So What Is The CRU Hiding?
nbzoo
We've lost the numbers: CRU responds to FOIA requests
13 August 2009
The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or
destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct
a global temperature record.
The destruction, or loss, of the data comes at a convenient time for the
Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA
requests to see the data.
The CRU has refused to release the raw weather station data and its
processing methods for inspection - except to hand-picked academics - for
several years. Instead, it releases a processed version, in gridded form.
NASA maintains its own (GISSTEMP), but the CRU Global Climate Dataset, is
the most cited surface temperature record by the UN IPCC. So any errors in
CRU cascade around the world, and become part of "the science".
Professor Phil Jones, the activist-scientist who maintains the data set, has
cited various reasons for refusing to release the raw data.
Most famously, Jones told an Australian climate scientist in 2004:
"Even if WMO agrees, I will still not pass on the data. We have 25 or so
years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you,
when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it."
In 2007, in response to Freedom of Information Act requests, CRU initially
said it didn't have to fulfil the requests because "Information accessible
to applicant via other means Some information is publicly available on
external websites".
Now it's citing confidentiality agreements with Denmark, Spain, Bahrain and
our own Mystic Met Office. Others may exist, CRU says in a statement, but it
might have lost them because it moved offices. Or they were made verbally,
and nobody at CRU wrote them down.
As for the raw station data,
"We are not in a position to supply data for a particular country not
covered by the example agreements referred to earlier, as we have never had
sufficient resources to keep track of the exact source of each individual
monthly value. Since the 1980s, we have merged the data we have received
into existing series or begun new ones, so it is impossible to say if all
stations within a particular country or if all of an individual record
should be freely available. Data storage availability in the 1980s meant
that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the
station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do
not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality
controlled and homogenized) data."
Canadian statistician and blogger Steve McIntyre, who has been asking for
the data set for years, says he isn't impressed by the excuses. McIntyre
obtained raw data when it was accidentally left on an FTP server last month.
Since then, CRU has battened down the hatches, and purged its FTP
directories lest any more raw data escapes and falls into the "wrong" hands.
McIntyre says he doesn't expect any significant surprises after analysing
the raw data, but believes that reproducibility is a cornerstone of the
scientific principle, and so raw data and methods should be disclosed.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/13/cru_missing/
Warmest Regards
Bonzo
Surfer
>
>The world's source for global temperature record admits it's lost or
>destroyed all the original data that would allow a third party to construct
>a global temperature record.
>
>The destruction, or loss, of the data comes at a convenient time for the
>Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in East Anglia - permitting it to snub FoIA
>requests to see the data.
>
That doesn't seem correct.
Even if the CRU receives data from all over the world, it would only
ever be receiving copies of the data.
Responsibility for the original data would lie with the organizations
which supplied it.
The following letter from the UK Met Office explains why the data is
not being made publically available.
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/7/22/climate-cuttings-29.html
<Start extract>
Our Ref: 22-06-2009-131902-003 23 July 2009
Dear Mr McIntyre
Request for Information � Information not Held and Refusal to Disclose
Information
Your correspondence dated 9 June 2009 has been considered to be a
request for information in accordance with the Environmental
Information Regulations 2004. The Ministry of Defence is permitted to
withhold information where exceptions are considered justifiable.
You asked �You stated that CRUTEM3 data that you held was the value
added data. Pursuant to the Environmental Information Regulations Act
2004, please provide me with this data in the digital form, together
with any documents that you hold describing the procedures under which
the data has been quality controlled and where deemed appropriate,
adjusted to account for apparent non-climatic influences�.
Your request has been assessed and this letter is to inform you that
the Met Office does hold some information covered by the request. We
do not hold documents describing the procedures under which the data
has been quality controlled or adjusted to account for apparent
non-climatic influences.
The information held by the Met Office is withheld in accordance with
the following exceptions pursuant to the Environmental Information
Regulations Act 2004:
� Section 12 (5) (a) Information likely to prejudice relations between
the United Kingdom and any International organisation;
� Section 12 (5) (e) Confidentiality of commercial or industrial
information where such confidentiality is provided by law to protect a
legitimate economic interest.
� Section 12 (5) (f) (i) (iii) The supplier was not under legal
obligation to supply the information and has not consented to its
disclosure.
