This sent in from a reader:
Here are a couple of quotes from a "peer reviewed" report published a
few hours ago.;
para 22 "We sought evidence that refuted the claims of McIntyre and McKitrick, but have not come across any detailed rebuttal."
Para 23 "We are in no position to determine who is right and who is
wrong in the growing debate on the hockey stick. If there are historical
periods of marked temperature increase, it seems to us it is important
to know why these occurred. Overall, we can only urge that the issue is
pursued in the next IPCC Assessment."
I say "peer reviewed" because it is a committee report from the UK’s
House of Lords here.
It is surely ironic how quickly Mann et al. have been to cite internet "grey" literature such as realclimate.org posts or Wahl-Ammann press releases as validation of their position, while withholding information about rejections of their submissions to journals: the submission by Mann et al. to Climatic Change cited last year in Jones and Mann  has never appeared and the Wahl and Ammann submission to GRL was rejected. I don’t view journal publication as determining the truth or falsity of any argument – I’m merely noting irony.