AGW disciples - International Scoflaws

As East Anglia CRU moves to release their temperature data in an attempt to reclaim some small measure of integrity, one overriding thing needs to be considered. As people digging into the released code have discovered, some poor programmer named Harry at the CRU has tried to duplicate previous results and met with failure. So the chances of this released data ever supporting the CRU's published results are slim to none. Which means every published report that incorporated any CRU data is now at a minimum suspect and at worse worthless.

This leads back to the Heidelberg Appeal which was issued back in 1992 during the Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro. In this document, scientists appealed to all the people running the Earth Summit to use scientific methods in efforts to address any attempt to manage the environment. To date, 72 Nobel Prize winners can be counted among the 4,000+ signatories. Nobel winners in Medicine and Physics seem to dominate. As opposed to Al Gore and his Peace Prize who acts as the leader of the global warming/climate change brigade.

What also emerged from the Earth Summit was the Rio Declaration that had 27 Principles. It seems Mann, Hanson, and the CRU crew have been using Principle 15 to push their agenda.
In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.
But at the same time by their steadfast refusal to release their data and code they are in violation of Principle 10 of the same declaration. Environmental issues are best handled with participation of all concerned citizens, at the relevant level. At the national level, each individual shall have appropriate access to information concerning the environment that is held by public authorities... East Anglia CRU, NASA, NOAA, and others involved in this debacle can be considered public authorities since they receive governmental funding which affects public policy and everyone's standard of living. By denying individuals like McIntyre the appropriate access, they, being Mann et al, are repudiating Principle 10.

Finally lets look at Al Gore and how his carbon offset business fits within the Rio Declaration framework. This is germane since Al Gore has been the most visible supporter of global warming legislation while marketing the concept of a poor country selling its excess carbon credits to a developed county like the United Kingdom. Lets look at Principle 16 shall we? National authorities should endeavour to promote the internalization of environmental costs and the use of economic instruments, taking into account the approach that the polluter should, in principle, bear the cost of pollution, with due regard to the public interest and without distorting international trade and investment. Seems Al Gore and his business might be violating the spirit at least of this principle to make some dollars.

Ladies and gentlemen of the world, I must ask a simple question. When the big name people who push a certain approach are shown to be liars and charlatans, what should be done? The peddlers of this charade need to be repudiated. As for their ideas, these ideas must be classified as fallacy until reproducible results carried out in an open manner shows these ideas to have merit. Millions for defense, not one cent for AGW.