As the above exceptions are qualified exceptions, a public interest
test was undertaken by the Met Office to consider whether there are
overriding reasons why disclosure of this information would not be in
the public interest. The Met Office has duly considered these reasons
in conjunction with the public interest in disclosing the requested
information, in particular the benefits of assisting the public having
information on environmental information, whereby they would hope to
influence decisions from a position of knowledge rather than
speculation.
Access to environmental information is particularly important as
environmental issues affect the whole population.
Consideration of Exception Regulation 12 (5) (a)
Much of the requested data comes from individual Scientists and
Institutions from several countries. The Met Office received the data
information from Professor Jones at the University of East Anglia on
the strict understanding by the data providers that this station data
must not be publicly released. If any of this information were
released, scientists could be reluctant to share information and
participate in scientific projects with the public sector
organisations based in the UK in future. It would also damage the
trust that scientists have in those scientists who happen to be
employed in the public sector and could show the Met Office ignored
the confidentiality in which the data information was provided.
We considered that if the public have information on environmental
matters, they could hope to influence decisions from a position of
knowledge rather than speculation. However, the effective conduct of
international relations depends upon maintaining trust and confidence
between states and international organisations. This relationship of
trust allows for the free and frank exchange of information on the
understanding that it will be treated in confidence. If the United
Kingdom does not respect such confidences, its ability to protect and
promote United Kingdom interests through international relations may
be hampered. Competitors/ Collaborators could be damaged by the
release of information which was given to us in confidence and this
will detrimentally affect the ability of the Met Office (UK) to
co-operate with meteorological organisations and governments of other
countries. This could also provoke a negative reaction from scientist
globally if their information which they have requested remains
private is disclosed.
Consideration of Exception Regulation 12 (5) (e)
The information is also withheld in accordance with the exception
under regulation 12 (5) (e) because the information comprises of
Station Data which are commercially sensitive for many of the data
sources (particularly European and African Meteorological services)
release of any data could adversely affect relationships with other
Institutions and individuals, who may plan to use their data for their
own commercial interests. Some of this is documented in Hulme, 1996
but this is not a globally comprehensive summary.
The Met Office are not party to information which would allow us to
determine which countries and stations data can or cannot be released
as records were not kept, or given to the Met Office, therefore we
cannot release data where we have no authority to do so. Competitors
or collaborators could be damaged by the release of information which
was given to us in confidence and could affect their ability to trade.
The Met Office uses the data solely and expressly to create a gridded
product that we distribute without condition.
Consideration of Exception Regulation 12 (5) (f) (i) and (iii)
The information is also withheld in accordance with the exception
under regulation 12 (5) (f) (i) (iii) as Professor Jones was not
legally bound to release the data to the Met Office and has not
consented to the disclosure to any other party. As stated above in 12
(5) (a) Some of the information was provided to Professor Jones on the
strict understanding by the data providers that this station data must
not be publicly released and it cannot be determined which countries
or stations data were given in confidence as records were not kept.
The Met Office received the data from Professor Jones on the proviso
that it would not be released to any other source and to release it
without authority would seriously affect the relationship between the
United Kingdom and other Countries and Institutions.
I hope this answers your enquiry.
If you are not satisfied with this response or you wish to complain
about any aspect of the handling of your request, then you should
contact me in the first instance. If informal resolution is not
possible and you are still dissatisfied then you may apply for an
independent internal review by contacting the Head of Corporate
Information, 6th Floor, MOD Main Building, Whitehall, SW1A 2HB (e-mail
CIO...@mod.uk). Please note that any request for an internal review
must be made within 40 working days of the date on which the attempt
to reach informal resolution has come to an end.
If you remain dissatisfied following an internal review, you may take
your complaint to the Information Commissioner under the provisions of
Section 50 of the Freedom of Information Act. Please note that the
Information Commissioner will not investigate your case until the MOD
internal review process has been completed. Further details of the
role and powers of the Information Commissioner can be found on the
Commissioner�s website, www.ico.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely,
Marion Archer
FOI Manager
<End extract>
Roger Coppock
The Met office's FOI denial letter said,
"
> The Met Office received the data from Professor Jones on the proviso
> that it would not be released to any other source and to release it
> without authority would seriously affect the relationship between the
> United Kingdom and other Countries and Institutions.
"
So, McIntyre should write all the necessary countries
around the world and collect the raw data from them.
Then he will have the available data, and a list of
countries not providing data. Of course, we'll expect
him to make all his sources public.