How about Michael Mann. In court he says that he was exonerated by the British, while in his book he says that that report had nothing to do with his work. He also claims to have nothing to do with the WMO report that sparked 'hide the decline', , both in his book and in court, but then he lists it in his CV on his website.

He is still lying about McIntyre's asking for spreadsheet formats and not understanding upside-down data.

Phil Jones is lying about his reasons for denying FOIA requests, saying that they were overburdened by skeptics looking to harass them, when the reality is the denials happened BEFORE the large bundle of requests, which was one request split up to keep them from complaining about a single burdensome request. The truth was in Jones's email' If they ever find out we have an FOI here, I think I'll delete the file rather than hand it over.' 'Why should I show you my work, when you're just trying to find something wrong with it.'

There is no evidence of tampering of data by James Hansen. And correcting data =/= tampering with data.

And regarding the criminally hacked emails. What do the emails say about

1. CO2 is a greenhouse gas? http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissio...

2. The laws of thermodynamics? http://physics.about.com/od/thermodynami...

3. Atmospheric CO2 levels are increasing? http://co2now.org/

http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/uniontr...

4. This CO2 is due to the combustion of fossil fuels? http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...

5. The Earth's temperature is increasing? http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

6. Natural factors which influence climate would be cooling the Earth if not for anthropogenic CO2? http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...

We have honesty in science, but not on propaganda funded by Big Oil, The Kochs, and The Heritage Foundation.

Much of the GW research is funded by Universities and governments other than the USA. No body of scientists contradicts AGW.

There was no evidence of "corruption of data by East Anglia" but don't let a fact get in the way of a good story, especially one that ties in with your preconceived ideas.

Edit:

Phil Jones didn't have to go to parliament and apologise, he was asked to give evidence before a parliamentary committee. The transcript is available here, but I'm sure you have read it already.

http://www.parliament.uk/business/commit...

Both Jones and the CRU were cleared of any dishonesty. The main criticisms against them were that they were slow or uncooperative in releasing data to outside parties.

Now, where is your evidence that they corrupted data?

There is honesty in science (honesty is no guarantee of accuracy) but alarmists don't practice much science. They practice chicanery for the Cause.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/01/29/ha...

Anything human beings touch literally turn to **** and lies.

Because unfortunately, there's a very thin line between politics and science.

There is a lot more honesty in science than there is in your question and answers.

Only when funding for scientific research comes from a totally unbiased source.

The only way that corruption in climate science will end is to pull all taxpayer welfare/subsidies currently being lavished on corrupt scientists, universities and so-called renewable energy industries.

We have had the corruption of data by East Anglia, which accuracy can never be recovered.

We have had data tampering by Jimmy Hansen.

These two places have the highest political influence regarding AGW or ACC in the world. Yet their integrity has proven lacking.

It's a given that the eco fascists constantly lie.

making false accusations is very dishonest