[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Why when we know satellite readings are more accurate do they continue to use land and ocean based readings in their data?
Because the satellite readings are cooler.
Fraud!

That's what I wanted to know, thanks.

So do the surface temperatures (according to CRU numbers) show not only hotter temps, but also a significant rise in temps over 10 or 20 years?

And what trends, over decades, do satellite readings show, if any?

[dila813]

Yes, they do

Some skeptics (us) say this is because of encroachment on temperature stations by urban expansion. In other words, the heat island affect.

Here is the neat thing, you don’t even have to have a temperature monitoring station next to a city. If it is to the east of the city and the city gets larger, you have both a rain shadow due to the heat island plus the wind blows in hot air from the city into the countryside.

Land surface records have show significant increases in temperature as compared to satellite data, also the land temperature data appears to be getting worse everyday. In other words, one is reading much more consistently and the other is rising.

Now that they have satellite they should through out the land readings except for normalizing the data to match the satellite record.