This editorial sides with climate change deniers, suggesting that "the climate-tracking game has been rigged from the start." To back its points, the article cites emails from scientists that were recently leaked in an incident which conservatives refer to as "ClimateGate." Considering that these private emails were illegally obtained and only involve a few scientist quoted out of context, the WSJ's editorial position on this matter seems irresponsible: based on this flimsy evidence, it makes serious allegations that the whole scientific community is maliciously trying to deceive the public.

No science is invoked, and experts on climate science are presumed guilty. No hint is given to the possibility that proponents of valid scientific analysis were legitimately trying to reduce the dangerous effects of ignorant doubters and media with a political agenda, in order to save the planet.

For a claim as sweeping as this: "The impression left by the correspondence among Messrs. Mann and Jones and others is that the climate-tracking game has been rigged from the start.", there isn't much evidence to support it. Trying to dismiss an entire discipline and work of scientists across the world takes more proof than a bunch of leaked emails.

A revealing look at a breaking story. This editorial centers around e-mails that came to light last week indicating that the supposed scientific "consensus" surrounding anthropogenic global warming may be less a consensus than a point of view enforced by a powerful elite. Since all the major nations of the world are presently considering legislation based on this point of view, systematic muzzling of those in the scientific community who are not in agreement has major implications.