UKs MET office caught lying about tempatures.

In this article:


http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=axqsAEyw7U.A

This is what they also say:

"Pope said. Of the 10 hottest years on record, nine occurred in the 2000s, according to the Met Office, which said it expected temperatures to keep rising as a result of greenhouse-gas emissions."


Now it has been proven that that is a out and out lie. Look at this link where NASA had to REVISE their own results from the data:


http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/104812.html

This is what happen:

"He further refines his argument showing the distribution of the error, and the problems with the USHCN temperature data. He also sends an email to NASA GISS advising of the problem.

He finally publishes it here, stating that NASA made a correction not only on their own web page, attributing the discovery to McIntyre, but NASA also issued a corrected set of temperature anomaly data which you can see here:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D.txt

Steve McIntyre posted this data from NASA's newly published data set from Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) These numbers represent deviation from the mean temperature calculated from temperature measurement stations throughout the USA.

According to the new data published by NASA, 1998 is no longer the hottest year ever. 1934 is.

Four of the top 10 years of US CONUS high temperature deviations are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900."



That clearly shows that you cant believe anything MET is coming out with they are still using data that even NASA says was wrong.

Ho yes people the UKs MET office is the same ones saying that, this was the warmest decade and that this was the 5th warmest year.

Here is another little tid bit from that bloomberg article, make of it what you will, I have my opinion and will tell you what logic and common sense tells me.



"The Met Office today said it is releasing data from more than 1,500 stations worldwide. The agency has used data from about 5,000 stations in compiling its temperature series, and doesn’t have permission from all of them to release figures, Dave Britton, a spokesman for the Met Office, said today."


Now really, they are using data from 5,000 stations and only data of 1,500 are being shown because the 1,500 are the only ones giving permission to show their data.

That has got to make anyone stop and think. After all that we have seen and now know about the manipulation of data by some of the main scientists (that were cought red handed SO FAR). Does it make any sense at all that for some reason most of these other stations would not let the data be shown.


Here is a small example: In astronomy, when a person makes a discovery he puts his data out for all to see so that it can be proven by others to be true. They do not limit the data or people that they show it to, unless they are trying to cover up something. That is why they dont do that.


So lets break this down there are 5,000 stations being used in the data collection and study yet they are only going to show less then 1/3 of it. Anyone ever heard the devil is in the details.

I will make a guess from the past history here. Just as a "freedom of information act" is applied for and given, they will say, OPPS we are so sorry we accidentally tossed that information out with last weeks trash, so we dont have it anymore but but we still do have the data from the 1,500 other stations.

Hey Havasaka after the email scandel on man made global warming dont you think it would be prudent to release all the data from all the tempature stations, you know the other 3,500 of the 5,000.

Yes these are the facts Havasaka would like you to just disreguard.

I just have to say Havasaka is a puss. I mean my god he comes on in the middle of the night and on the weekends to try and push the truth down and when I sign on, he leaves. I got news for you Havasaka I know your game now and will be checking in more. Believe me I have the time.

Isn't funny How havasaka cant seem to explain away any of this. Yep never an explaination to these things. It is not like he doesn't look at my threads or post on them because he has. The problem is he never explains away what I just wrote, just some off the wall post that has nothing to do with what the thread was talking about.

So havasaka explain why The UF MET office and the UN is still using the old NASA tempatures that NASA says themselves are WRONG and not the revised ones that should be used.

Still no answer, I know you look because you have posted on ithers.

Yes thats right and another.

http://www.usatoday.com/weather/clim...eratures_N.htm