Looking at the CRU code Tom Smith

Over at JamulBlog.  

I'm not a software engineer or climatologist but I'm guessing comments like "fudge factor" and "ARTIFICAL CORRECTION" might suggest the data is being, well, fudged.  Read the whole thing and the posts around it too.

To restate the obvious, the data and the code have to be available to the public so they can be examined and critiqued or it's not science.  Or, if it is science, it's not the kind of science you want to base trillion dollar public policy on.  It's our money, isn't it?