Updates to HadCRUT global temperature dataset

The global temperature dataset compiled by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit has been updated.

Compiled from temperature observations obtained over land and sea, HadCRUT is used as a basis for a global temperature record going back to 1850.

In this video, Peter Stott explains what the changes are.

• Category

  Science & Technology

[Michael Truman]

Their just playing with figures now, figures will say anything if you slice and dice them enough. N one buys this rubbish anymore, A few years ago 2004 I was into this stuff and expected water shortages in the south of England and Ireland because that was what was predicted by the computer models. Since then nothing but rain so now they say woops thats what we ment, well if you ment it why didn't you say it. Rubblish Rubbish Rubbish is all the IPCC says anymore.

[cbrtxus]

They are including Arctic data now. Where did they get Arctic data for the 1800's and the early 1900's? They can't splice data with the Arctic on to the end of data without the Arctic.

[fingerhorn4]

No intelligent person now can believe anything the CRU says about climate or temperature after it blatantly manipulated data then tried to cover it up. But even if your graph is correct, how come no significant rise.in the last part of the industrial revolution? And since the early 20th Century barely half a degree rise at best. But neither you nor anyone else knows why. The bbc and met office ceased long ago to be scrupulously objective about this subject which is now wholly PR based.

[Mark Raven]

Great work guys, and I might add an excellent way to communicate the findings. Thanks

[KevinC112358]

PKveni: Fortunately, all the data is available so you can check for yourself. You can use the CRU data (5000 weather stations), or the GHCN data (7000 stations), or the BEST data (30000 stations). The interesting thing is that it doesn't matter which dataset you use, or which stations you use, you get the same answer. You can pick a random subset of 5% of the data, and you still get a similar answer.

I'm not a climatologist - I work in a different field. We would kill for data what good.

[pKvnei]

Be honest, you really have no idea. However, you are very good at convincing yourselves that you know what you are doing and that it can be called "science". Faux science at its best.