> Citation please? http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6789 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6789 quotes them saying they no longer had the raw data in August. > why

> Citation please? http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6789 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=6789 quotes them saying they no longer had the raw data in August. > why didn't they say as much in their statement about the loss? When exactly did they not say this? They say it on their statement on their website which is currently down but cached at http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:mcd09WUmm08J:https://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/availability/ http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:mcd09WUmm08J:https://ww... > Furthermore, why did Jones, Mann, et. al. spend so much time talking about "hiding from" (their words) FoI requests if the data being requested were lost? Presumably they were talking about different data. > The proper response is to re-establish those results as quickly and conclusively as possible. If this debacle leads to that happening then that would be a great outcome. I don't get the impression that's mostly what CRU's critics want though.