Dr UK writes in about an interesting article about ad hominems in the Climategate emails
Ad hominem arguments in the service of boundary work among climate scientists
By Lawrence Souder, Furrah Qureshi
In their conclusions, Souder and Qureshi contrast the behaviour of climate scientists revealed in the Climategate emails with that of gravity wave scientists studied by H. M. Collins:
In his ethnography of gravity wave scientists, Collins fantasized: “[S]cience done with real integrity can provide a model for how we should live and how we should judge.” He makes this claim not because he finds perfection in the practice of science but because he found practitioners of science in a community who openly revealed their imperfections. This community, he boasted, gave him virtually complete access to their work. On account of this transparency he felt he could trust them implicitly.
I found the Souder and Qureshi paper very interesting. It analyses (in a qualitative way) the different forms of ad hominem attacks found in Climategate emails. It is getting short shrift in the comments at Bishop Hill, and indeed contains some factual errors and misunderstandings. But as commenter The Leopard in the Basement puts it, if one gets past the socio-speak and the references to ‘deniers’:
“I’m pretty sure the Team won’t like this one bit if they ever saw it it.”
Some factual errors in the article e.g. Real Climate was started before Climate Audit, but an unusual acknowledgement within the academic world.