So what will be the fall-out from the leaked East Anglia CRU files? What happens when politically connected scientists blatantly manipulate data to buttress a flawed hypothesis: that increasing CO2 concentrations in our atmosphere drive increases in global temperatures – when in fact the inverse is true. Now that the hoax has been exposed through their own research documents and communications, the narrative will become an exercise in the dissembling of culpability by the principles, to be followed by the inevitable claims of victimhood.
There should be no quarter spared in aggressively pursuing the perpetrators at every level in order to expose those who have participated in a conspiracy to enrich themselves through the manipulation of data and research. And with these leaked East Anglia CRU documents providing a basis for further investigation, it would appear that the content developed for the United Nations IPCC TAR and AR4 reports is now hopelessly compromised.
Imagine! – We are one step away from levying a tax on the emissions of CO2 worldwide; a tax that each and every consumer will pay through the increased cost of producing everything we buy. The EPA is on the verge of rendering an endangerment finding on a gas that is an essential building block to all plant life on the globe based on what appears to be falsified data. Carbon Dioxide is a gas that is soluble in water, and one that forms the very base of the food chain in our oceans; it is a compound that each and every living mammal on the planet exhales as part of its very existence. And yet a group of scientists, who for purely self-serving and political reasons, embark on a crusade to manufacture evidence that CO2 is the hobgoblin of greenhouse gases, when in fact all life forms are inherently dependent on its existence.
How many politicians have blindly signed onto invasive and misguided regulations designed to label CO2 emissions as causative to AGW in response to apocalyptic scenarios pushed by Special Interest and the Environmental Lobby, based primarily on the manufactured CRU research.
The selective and purely partisan consideration demonstrated by editors of peer-reviewed journals, willfully rejecting dissenting opinion in favor of sensational headlines, and the banishment of objective experts and opinions to the scientific equivalent of Botany Bay has been unforgivable.
What is the sum total of tax-payer funds on a global scale committed to a fraudulent premise based on falsified data. Do the ends justify the means? – I’m sure there are those who believe so! But is this to become the philosophy of our scientific method.
The virtue of scientific endeavor must remain paramount and therefore the entire community must be held to the highest of standards. There can be absolutely no compromise on the manipulation of data or the scientific method – and for those who breech the protocols and embark on the path of manufacturing results – justice must be swift and uncompromising. To do anything less than issue a ‘scarlet letter’ to those who would perpetrate fraud on a scale such as this would border on criminal itself.
The integrity of the Scientific Process needs to be restored and the first step requires a purging of the ranks to excise the taint; followed by the aggressive prosecution of the principles so that examples of harsh sanctions and consequences are well documented for those who might contemplate embarking down a similar path.
