Also, many inhomogeneities can be detected (and either compensated for, or eliminated) when there's enough data to
compare nearby stations for consistency.
Not exact matches
No, because there are no
nearby rural
stations that would have a long enough record to
compare it to.
Finally we get to Durham New Hampshire where an interesting study was done that
compared the temperature
station with a
nearby reference
station.
However, by
comparing the difference between all the Eastern China land
stations to the
nearby ocean temperatures, the 2008 paper did find significant warming from increased urbanization on the land — 0.1 degrees Celsius per decade between 1951 and 2004.
So I was curious how the raw data from West Medway's
nearby USHCN
stations compared and affected the regional expectation.
This data could then be analysed as required and
compared with the data manually collected from the same
station, and from
nearby stations with newer technology.
One solution is to
compare the measurements with the jump to measurements at
nearby stations where the time of observation stayed the same.
They
compare the Kingston USHCN
station to a
nearby pristinely sited USCRN
station.
But the thing that really hit me was the data they compiled,
comparing to other
nearby stations, and thus proving the case for rooftop bias with this
station: