From Phil B via email.
Shocking evidence has emerged that points to the U.K. Met Office inventing temperature data from over 100 non-existent weather stations. The explosive allegations have been made by citizen journalist Ray Sanders and sent to the new Labour Science Minister Peter Kyle MP. Following a number of Freedom of Information requests to the Met Office and diligent field work visiting individuals stations, Sanders has discovered that 103 stations out of 302 sites supplying temperature averages do not exist. “How would any reasonable observer know that the data was not real and simply ‘made up’ by a Government agency,” asks Sanders. He calls for an “open declaration” of likely inaccuracy of existing published data, “to avoid other institutions and researchers using unreliable data and reaching erroneous conclusions”.
I suppose the only shock here is that anyone is shocked. I was aware that they use weather stations in urban areas where the heat will inevitably be higher than rural ones, resulting in misleading higher levels than they should. I’d like to say that I am surprised by this revelation, but it is all too depressingly predictable.
To me the real scandal is that nothing will be done. No one will be sacked or even disciplined in any way at all. The Mainstream Media won’t be making any of this stuff public or holding anyone to account for malfeasance in public office. It’s just some random guy off the Internet, nothing to see here. I always knew that temperature recordings were spurious due to poor siting of the weather stations. New records are always set near aircon units, the arse end of a jet airliner or, in one case cited, next to an electricity sub station. This though is an entirely new level of dishonesty and incompetence, why bother with weather stations at all if you can just make stuff up instead?
Hardly surprising that the last two record temperatures for England have been reported at Heathrow. An airport is a major heat island, air conditioning pumping out heat, surrounded by motorways, so many contributions to heat. It used to be that weather stations were placed in both urban and rural environments. Anomalous readings, high or low were put to one side and a local average was arrived at. Proper science relies on accurate data, crap in – crap out.
The real question is how much more is fabrication by the state and their minions, not just our state which has become a worldwide laughing/pitying stock but the wannabe world dominators.
I just tried to share the link on farcebox: they pulled it.
Climate blogger Paul Homewood has a bit more detail on this story if anyone is interested.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2024/11/06/met-office-is-inventing-temperature-data-from-100-non-existent-stations/#respond
Let’s be charitable and assume that the Met Office ‘interpolated’ data for the missing stations to maintain their datasets.
Now let’s be critical and assume that anyone who interpolates a third of the data set isn’t concerned enough about accuracy – especially if some of that interpolation includes data from low quality stations, amplifying inaccuracy.
*As a minimum* the Met Office should produce data sets and forecasts from only existing weather stations to see how it compares with the interpolated data sets – and make that publically available.
What they’ve done is NOT interpolation, it is the clear and fraudulent invention of false data.
It’s either a real station or its not. If it’s real then the specific reading will have errors and those errors can be properly determined and included in the overall errors for the data set.
If you interpolate, then you are clearly stating that you do not have data for certain points, and the exercise of interpolation is to justify why this is acceptable (for example, you could say it’s uniform land area – same terrain, soil…so it’s probably OK to “extend” the validity of the nearest actual station to cover etc). Indeed, globally, the 30% of land has obviously always vastly more station than the 70% of water (and it’s needed the because the land varies far more)
But given satellite coverage, why would they even bother to invent additional ground stations?
Stinks to high heaven.
@Stonyground
That is indeed the real scandal.
@Andy
Quite, so why do they need to invent weather stations when the ones they have will happily show the desired warming for these screamingly obvious reasons!
There are two kinds of statistics, those you look up and those you make up.
The latter seems increasingly popular if the former fails to support the approved narrative.
It’s now so bad that the main surprise is that we’re not surprised any more.
If you have to lie in order to defend your beliefs, your beliefs are not worth defending.
Why not take temperature readings at Heathrow behind a taxi-ing Jumbo jet? Oh look! Hottest day of 2023.