Back at the beginning of time, Eli pointed out that Tony Watts' Surface Station of the Month Club was turning up as many stations with bad cooling features as with warming ones. Some are shown on the right from Rabett Run's Cool Station of the Day feature back in September 2007. This was not taken well and there were some real classics over there
Steve Bloom put it well;
Well, guess we have. Time to pay up Tony. Since there is no such thing as a free lunch, Eli will accept a dinner.
So little time, so many baseless assumptions:
1) Eli's point is that your material is basically self-cancelling within its own terms. If he were using it for any other purpose, you might have an argument. As it is, you don't.
[MODERATOR NOTE - on #1 I get what he's trying to say, but we'll see when its all tallied. So far there does not appear to be a balance as has been suggested.]
And then there was maybe Jeff ID with
Steve Mosher puts in a cameo waving his hand wildly about.
Eli summed it up in a comment at Rabett Run
The point is thatNow Eli is not one to gloat, but simply wishes to point to a paper under discussion
a. There are both negative and positive biases at the various USHCN network stations
b. Eli can find a lot more stations with negative biases in the surface station picture gallery.
c. The net effect will be to broaden the distribution, but not change the means (by anything meaningful).
d. That's what you get when you are too cheap to run your own system.
Fall, S., A. Watts, J. Nielsen-Gammon, E. Jones, D. Niyogi, J. Christy, and R.A. Pielke Sr., 2011: Analysis of the impacts of station exposure on the U.S. Historical Climatology Network temperatures and temperature trends. J. Geophys. Res., in press. Copyright (2011) American Geophysical Union.
Which pretty much says Watt Eli Said