On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 17:48:37 +0100 (BST), "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 16:52:07 +0100, Gnube wrote:

Trying to get my head around this; we are saying that the Met Office
can be a couple of degrees higher than reality?

Yes.

... then why wouldn't the Met Office use the same method used to
determine the (correct) temp, which we used to decide the Met Office
is wrong, and then they too would end up with the correct temp?

Standards and models. The measurement of the atmosphere is governed by
international standards which are based on best available technology
from many years ago, there have been changes but not many. If you
change the data entering the model it won't come up with the "correct"
answer unless you change the model as well (ie the forcasts are even
less accurate).

I don't think anyone in their right might should expect forecasts to
be totally accurate! They're way too general to mean anything concrete
at all for a start.

Then there is all the old data (used to build/check models or
theories) using such "standard" measurements going back hundreds of
years in some cases.

I'm sure you're right, but to me this sounds like an upmarket version
of "it's always been that way"! That has to be the worst possible
reason for lack of action! You know it's been a long time since we had
the courage to correct our major mistakes, The Gregorian calendar as a
fairly recent example! ;O)

If there's to be any real hope for us as a species, we simply have to
work that one out and swallow our pride before we choke on it!

Take Care,
Gnube
{too thick for linux}