Cambridge Botanic Gardens Addendum – Proof of Met Office Misrepresentation.

Image from MET OFFICE Weather Observations Website for 1/2/2019 @ 09:00

On the 1st of February 2019 at their official Cambridge University Botanic Gardens weather station the Met Office recorded a daily minimum temperature of -5.8°C. Simultaneously less than 4 miles away at their equally official Cambridge National Institute of Agricultural Botany ( marked Impington above) the daily minimum temperature recorded was +0.2°C.

Was there really a 6°C differential between these two sites? No there was not and the Met Office knows that. In this report I will demonstrate how the Met Office knowingly and deliberately displays and archives information it knows to be false………i.e. DISINFORMATION.

Firstly the PROOF of my assertion from the official CEDA Archives which are freely available for any of the public to view.

Cambridge Botanic Gardens.

Column J is the recorded daily minimum.

Cambridge NIAB

So what actually was the temperature profile for this day if two official sites are passing into the official government archives completely different figures? Fortunately an independent weather station under 1.5 miles from CUBG, also reports its data by the hour to the Met Office WOW site. Below this is what the 1st February 2019 looks like.

At no time on the 1st February 2019 does the temperature drop below freezing point let alone almost 6 degrees below as recorded in the notoriously warmer recording botanic gardens site.

The data for Cambridge Botanic Gardens is obviously wrong. I have highlighted the very simple reason for this error in my Winter Nighttimes post together with further details on Rothamsted and in yet more detail at Cassley.

To briefly recap, taking daily readings at 09:00 (often the coldest time of day) means that one cold day’s minimum reading can also be attributed to the following day* regardless of the actual subsequent themperatures. N.B. The minimum temperature reading for 31st January 2019 was exactly the same at -5.8°C and has simply been recorded twice due to this system.

{* The UK defined “Meteorological Day” runs from 09:00 to 09:00}

I will be following up these reports with site data from Dunstaffnage, Dalwhinnie, and Helens Bay (plus others) which demonstrate the massive scale of distortions (in excess of 15°C discrepancies are proven) that are not only historical but are continuing to regularly occur as demonstrated here in Cambridge. I can provide tens of examples like this for every year.

The very regular over recording of cold temperatures disappears when sites are automated and/or temperature readings are taken more frequently thus avoiding the “carry over ” effect – and this has been known for a very long time. As I reported in my original CUBG report (n.b. “CET” is the Central England Temperature Record, the world’s longest running temperature series.)

“93 years ago with a Cambridge population of 69,000, CUBG was removed from the CET due to displaying Urban Heat Island Effect by meteorologists keen to ensure the integrity of their temperature record series.“

Similarly, a long time ago, those more diligent meteorologists “keen to ensure the integrity of their temperature record series” resolved the problem of over recording cold events simply by taking two sets of daily readings. This is an archive from 104 years ago in 1921. Notice how the maximum and minimum are “time offset” to rectify the problem. A future report will cover how our European near neighbours similarly resolve this issue.

This regime lasted until 1931 when it would appear removal from the CET caused a reversion to just once daily readings and the re-emergence of the problem.

In summary the Met Office is demonstrated to be knowingly continuing with an incorrect recording (and thus archiving) system that distorts the historic temperature record making older data appear cooler than it actually was. The Met Office are replacing this system only piecemeal and when it suits them thus artificially creating a progressive warming trend where none may exist. These problems were solvable centuries ago and in most reputable instances actually were. That the Met office perpetuates the problem is inexcusable………DISINFORMATION.

As ever, all the above is derived from freely available online information supplied by the Met Office itself. If anyone at the Met Office feels the need to again attempt to “Debunk” my work or accuse me of misinforming, I suggest they take a long hard look in the mirror.

Source: https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2025/11/25/cambridge-botanic-gardens-addendum-proof-of-met-office-misrepresentation/