Watts & Strata question CRU "Lost Data" [krak]

James (why do I keep doing that -ed) Anthony Watts asks a rather obvious question. If the raw data was really lost, why, in all those thousands of emails, is there no mention of this loss? Instead the relevent emails dealt in ways to avoid the release of said data to FOI demands.

AJ Strata questions how recent temperature analyses (1, 2) were done by the CRU using this data that was supposedly lost years earlier. My uneducated guess would be that the analysis was done using the scrubbed "value-added" data, but he thinks raw data must have been used.

The easy answer is that, as in so many other areas, CRU scientists were just winging it with OOMA * numbers that reinforced their theories instead of worrying about what the raw data did or didn't tell them, and regardless of whether the data was even available.

But if OOMA numbers weren't used, and the raw data did exist after it was claimed to be lost, "Robin" Jones and his Merry Men ** have left another opening for criminal inquiry into their actions vis-a-vis their response to the FOI requests.

(*Out Of My Ass)

(**Make no mistake, the policy demands by this group of climate scientists has little to do with climate, and depends almost entirely on robbing 1st world nations to "even the playing field" with developing nations.)

Lost Data" [krak]&bodytext=James (why do I keep doing that -ed) Anthony Watts asks a rather obvious question. If the raw data was really lost, why, in all those thousands of emails, is there no mention of this loss? Instead the relevent emails...&topic=world_news"> posted by xgenghisx at 10:18 AM

| Access Comments