Also, I noticed that NOAA has declared U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), using only 128 stations at 114 sites. This is how they explain that: These stations adhere to all of the established monitoring principles and are located in unpopulated areas. They are closely monitored and are subject to rigorous calibration procedures. It is a network designed specifically for assessing climate change.
This is:
a) a tacit acknowledgement that NOAA does NOT adhere to the “established monitoring principles”, as a general rule;
b) a direct acknowledgement that NOAA did NOT adhere to those principles in the past;
c) simply not enough for adequate coverage!
You made them confess!
Donation made. Good luck Anthony!
Anthony, you are a brave man. I’m sure you’l spend my penny well. Good luck!
Another angle on this topic: the fact that the number of surface stations was cut so sharply is the evidence that NASA and NOAA prefer satellites over the surface stations!
Good luck at AGU meeting!
Also, I noticed that NOAA has declared U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN), using only 128 stations at 114 sites. This is how they explain that:
These stations adhere to all of the established monitoring principles and are located in unpopulated areas. They are closely monitored and are subject to rigorous calibration procedures. It is a network designed specifically for assessing climate change.
This is:
a) a tacit acknowledgement that NOAA does NOT adhere to the “established monitoring principles”, as a general rule;
b) a direct acknowledgement that NOAA did NOT adhere to those principles in the past;
c) simply not enough for adequate coverage!
You made them confess!