re: #444 bagua

Well we disagree then. But I have yet to hear anyone else assert that the MET Office is doing this massive, ground up re-do because they believe the data is not suspect. That is illogical.

And somehow you just keep ignoring the obvious — that the review is happening because of the overblown scandal, for public relations reasons. Go ahead and keep trying to spin it — I think most people can see what you’re doing, despite the MET’s own statements.