Here are the authors of a study critical of the consensus AGW narrative which the leaked CRU letters talk about how to suppress. The letters discuss how to stack peer reviewers in favor of AGW and against dissenters, and how to bypass the normal peer review cycle to cram a response in immediately after the critical paper.
Hint: this is not the way disinterested science is supposed to work.
Tags: Climategate, CRU, fraud, Global Warming