FOIA couldn’t have known the context which would make Schneider look so bad.

I wouldn’t be so sure about that! Given what we can reasonably surmise about the skills of The Saint (as I prefer to call FOIA), it would be a relatively simple matter for her/him to check Ross’s site (and/or the National Post archives at whatever point he had discovered this email) for a likely original, don’t you think? Not to mention that s/he would by now have considerable trust that at least one of us “good guys” would find the context!

One of the things that surprised me in the early days after the release of Climategate 1.0 was the Phelim McAleer video (at Copenhagen), in which Schneider was asked for his opinion on Jones’s “delete the emails” request. Considering his reputation as the “great communicator” of climate science, Schneider’s body language facial expressions, and evasiveness, struck me as being those of a somewhat terrified rabbit – rather than those of one who had the confidence and courage of his convictions.

Here’s a link to the video.

Not that I disagree that the “cherry-picking” charge certainly lacks credibility!

“Scientist should consider stretching the truth to get some broad base support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of
media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little
mention about any doubts we might have.

This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in
cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”

See also http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/199608/environmental.cfm