UK MET OFFICE UNDER SCRUTINY

The public and our government place much reliance on the government funded UK Meteorological Office. Most people would expect their data to be the "gold standard" with every care taken to ensure no errors were presented. In fact a comprehensive investigation has revealed this is simply not true. Read on for the details:  

1. How "Climate Averages" data was presented by the Met Office. 

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/climate/maps-and-data/uk-climate-averages

This details 302 sites. As an example, either click on the map or type in "Dungeness".  You will be directed to a "nearest site" called "Dungeness" giving accurate map co-ordinates, elevation and a description as "Observing Site" 

Any reasonable person viewing this (a student for example) would assume there is a site there and the 30 year rolling averages from 1960 to 2020 were both "observed" and "data" - notably quoted to the second decimal place of a degree. 

However, there is NO weather station at Dungeness - it closed in 1986 - i.e. 38 years ago. 

For these  last 38 years there have been no observations, thus no data recorded at Dungeness.  All the figures are fabricated in scientific terms. 

Through Freedom of Information request (FOI)  I obtained the details of which stations actually still exist as attached excel spread sheet. 

Of the 302 sites quoted, over one third (103) do NOT exist. The Met Office declined to advise me  exactly how or from where the alleged "data" was derived for these 102 non-existent sites.

In my home county of  Kent, 4 of the 8 sites shown are fiction (Dungeness, Folkestone, Dover, Gillingham) and all produce different "averages". Referring back to Dungeness, the nearest open Met Office Weather Station sites are over 25 miles away.   

There is no plausible  scientific purpose in the invention of numbers for non-existent sites which are falsely posing as authentic locations.

How would any reasonable observer (i.e. the example student) know that the data was not real and simply "made up" by a government agency?

Part 2 will reveal further shocking shortcomings tomorrow.