They were not "comprehensively disproven", and it was certainly not a non-scandal.
The whole affair is forensically detailed in
Hiding the Decline: A. W. Montford: 9781475293364: Amazon.com: Books.
And what do you think about the Harry-Read-Me file?
ClimateGate After Five Years: Ten Credibility-Killing Quotes from Leaked Files That Media Ignored
Ooh look, a blog!
Meanwhile, eight (8!) separate committees looked into 'Climategate' and found no serious fault with the way the CRU interpreted or presented their data.
Given that 8 is clearly insufficient in your mind, just how many committees finding no fault would satisfy you that there was no fault? Perhaps 50? 100?
Let's consider each committee:
The
House of Commons' Science and Technology Committee said "the scientific reputation of Professor Jones and CRU remains intact"
The
Independent Climate Change Review said On the specific allegations made against the behaviour of C.R.U. scientists, we find that their rigor and honesty as scientists are not in doubt,
The
International Science Assessment Panel (Oxburgh Enquiry) concluded "We found absolutely no evidence of impropriety whatsoever,"
2 Separate Penn State University committees (
1 &
2) found Dr Mann innocent of all allegations made against him
The
US Environment Protection Agency found no fault, and instead were very critical of those who they said "routinely misunderstood the scientific issues". I think they might have been referring to bloggers!
The
U.S. Department of Commerce said "We did not find any evidence that NOAA inappropriately manipulated data or failed to adhere to appropriate peer review procedures,"
The
US-based National Science Foundation found no evidence of research misconduct,
Quite a list isn't it? And yet, the 'controversy' rages on amongst bloggers and news outlets owned or funded by those with big oil interests.
You're saying we should sit back and let the person accused of wrongdoing investigate themselves, anyone else see a problem with that?
Go ahead and look up the various organisations who conducted these enquiries. British and US governments, independent advisory authorities in both countries, hardly the CRU 'investigating itself' is it?
You all really need to stop referring to 'climategate', because continuing to go on about it, in the face of such a tsunami of contrary expert assessments, makes your whole case look more and more desperate.