re: #405 windsagio

I’d go so far as to say the primary causes were Political. They were probably able to find some scientific justification for it, but that wasn’t what got the wheel rolling.

Its clear to everyone but you that that’s the case (oh and Bagua).

No… I agree that they were under a lot of pressure, political and simply public, to make some statements, or to make some decisions, or to examine the issues in some way.

I was only debating with the concept that PR and Politics was the only reason they are doing it.

I don’t think so.

And the review proposal that the MET has crafted cannot be anything but good for science.

This is good…

“The current surface temperature datasets were first put together in the 1980s to the best standards of dataset development at that time; they are independent analyses and give the same results, thereby corroborating each other.

In the case of the CRU land surface temperature dataset (CRUTEMP3, which forms the land component of the HADCRUT dataset) there are substantial IPR issues around the raw station data that underpin the dataset: we are actively pursuing resolution of these issues so that the base data can be made openly available. We know that several stations have already been explicitly forbidden from release by the rights’ holders so we will not be able to release all the under-pinning station data.

Consequently we have been considering how the dataset can be brought up to modern standards and made fit for the purpose of addressing 21st Century needs. We feel that it is timely to propose an international effort to reanalyze surface temperature data in collaboration with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), which has the responsiblity for global observing and monitoring systems for weather and climate.”