Bodiam DCNN 5488 – Yet another example of why fabricated figures are false.

The above table represents the climate averages for the period 1961 to 1990 for each month of the year and an annual average over six different parameters of averages maximum and minimum temperatures, days of air frost, sunshine hours, rainfall and days of rainfall equal to or less than 1 mm. It is worth noting that no sunshine recorder ever existed at Bodiam and how on earth does anyone derive decimal point parts of an “Air Frost Day”?

Of course all the above are complete nonsense and below I will demonstrate why.

This is how the Met Office via the Centre for Environmental Data (CEDA) displays the basic details for Bodiam weather station.

We are shown a “Station Start Date” of 1/1/1908 and given detailed coordinates and elevation. This indicates that it has been at the stated site since 1908 – IT HAS NOT. A site formerly known as “Ewhurst” was a significant distance away in a different village as shown with different coordinates when one delves deeper into the archives.

The next date indicate the “Station End Date” of 31/12/1978. This is also incorrect – all readings ended 31/12/1975 as shown below – there are no records afterwards. Another zombie site approaching 50 years past its original death.

So going back to our headline image of averages from 1961 to 1990, clearly with no readings from 1/1/1976 onwards those missing 15 years must be artificially created. The Met office owns up to this, by definition, fabrication of data by claiming peer reviewed process but, under challenge over other locations, were unable to supply details of the other “well correlated” sites. {n.b. I currently have 3 Freedom of Information requests pending for details of those sites used to correlate data for Scole, Manby and Lowestoft and will publish answers when available}

These “climate averages” roll forward for 30 averages by the decade so the following period of 1971 to 2000 only has 5 years of real world data and 25 years of fabricated data. It is worth posting this table before moving on to the decadal datasets where no figures at all were recorded at Bodiam.

Comparing the two periods it shows monthly increments in both daily maxima and minima courtesy of their “peer reviewed” but highly secretive mathematical conjuring tricks applied. Also note the rainfall is increasing but more importantly that those “air frost days” have also decreased – further “proof” of a warming climate? Well move forward to a 100% fabricated period and note a dramatic change.

Now, the Met Office can be seen to have further proven “warming” with their “derived” averages. It is also magically getting sunnier from the never existent sunshine recorder and wetter from the long gone rain gauge BUT why no data for “average days of air frost”? The mystical Met Office manipulation can calculate “means” to the second decimal place of a degree (only initially measured to the first decimal place) but not air frosts. Really….were there none? If mean air temperatures can be derived they must (by definition) have a variable range of readings from which to calculate those averages.

What exactly is the Met Office claiming here? It must know from the selected sites temperature range the number of times air temperatures were below freezing – if not their data fabrication falsifies itself.

This situation continues to the next time series – more artificially contrived warming, wetter and simultaneously sunnier but no air frost data.

Here is a possible explanation for this “oversight” by the Met Office. Average temperatures are difficult to judge for most people and perception of changes of tenths of a degree are, in reality, “unjudgeable.” Frosts, however, are very tangible events AND often recorded throughout many walks of life. The Uk’s most popular hobby is gardening and there are literally millions who note such frost events. Motoring and transport organisations broadcast frost events. The construction industry modifies work dependent on frost incidence. Aviation has a very significant interest. The NHS notes more accidents in frosts. And the list goes on.

The Met Office must know it cannot fabricate data for such tangible events (even laughably to the second decimal part of a day) from a long non existent site so conveniently do not try – leaving the box blank is the “safest” option. And we are supposed to trust them!

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2025/04/22/bodiam-dcnn-5488-yet-another-example-of-why-fabricated-figures-are-false/