Thus,
although poor station quality might affect absolute temperature, it does not appear to affect trends, and for global warming estimates, the trend is what is important
was not that warming has occurred; it was that the level of warming was not affected by station selection bias, by homogenization bias,
by poor station quality.
We carefully studied issues raised by skeptics: biases from urban heating (we duplicated our results using rural data alone), from data selection (prior groups selected fewer than 20 percent of the available temperature stations; we used virtually 100 percent),
from poor station quality (we separately analyzed good stations and poor ones) and from human intervention and data adjustment (our work is completely automated and hands - off).
We found that
this poor station quality bias increased the mean U.S. temperature trends of the raw records by about 32 %.
We carefully studied issues raised by skeptics: biases from urban heating (we duplicated our results using rural data alone), from data selection (prior groups selected fewer than 20 percent of the available temperature stations; we used virtually 100 percent), from
poor station quality (we separately analyzed good stations and poor ones) and from human intervention and data adjustment (our work is completely automated and hands - off).
However, in this study, these contradictions are resolved, and it is shown that
poor station quality has introduced a noticeable warming bias into temperature trend estimates for the U.S.