Has anyone (here) analysed the Met Office data?

Its expected to take 3years of reanalysis and computation for150years worth of records. So 'No" nor can anyone else.

http://www.weatherxchange.com/public/public_page.p...

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/science/...

http://www.qando.net/?p=6065

edit: a tao, and Trevor would either one of you object to me using this question as an example?

edit: sure the met is updated monthly, now review the (question asked). I could lie and say I corrected Trevors assessments, as could anyone on this site. I don't see any point in misleading people though. Your thoughts?

• I've analysed it in great detail along with many other data as well

• I found that it mirrors other comparable records excepting that the 61-90 base-period mean provides for anomalous values lower than other GTRs and that there is a more realistic homogeneity adjustment

• Yes I have published my findings and used to link to them quite often from Answers

• There is no missing data, this is a lie continually perpetuated by skeptics

- - - - - - - - - - - -

EDIT: TO RIO

I'm not quite sure what you're asking but I have absolutely no objection to you referencing this question or my answer if that's what you want to do. You may wish to bear in mind that each time you've tried to pick fault in my answers you've ended up shooting yourself in the foot.

no