The mainstream media and green journalists have ignored the Climategate scandal, but it is unlikely that the scientific institutions will be able to ignore things for long.  As Andrew Bolt reported in the Herald Sun, the IPCC may now be too politicized to survive.

Professor Mike Hulme is of the University of East Anglia from which the emails were leaked, and is named by ScienceWatch as “the 10th most cited author in the world in the field of climate change, between 1999 and 2009”. The leaked emails of IPCC authors show an organisation corrupted by a clique of warmist evangelists, and even Hume now says the IPCC may have run its course:

(The UN’s Copenhagen summit) is about raw politics, not about the politics of science… It is possible that climate science has become too partisan, too centralized. The tribalism that some of the leaked emails display is something more usually associated with social organization within primitive cultures; it is not attractive when we find it at work inside science.

It is also possible that the institutional innovation that has been the I.P.C.C. has run its course. Yes, there will be an AR5 (fifth report) but for what purpose? The I.P.C.C. itself, through its structural tendency to politicize climate change science, has perhaps helped to foster a more authoritarian and exclusive form of knowledge production – just at a time when a globalizing and wired cosmopolitan culture is demanding of science something much more open and inclusive.

The next question on everyone's mind is how many other published articles and scientific "discoveries" were made based on the junk science that came out of the CRU.  We need to do a scientific journal article look up to find the citations to track exactly how much influence was created by the team of people in this very small tribe.  This is a quantifiable amount of journal articles on Climate Change that when this information hits, it will be the next wave in this tsunami.  The coupe de grace will be the release of the forensically examined "scientific" models, which will show exactly how much fudging was going on.