[exclusiv]

This also doesn't help ease concerns with those that are skeptical of many reports and models:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/5/climate-chang...

> “Gradually, in the months after [the report] came out, the evidence kept mounting that Tom Karl constantly had his ‘thumb on the scale’ — in the documentation, scientific choices, and release of datasets — in an effort to discredit the notion of a global warming hiatus and rush to time the publication of the paper to influence national and international deliberations on climate policy,” Mr. Bates said Saturday on Climate Etc.

> “What John Bates has done is to expose this culture based not on robust science, but on promoting an agenda,” Mr. Pielke said in a comment on Climate Etc. “Regardless of one’s views on policies, the scientific method should not be hijacked as they have done.”

[digitalzombie]

It's an allegation base on evidence and report with no source.

The news article if you can call that, sources the Daily UK Mail as a source.

> Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus,

There is no smoking gun. It's a hear say from one person or two.

[exclusiv]

Bates is an insider source as is Roger Pielke. We'll find out more as the investigation unfolds. There's more to this lack of discipline to scientific methods as they push for policy changes and their own agenda.

> Another prominent climate scientist, the University of Colorado’s Roger A. Pielke Sr., said Mr. Bates‘ experience was “consistent with my experiences” with Mr. Karl on the Climate Change Science Program in 2005.