Kremmen wrote:
I don't think it's accurate, but, it's the same max/min thermometer that been hanging at the back of my garage(outside) always in the shade under a canopy, so the comparisons are accurate. I think it under reads by about 2°C
I agree with Jon. Your site and thermometer potentially has far more reliability, repeatability, and far less variation in the local conditions than some of the IPCC measuring sites.
At some measuring sites the IPCC use, the type of measuring equipment employed over their monitoring periods has been changed (repeatability is lost), the location has been moved, and the local environment has knowingly been changed in such a way as to produce higher measured temperatures; examples include sites that were once in open countryside that are now surrounded by black tarmac in a built-up area (heat island effect), and in some cases the measuring equipment has been found to now be in the exhaust flow of air-conditioning plant. The IPCC have even gone so far as to remove a large number of sites that indicate a lowering of temperature, from their 'data sets'. which very effectively raises their average global temperatures. But such inconvenient facts won't get in the way of the BBC's biased and deceptive reporting.