Well according to James Delingpole scientists in Russia aren't very impressed with how the CRU "tricked" the data. In his blog he writes:
"The crux of the argument is that the CRU cherry picked data following the same methods that have been done everywhere else. They ignored data covering 40% of Russia and chose data that showed a warming trend over statistically preferable alternatives when available. They ignored completeness of data, preferred urban data, strongly preferred data from stations that relocated, ignored length of data set.
One the final page, there is a chart that shows that CRU’s selective use of 25% of the data created 0.64C more warming than simply using all of the raw data would have done. The complete set of data show 1.4C rise since 1860, the CRU set shows 2.06C rise over the same period."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ja...lobal-warming/
Now James Delingpole isn't a scientist. He is a reporter; part of the great unwashed who should just blindly follow our scientific leaders. But Jimmy does provide links to real Russian scientists. Apparently some Russian scientists aren't making their careers off of the global warming scare. Russian scientists tend to write and report in Russian. There's something Photon forgot to mention when he said the data was there on the Internet for anyone to see.
http://en.rian.ru/papers/20091216/157260660.html