William Winner wrote:
My first question about this analysis is why in the world would you arbitrarily choose to select a station from within each state?
I dont know, he doesnt explain why he chooses that. However, since he is comparing the raw data for each station to the adjusted data produced by GISS and NOAA it isnt an affecting factor. He has after all got 96 stations in total, 48 urban and 48 rural where GISS have 118 in total. Perhaps he just wanted an equal number of rural and urban stations and using the whole 118 stations doesnt give him that.
William Winner wrote:
Personally, I have no idea of the best way to measure global temperatures
In order to simplify the process, and obviate the need for adjustments, I would start by analysing purely rural data. Because its not so much WHAT the global average temperature is, but how its CHANGING thats important. And for that it doesntf matter what the humidity, altitude, or population is (provided it isnt growing and thus urbanising a previously rural station). Do you see my point?
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription