Fox News is reporting that there is to be a redo of climate data.

At a meeting on Monday of about 150 climate scientists, representatives of Britain’s weather office quietly proposed that the world’s climatologists start all over again to produce a new trove of global temperature data that is open to public scrutiny and “rigorous” peer review.

Isn’t that supposed to be how science is done? Yes it is. Ah. But they still have a few surprises in store. Check this out:

The Hadley stonewall began to crumble after a gusher of leaked e-mails revealed climate scientists, including the center’s chief, Phil Jones, discussing how to keep controversial climate data out of the hands of the skeptics, keep opposing scientific viewpoints out of peer-reviewed scientific journals, and bemoaning that their climate models failed to account for more than a decade of stagnation in global temperatures. Jones later revealed that key temperature datasets used in Hadley’s predictions had been lost, and could not be retrieved for verification.

No data. Well that is bad.
But how about this for a capper:

Then, in a last defense of its old ways, the Met proposals argues says that its old datasets “are adequate for answering the pressing 20th Century questions of whether climate is changing and if so how.

So no data is good enough to make a case in the 20th Century but for the 21st Century such an oversight will just not do. That kind of thinking puts my mind totally at ease.
H/T Watts Up With That
Cross Posted at Power and Control