The CRU e-mails have revealed how the normal conventions of the peer review process
appear to have been compromised by a team* of global warming scientists, with the
willing cooperation of the editor of the International Journal of Climatology (IJC),
Glenn McGregor. The team spent nearly a year preparing and publishing a paper that
attempted to rebut a previously published paper in IJC by Douglass, Christy, Pearson,
and Singer (DCPS). The DCPS paper, reviewed and accepted in the traditional manner,
had shown that the IPCC models that predicted significant "global warming" in fact
largely disagreed with the observational data.