Basic problem is that all models are wrong - not got enough middle and low level clouds.

We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try to find something wrong with it.

I've just completed Mike's [Mann] Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's [Briffa] to hide the decline.

Mom's always know how to make us happy, but they also know exactly how to make us cry.

In an odd way (the death of John Daly) is cheering news!

...I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin [Trenberth] and I will keep them out somehow, even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!

You might want to check with the IPCC Bureau. I've been told that IPCC is above national FOI Acts. One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 [the upcoming IPCC Fifth Assessment Report] would be to delete all e-mails at the end of the process. Hard to do, as not everybody will remember it.