This is a reference I'll use in the analysis of Bauge's attempt to associate cryonics with the Australian disinterment case:
"Information Storage and Computational Aspect of Repair", by Tad Hogg, Ph.D. email tad@alumni.caltech.edu
http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~tad
Cryonics magazine, 3rd Qtr. 1996. Volume 17:3. A publication of Alcor Life Extension Foundation.
Hogg begins this article as follows: "Cryonic suspension is an attempt to preserve enough of a person's body, after death by current standards, to allow future technology to restore the person to health. This preserved physical structure may not in itself by sufficient for future repair, due to the damage caused by suspension, especially if the suspension is delayed. So people planning for suspension might improve their cahnces of eventual revival by saving additional information about themselves in the form of records seaprate from their bodies".
In the case of exhumation as contemplated by Bauge's bogus cryonics case in Australia, the "suspension would be delayed" to an exceedingly extraordinary degree. Bauge insists that such a case would merely be an extension of current cryonics practice by extending the benefits of post-mortem suspensions to a wider customer base. On the contrary, such a case cannot in any meaningful sense of the term, be "cryonics". By the thinnest of threads, Bauge hangs the name cryonics on, apparently, anything his "client" wants it to be, even, admittedly if it's only the DNA that is preserved. Clearly, DNA preservation in liquid nitrogen does "not" constitute cryonics anymore than does preserving an individual's diaries or written records.
I'll expand on this notion, using Tad Hogg's published article in Cryonics from 1996. The point I will argue will argue is that to the extent that cryonic suspension is delayed is the extent to which external records become vital. Hogg makes this clear when he says "a key purpose of suspension [is] preservation of individual [and unique] information. From this point of view, the required information can be shared between preserved structure and external records so that records can compensate for some suspension damage."
In Bauge's bogus cryonics, he most defintely has "some suspension damage" his hands. For Bauge to demonstrate consistency with a scientific approach in light of a key purpose of suspension according to Hoag, he would have to ask his Australian "client" to work as much as possible to preserve diaries, photos, and any other "external records" as well as anything else he asks of her, in order to maintain scientific credibility.
To the extent Bauge does NOT ask his client for such records is the extent to which Bauge rejects Hogg's thesis. And to the extent Bauge rejects Hogg's thesis is the extent to which Bauge is attempting to grandstand for the publicity as opposed to making an attempt at working on cryonics qua cryonics as we all understand it and as defined by Hogg.
Check, Bauge.
And probably checkmate.
Q.E.D.