The one thing about science I have always appreciated is the concept of replication. In fact, this is the backbone of what distinguishes good scientific results and theory from pure guess work. Replication can take a couple of forms; 1.) involves unrelated scientists studying the same problem and arriving at the same or similar conclusions, or 2.) scientists sharing raw data crunching the numbers and independently reaching similar conclusions as to the meaning of the data.
The data used as the foundation of the United Nations report on global warming has always been suspect in my mind for a number of reasons. The data from the studies are the foundation of the UN recommendations and the basis for the Copenhagen treaty next month, has never been shared with other scientists. At one point these scientists, the ones who champion the treaty, even stated that the data was inadvertently destroyed. We are not talking about some napkin theory, drawn up over a drunken dinner; the data used was freely passed between a handful of cheerleaders to “replicate” the original hypothesis that carbon dioxide was killing the planet and suddenly was unavailable to scientists who questioned the manipulation of the data and the results.