Tuesday
Aug172010
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Surface temperatures blog
Aug 17, 2010 Blogs Climate: Surface The Met Office's Peter Thorne is running a blog to go alongside the surfacetemperatures.org initiative. This project intends to design a new surface temperature dataset. Public views are being sought on the project although time is somewhat short now so if you are interested you need to be quick.
(H/T Oliver Morton)
Reader Comments (8)
The U.K. Met Office proposes to restart from scratch, then mix-and-match-- apply "adjustments" all different yet substantively the same to obtain identically preconceived results with a spurious veneer of updated credibility. Now that Hansen's GISS/NASA satellite readings themselves have been acknowledged as conscious, knowing frauds, we'd say that in matters climatological no administrative/bureaucratic (governmental) entity deserves the slightest public trust. Climate hysterics, Green Gangsters such as Briffa, Hansen, Jones, Mann, Trenberth et al. --nevermind Railroad Bill Pachauri's suppurating IPCC-- have brought this on themselves.
"Public views are being sought on the project although time is somewhat short now"
Well publicised, was it?
As in: 'All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display in your local planning department on Alpha Centauri for fifty of your Earth years..' :-)
They obviously don't want to be confused by the facts.
Blissfully unaware of the real world. Privatization cannot come soon enough.
Dear Met Office,
We don't believe you now because of evidence suggesting you are wrong. We won't believe you in the future because you have been found wrong in the past and therefore proven to be fallible: unless you are transparent by publishing raw data and your treatment of it. This would save us all the time and expense that will ensue if you are not. Remember that the whole point of this exercise is to regain credibility. You could make a significant contribution to mankind's benefit by revealing truth. Then the goal of credibility would be reached.
A quote from the preamble (which cannot be copied and pasted for 'security reasons') give lie to the entire project. The outcome is pre-ordained.
"The nature of this project also provides the opportunity, by making this a highly visible activity, to re-build public conficence in climate science (and science as a whole) and facilitate "buy-in" to the need for a lower carbon future."
This entire charade is for one purpose, and one purpose only and that is to provide "support" for the CAGW belief system.
@ Stephen Brown 8:31
For "to re-build public conficence in climate science" read 'credibility'.
"the need for a lower carbon future."
Failed at the first hurdle so that saves all that pouring over their stats then!
In other news, Bernie Madoff is now offering investment advice by email.