Extracts from hacked emails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (CRU), popularly known as "Climategate", have provided ammunition for the sceptics.  On closer inspection, however, it may be their only fault was to be less open than they might have been. 

Some aspects of the furore are certainly a beat-up.  The reference to using a certain "trick" with the data is normal techie-speak for a neat method of extracting answers from raw data.  There's no implication in this instance that the method is not correct. 

The purported suppression of converse findings consisted of avoiding lending unwarranted credibility to non-peer-reviewed papers by their juxtaposition with peer-reviewed papers in the same journal.

Investigations continue.  Meanwhile, for a good analysis see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_e-mail_hacking_incident.