I firmly believe in the soundness of interpolation and adjustments, but for comparison the average raw temperature measurement should always be displayed too.
Because the interesting question is not "what was the temperature?" but "what is the change?". For this, the raw data would probably suffice.
Excellent - very many thanks for this. Interesting also to look at riverine temperature increase data (where available..), at significantly greater rates than oceanic. What's going on here ? Nothing too controversial - mainly the effects of land use change, accounted for by IPCC as 15% of global change, but poorly allocated on a regional basis. Hence UK/EU projections inadequate.
I firmly believe in the soundness of interpolation and adjustments, but for comparison the average raw temperature measurement should always be displayed too.
Because the interesting question is not "what was the temperature?" but "what is the change?". For this, the raw data would probably suffice.
I was actually having an argument regarding this a few days ago. Thank you for sharing!
Excellent - very many thanks for this. Interesting also to look at riverine temperature increase data (where available..), at significantly greater rates than oceanic. What's going on here ? Nothing too controversial - mainly the effects of land use change, accounted for by IPCC as 15% of global change, but poorly allocated on a regional basis. Hence UK/EU projections inadequate.