I’d guess almost one-half a degree in bias in data prior to 1965 for this latest example from Anthony Watts; not greatly different from #51 to the layman. Apparently, there is a systematic bias in this data which has been used to decide how and where to spend tax dollars. It seems to me the half-degree is equal to the entire claimed anthropogenic warming effect!
Naturally, Jim Hansen is up to his eyeballs in this excremental information. What a bowl diver!
As is typical when an MMTS sensor gets installed by NOAA/NWS to replace the traditional Stevenson Screen, it got closer to human habitation, and in this case, a LOT closer. Too close I’d say:
In a comment on the subject, Steve Mosher offers an explanation:
In Hansen 2001 Hansen says he uses nightlights to determine
if a station is Rural in the US and population everywhere else.
Miles city population is less than 10K which makes it rural,
BUT, nightlights ( satellite imagery taken in 1995)
indicates a brightness factor for Miles of 26! effectively making it urban.