On 10 Dec, 09:17, "Stan" wrote:
I tell you what instead of averaged values for month, which have been
accepted for 100's of years, the daily readings are made freely available
(In
Met Office alone this is probably a ridiculous amount of data).

When the daily readings are then made available and still shown that monthly
values have been correctly done (I have worked in job where we did this sort
of thing) then the argument will be we can't accept these figures as the
instruments which measured them must have been altered and they need to be
made available.

When it is discovered that instruments from 30 years ago have been replaced,
with original instrument scrapped, *I can just imagine the outrage will be
expressed by the Skeptic community causing many leading scientists to resign
over the scandal.

Tongue in cheek Stan

" wrote in message

...



On Dec 9, 5:36 pm, " wrote:
On Dec 9, 7:31 am, David Segall

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.g...browse_frm/thr...

Exactly what raw data do you want? Which temperature measurements,
tree ring or ice core data do you need to refute the AGW proponents?
Who has refused to provide you with the data?

Funny you should ask.

We want and demand the actual readings from the stations of the CRU
data.

What? This data has been carefully destroyed? After the Freedom of
Information Act was passed in Britain?

Without this raw data, the modified data is legally defined as
WORTHLESS.

Wonder what the motivation could have been to destroy both the paper
record and the electronic record?

Thus at this point, there is no valid science whatsoever with any use
of these modified statistics, or any work which uses these modified
statistics. They are FRAUDULENT. And the original records were
destroyd in attempt to hide this clear crime.

BECAUSE THIS DATA WOULD HAVE CLEARLY PROVED THAT THE MODIFICATIONS
ARE
INVALID AND THUS DIRECT FRAUD.

THIS IS THE REASON THAT THIS EVIDENCE WAS DELIBERATELY DESTROYED. WHAT
BRILLIANT FUNCTION OF SCIENCE AND USE OF PUBLIC FUNDING.

This is the data which is used to derive the 'world average'.
Virtually the entire field of climatology is based upon this data,
which for some reason NO LONGER EXISTS.

No temperature records exists which can replace these. All other
temperature records are based on these.

Perhaps just US temperatures? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
No warming trend there from the 30's at all, even though human
emisisons of CO2 only became significant in the 50's.

The modified versions are falsly depressed in earlier temperatures to
make recent temperatures appear to be warmer. So NOAA and all such
comparisons of present years are now also criminal fraud.

So the greenie weenies proceed on. Without any valid science to base
their theoretical conjecture of a
temperature rise that can in anyway be attributed to the rise of human
CO2.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

AGW is fatally wounded. Now it is just a matter of watching the
ignorant beast die. And the humor of the idiots and algore as they try
to deny this very inconvenient TRUTH.

HAHAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHHAHAHAHAHHA

KD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I hear that the Illustrious People's Met Office has been enthralling
their audience of AGW acolytes at Copenhagen, and regaling them with
dire warnings that if "greenhouse gases" have not reached a peak, and
started to decline within ten years, we won't be able to keep the old
global thermostat at a maximum of 2 degrees higher than it is now, and
then we may have to suck carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. I
nearly fell of my chair laughing, before I realised that these mad,
delusional fools are serious.

This current excuse for a government has rendered the UK almost
bankrupt, and cash is obviously not so freely available to fund
"useful" government-friendly establishments like the Met Office, who
are now prepared to trot out any old rubbish to appease their
political masters in order to grab whatever funds ARE available, so a
few whopping lies here or there to the gullible public won't go amiss,
particularly when broadcast from the current greeniefest in
Copenhagen (which, they think, gives their pronouncements some added
gravitas). I bet there were some glazed eyes, wet knickers and
"oohs" and "aahs" when they came out with that one!

Anyway, not one to be unprepared, I'm off down to my local Bricomart
to see if I can find some sort of carbon dioxide extraction kit for
the Dyson. I've no idea what I'm going to do with the deadly, evil
extracted gas which I'm left with - maybe I can build some sort of
airtight greenhouse and grow a few plants with it, then I can extract
the extra oxygen they'll produce, bag it up and sell it! More likely
that some formal edict will insist that I put it in a box and bury it.

Humanity has gone stark staring bonkers.

CK