Just like the US, the UK simply “makes shit up” about temperature readings to support its faux science narrative on “climate change” and “net zero”
The US simply “makes shit up” to support the narrative, now the UK has also been caught doing the same.
Uk can read about the US data lies here:
Reacting to this report:
“On the 19th July 2024, following correct protocol, I emailed my constituency MP, Rosie Duffield, asking her to forward a report I had produced onto Peter Kyle MP (above) in his capacity of Secretary of State for Science, Information and Technology responsible for the Met Office. Ms Duffield confirmed this was forwarded and I also received an acknowledgement from Peter Kyle’s constituency office.”
“Despite further polite follow ups direct to Mr Kyle and further enquiries via the BSIT department’s Science Advisors, I have received no response from anyone whatsoever. I feel a response was warranted hence in the absence of any I publish below the full text of my original email. This is an open letter and anyone is free to draw from it or forward all or any part of it wherever they wish.
“Dear Mr Kyle
Investigation into accuracy of Meteorological Office Data
I have extensively researched aspects regarding the accuracy and scientific validity of data produced by the UK Meteorological Office (Met Office). I have discovered significant inaccuracies and potential misrepresentation of hard data produced by the Met Office which calls into question its validity and requires an independent investigation to correct.
I precis below the main points.
Firstly I considered how “Climate Averages” data was presented by the Met Office.
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages
This details 302 sites. As an example, either click on the map or type in “Dungeness”. You will be directed to a “nearest site” called “Dungeness” giving accurate map co-ordinates, elevation and a description as “Observing Site”
Any reasonable person viewing this (a student for example) would assume there is a site there and the 30 year rolling averages from 1960 to 2020 were both “observed” and “data” – notably quoted to the second decimal place of a degree.
However, there is NO weather station at Dungeness – it closed in 1986 – i.e. 38 years ago.
For these last 38 years there have been no observations, thus no data recorded at Dungeness. All the figures are fabricated in scientific terms.
Through Freedom of Information request (FOI) I obtained the details of which stations actually still exist as attached excel spread sheet.
Of the 302 sites quoted, over one third (103) do NOT exist. The Met Office declined to advise me exactly how or from where the alleged “data” was derived for these 102 non-existent sites.
In my home county of Kent, 4 of the 8 sites shown are fiction (Dungeness, Folkestone, Dover, Gillingham) and all produce different “averages”. Referring back to Dungeness, the nearest open Met Office Weather Station sites are over 25 miles away.
There is no plausible scientific purpose in the invention of numbers for non-existent sites which are falsely posing as authentic locations.
How would any reasonable observer (i.e. the example student) know that the data was not real and simply “made up” by a government agency?
Secondly, Long term “Historic Data“
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/historic-station-data
The above indicates 37 long term sites quoting monthly “Data”. Note that 3 sites on the map are coloured blue with the key indicating these stations have closed, the remainder are coloured orange indicating “open” stations.
Any reasonable person would therefore assume the orange marked sites were “open” stations as stated.
However, for example, go to Lowestoft and “view data”. Whilst figures run from 1914, all figures from 2010 are marked with an asterisk indicating they are “Estimated” – the station closed in 2010 – i.e.14 years ago.
What scientific organisation would continue to “estimate” figures for over 14 years and counting? What possible scientific purpose could such “estimation” serve?
The Met Office has again declined to advise me either how these estimates are arrived at or why they do so.
The stations at Nairn Druim, Paisley and Newton Rigg are similarly closed but still reporting “estimated” monthly data. It should also be noted that even those stations marked as closed continued to report “Estimated” numbers beyond their closure date.”
There’s a lot more on that weblog, but you get the picture. Not only are any emissions reductions irrelevant (as there is no climate crisis of any sort) - in the context of actions by China and India, but any data fed into the UN’s IPCC climate models using data from the UK and US is filling climate models with fake data.
I would bet that the temperature readings from the whole of the rest of the world are similarly fake.
Anyone know what the “ideal” global average temperature is, or what tolerances in what regions are “allowed” by the climate freaks?
Garbage in, garbage out – no doubt all tied to producing fake results to get taxpayer funding via corrupt and ignorant governments participating in climate fraud and signing multi-billion contracts for ugly, useless, expensive and environmentally hostile solar panels and wind turbines.
From here (h/t another Peter H)
UK’s National Weather and Climate Service Caught “Inventing” Data ━ The European Conservative
“Met Office reports of temperature stats from non-existent weather stations are informing the government drive for Net Zero.”
“Britain’s official meteorological service appears to be making up a worrying proportion of its published temperature readings, according to a new investigation. The most serious implication is that science could be/is being corrupted in pursuit of green ideology; at the very least, it shows that UK weather-recoding infrastructure is in need of a serious upgrade.”
The investigation referred to is here:
“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”.
Maybe the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband can spare the time to take a look at this issue. Or maybe he is simply the “minister of net zero IQ”,
Onwards!!!
Please take a (free or paid) subscription or forward this article to those you think might be interested. You can also donate via Ko-fi – any amount from three dollars upwards. Ko-fi donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan
Great reporting! Thanks!
How pathetic. Green scam will die. Cut purse strings to a false god that does not exist.
Take away their funding. Plant trees. Stop the geoengineering asap!!