Gah, messed my formatting to hell. Apologies. Cleaned up:

That is nonsense, The Times and the Telegraph are not at all sceptic on AGW. (With that said, I am suspicious of all MSM news sources.)

Why do you say that? I’ve seen about ten articles cited here by deniers from the Times Online and the Telegraph.

And I think it is you who “might want to research that story a bit more.” The are simply reporting what the MET Office is doing.

They’re getting more accurate. They’re zeroing in on the trend more precisely. It is entirely wrong to say that the The IPPC AR4 will be in limbo.

This is being done in the name of openness:

The Met Office is confident that its analysis will eventually be shown to be correct. However, it says it wants to create a new and fully open method of analysing temperature data.

And of course, they’re immediately being attacked for doing it, as though it shows that they’re weak and uncertain.