re: #47 goddamnedfrank

Wait, which one is it, did they “refuse to release” them or are they “getting permission” to do so? Both statements cannot simultaneously be true, and it comes off as cognitive dissonance to express them back to back this way. Clearly they do not currently have permission to re-release the data. Data that is available elsewhere so I’m really not sure why you’re still using the term “proprietary” in reference to it.

The “proprietary” bit is how they adjusted the underlying data to create the widely cited CRU data set. They have not released this. Other “proprietary” bits are the code they used to create their widely cited temperature sets, they have not released this either. Without these parts it is impossible to either verify or falsify their published work.

As to the raw data from the stations, that is the element they need permission to release and are in the process of doing. It will, however, be useless in verification/falsification of the CRU work if they do not explain which data sources they used, their location, and how and why they chose to include/exclude or adjust their data.

What will be possible to create is an entirely new data set independent of the CRU one, which I expect will be discarded and no longer cited.