Who Peer-Reviewed The Climate Models? Nobody.

There have been plenty of attempts to explain away Climategate by calling for the arrest of those who "hacked" the CRU emails, or by excusing the intemperate language in the emails as a kind of collegiality, but always concentrating on the emails.

Almost no one on the warmist side is talking about the software and data files that also leaked. But as Shannon Love writes at Chicago Boyz, that is changing.

Now, Programmers all over the world have begun wading through the code and they have been stunned by how bad it is. It’s quite clearly amateurish and nothing but an accumulation of seat-of-the-pants hacks and patches. 

And it is this amateur code that the UN IPCC is basing it's call for trillions of dollars in taxes on western economies.

Shannon Love:

As far as I can tell, none of the software on which the entire concept of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) is based has been examined, reviewed or tested by anyone save the people who wrote the code in the first place. This is a staggering omission of scientific oversight and correction. Nothing like it has happened in the history of science.

For now, we can safely say all the data produced by this CRU code is highly suspect. By the ancient and proven rule in computing of “Garbage in, Garbage Out” this means that all the climate simulations by other teams that make predictions using this dubious data are likewise corrupted.

Given that literally hundreds of millions of lives over the next century will depend on getting the climate models correct, we have to start all our climate modeling over from scratch.