting data, hiding source code from requests, manipulating data to make it more annoying to use, and attempting to deny requests from people recognized as contributors to specific internet sites. Big brother really is watching you. He's just not very good at securing his web site.

2. These scientists publicly diminished opposing arguments for lack of being published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In the background they discussed black-balling journals that did publish opposing views, and preventing opposing views from being published in journals they controlled. They even mention changing the rules midstream in arenas they control to ensure opposing views would not see the light of day. They discuss amongst themselves which scientists can be trusted and who should be excluded from having data because they may not be "predictable".

3. The scientists expressed concern privately over a lack of increase in global temperatures in the last decade, and the fact that they could not explain this. Publicly they discounted it as simple natural variations. In one instance, data was manipulated to hide a decline in temperatures when graphed. Other discussions included ways to discount historic warming trends that inconveniently did not occur during increases in atmospheric CO2.

4. The emails show examples of top scientists working to create public relations messaging with favorable news outlets. It shows them identifying and cataloging, by name and association, people with opposing views. These people are then disparaged in a coordinated fashion via favorable online communities.

(Hat Tip to Commission Impossible)