I have taken the time to read over some of the most often emails that were quoted from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit to see for myself (yes I am being somewhat skeptical). I was shocked by the lack of academic ethics I saw, however I don't believe I can see a smoking gun.
- I don't really care about the insulting emails about other scientists, I have seen way worse during my time at Université de Montréal and in the United States. Teachers do that often, they criticize and insult those who think differently than them.
- Even if I see that there is clearly a lack of academic ethics (dubious tampering, intimidation, blackmail and intended destruction of evidence), I don't see intent or motives (I need proofs)
- Overall, I can see only a couple of scientists who have been very out of place and that should be reprimanded, it questions only the work of the concerned scientists, not the entire science. I mean, there are a lot of economists that sometimes twist the facts and act in ways that they get reprimanded for lack of rigor and integrity, but we don't end up questionning the entire science of economics just because of one disreputable person.
The only thing I can see is that the scientists at the UEA CRU are just lacking in ethics, I don't see how this questions climate science per se.