The affair known as ‘climategate’ controversy has become a topic for interpretation and contention in the media, and also in some strands of the social sciences. Perhaps not surprisingly, it has become controversial among these social scientists, too. Scholars disagree about how to evaluate the exposed practices shown by the emails, especially if these should be seen as instances of scientific malpractice. However, there is general agreement that climate science needs more openness and transparency. This was the major finding of several official inquiries and is widely assumed to be a precondition for regaining trust. But when evaluating climategate there is a variety of responses, ranging from the apologetic to the highly critical, some even speaking of ‘corruption’. This seems to indicate that the politicized nature of the debate (including climate science and social science reflection) has had a major impact. This could be problematic from a history of science perspective.