Somebody pointed to this piece on a debate between Warmering True Believers and Skeptics. I'm just going to borrow one part:
Concluding the science sessions was one of the most senior figures in the Climate Industry, John Mitchell of the Met Office. Mitchell was review editor of Chapter 5 of the IPCC's most recent report (AR4) but hasn't been able to meet FOIA requests, despite the IPCC's pledge to keep all written expert comments on record for five years. "For my own part, I have not kept any working papers. There is no requirement to do so, given the extensive documentation already available from IPCC," Mitchell has claimed. This, like Climategate, was not mentioned.
"People underestimate the power of models. Observational evidence is not very useful," he said. "Our approach is not entirely emprical."
My, my, my... Since when does somebody else having records of THEIR stuff mean a scientist(apparently have to use the word loosely with these people) doesn't need to keep his OWN records of HIS work? And that last part is just, well, let's say 'revealing'. And boils down to "Our models give us the outcome we want, so we don't pay attention to that observing stuff. I mean, that's so old-fashioned, and anyway it didn't show what we wanted to find."