Tuesday, May 8, 2012

3988.txt

cc: "Phil Jones" <p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>, "Mcgarvie Michael Mr k364" <m.mcgarvieatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 12:25:23 +0100 (BST)
from: P.JonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk
subject: Re: FW: Freedom of Information request (FOI_07-04)
to: "Palmer Dave Mr \(LIB\)" <David.PalmeratXYZxyz.ac.uk>


Dave,
I am happy for you to involve Kitty. I am away
the next few weeks, so if you want to leave
this you can.
When you do, you need to point out what has
happened with the other request - the threat from
that nice chap Keenan.
I do not want to make the raw data available,
as it will involve more and more requests. We
make the gridded data available and that should
be enough.

I think it would be worthwhile having a meeting
involving a few more people in the light of the
Keenan letter and what has been said on the
Climate Audit website from Friday.

This to my mind is bullying and virtual harrasment.
This is not for any reasonable scientific point.
It is quite simply harrasment. These people are
self appointed.

Cheers
Phil


> Gents,
> My head is beginning to spin here but I read this as meaning that he
> wants the raw station data; we don't know which data belongs to which
> station, correct? Our letter stated:
>
>
> "We can, however, send a list of all stations used, but without sources.
> This would include locations, names and lengths of record, although the
> latter are no guide as to the completeness of the series."
>
>
>
> Can we put this on the web? Perhaps I am being really thick here but
> I'm not sure if putting this on the web will actually satisfy Mr.
> Eschenbach - we've said we don't have data sources, he says the external
> websites don't have them, so who does? Are we back to the NMS's? I am
> happy to give this one more go, stating exactly what we are putting on
> the web and seeing if that suffices. Should Mr. Eschenbach still insist
> that we actually possess the information in the form he requests, I can
> then only give the file to Kitty Inglis for review and then we move on
> formally....
>
> Cheers, Dave
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Willis Eschenbach [mailto:willis@taunovobay.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 9:37 PM
> To: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB)
> Subject: Re: Freedom of Information request (FOI_07-04)
>
>
> Dear Mr. Palmer:
>
> It appears we have gone full circle here, and ended up back where we
> started.
>
> I had originally asked for the raw station data used to produce the
> HadCRUT3 dataset to be posted up on the UEA website, or made available
> in some other form.
>
> You refused, saying that the information was available elsewhere on
> non-UEA websites, which is a valid reason for FOI refusals.
>
>
>
> I can report that the information requested is available on
> non-UEA websites as detailed below.
>
>
>
> Your most recent letter (Further
> _information_letter_final_070418_rev01.doc), however, says that you are
> unable to identify the locations of the requested information. Thus, the
> original reason for refusing to provide station data for HadCRUT3 was
> invalid.
>
> Therefore, since the information requested is not available on non-UEA
> websites, I wish to re-instate my original request, that the information
> itself be made available on your website or in some other form. I
> understand that a small amount of this data (about 2%, according to your
> letter) is not available due to privacy requests from the countries
> involved. In that case, a listing of which stations this applies to will
> suffice.
>
> The HadCRUT3 dataset is one of the fundamental datasets in the current
> climate discussion. As such, it is vitally important that it can be peer
> reviewed and examined to verify its accuracy. The only way this can be
> done is for the data to be made available to other researchers in the
> field.
>
> Once again, thank you for your assistance in all of this. It is truly
> not a difficult request, and is fully in line with both standard
> scientific practice and your " CODE OF PRACTICE FOR RESPONDING TO
> REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000". I
> am sure that we can bring this to a satisfactory resolution without
> involving appeals or unfavorable publicity.
>
> My best regards to you,
>
> w.
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> on 4/20/07 1:02 AM, Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) at David.PalmeratXYZxyz.ac.uk
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Mr. Eschenbach,
> Attached please find a response to your email of 14 April. As
> always, don't hesitate to contact me with queries or concerns.
>
> Cheers, Dave Palmer
>
> <<Further _information_letter_final_070418_rev01.doc>>
>
> ____________________________
> David Palmer
> Information Policy Officer
> University of East Anglia
> Norwich, England
> NR4 7TJ
>
>


No comments:

Post a Comment