[Errant]

What a joke. The data in question zipped could most likely easily have fit on one CD-R and certainly two.

(Number of stations x number of days in the reporting period x size of temperature data) x .20 (conservative text data compression)

So for $1.50 in CD-Rs they threw away how many dollars for cost of data collected?

Give me a break!

[Incorrigible]

100% agree!

If they were cataloging cloud cover and had extensive imaging databases, maybe they would have needed to run out to Tesco and pick up a terabyte USB drive for a few hundred pounds.

It’s simply preposterous that that data is gone.

[Pontiac]

Jones was not in charge of the CRU when the data were thrown away in the 1980s, a time when climate change was seen as a less pressing issue.

They did not have CD-Rs in the 80’s. (Assuming he is not lying)

Then there is the cost of converting print data to digital which at the time would have been expensive and time consuming.

What bothers me most is that supposedly this work was peer reviewed. How was this peer reviewed with out the peer having access to the raw data.

[ecomcon]

Do you believe for one second that the data is lost, destroyed, thrown away, or otherwise unavailable? I don’t. They were the only copies extant? Supposedly peer reviewed “science” with no one else on the planet Earth in possesion of this data? Ridiculous.

They could easily fetch the numbers, they just don’t want to.