When I first understood the IPCC had first written the Summary to say what it wanted it say, then only included the factual data that supported that statement in the body of the published data that led me to understand where the debate was headed.
www.Dilbert.com has many example of this type of management.
Unfortunately, you can only go back 30 days, but here's a good representative for folks that still don't understand:
How the heck does this kind of crap make GW real?