In recent years a number of researchers have provided evidence of bias in the review of papers on climate science submitted for journal publication. The papers were delayed or rejected because data, analyses, and subsequent discussion and conclusions did not fit or support the narrative being promoted by the IPCC and others that catestrophic global warming (now called climate change) has and is occurring.
I also believe that bias can exist at the journal editor-level and in peer-review of policy-related papers on climate issues. My observation is that only policy analyses that presume catestrophic global warming or climate change is man-caused recieve favorable reviews. Papers with other points of view end up being marginalized in the review process and not published. My own recent experience with 2 journals has confirmed this. Hence, looking beyond the peer-reviewed journals and government publications will be necessary to find the best science and policy ideas on this topic.
If you still doubt the large dose of politics in climate science, consider this report from India.