Hacked e-mails from Britain's Climate Research Unit are only the latest evidence of climate fraud. Just ask NASA's James Hansen about the faking of climate data or EPA employees about the suppression of climate fact.

For years, noted scientists and other global warming skeptics have been accused of being on the take, their research tainted and funded by grants from Big Oil and other fossil-fuel interests.

Now, it turns out, it's the warm-mongers who are fudging the numbers and concealing the inconvenient truth.

the incriminating e-mails documenting collusion and fraud among top global warming scientists, including a few from Jones himself, are genuine.

In one e-mail sent to Michael Mann, director of Penn State University's Earth System Science Center, Raymond Bradley, a climatologist at the University of Massachusetts, and Malcolm Hughes, a professor of dendrochronology at the University of Arizona's Laboratory for Tree-Ring Research, Jones speaks of the "trick" of filling in gaps of data in order to hide evidence of temperature decline:

An e-mail from scientist Mick Kelly to Jones also speaks of manipulating data to hide the fact that Earth is actually cooling: "I'll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again, as that's trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent coldish years."

When bad numbers aren't enough to show global warming, it's okay to just make them up. Hansen, the NASA scientist who began the climate scare, was himself caught fudging the numbers when he declared October 2008 the warmest October on record.

So how did Hansen claim it was the warmest October ever? As Christopher Booker wrote in the U.K.'s Telegraph: "The reason for the freak figures was that scores of temperature records from Russia and elsewhere were not based on October readings at all. Figures from the previous month had simply been carried over and repeated two months running."

As it turns out, Mann is the creator of the discredited "hockey stick" graph used in reports from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Their study also totally ignored major events such as the widely recognized Medieval Warm Period (about A.D. 800 to 1400) and the Little Ice Age (A.D. 1600 to 1850).

The warming debate was never over, only censored. We have noted how the Environmental Protection Agency has engaged in an ongoing cover-up of its own analyses of climate change and discouraged public dissent.

Ball says he has "watched climate science hijacked and corrupted by this small group of scientists." "Surely," he says, "this is the death knell for the CRU, the IPCC, Kyoto and Copenhagen and the carbon credits shell game."

These inconvenient truths may be just the tip of the iceberg.