I generally like the article, but I found a few rough spots. I hope this critique gets to you before the article is published.
I found this sentence hard to read:
"No wonder the GHCN data, which only includes monthly averages, but for more than 7,000 weather stations around the world, sometimes has as many as six different records for one location, all with different temperatures."
There are too many assides within the one sentence. I would simplify by getting rid of ", but":
"No wonder the GHCN data, which only includes monthly averages for more than 7,000 weather stations around the world, sometimes has as many as six different records for one location, all with different temperatures."
The "The pattern does not match so there are warm years and cool years in the satellite data that are not in the weather station data." sentence is missing a comma before 'so':
"The pattern does not match, so there are warm years and cool years in the satellite data that are not in the weather station data."
Another comma may be needed in the next sentence:
"If the weather station average temperature was reliable, then the three methods of measuring the average should closely align or at the very least follow the same pattern."
I did not fully appreciate your final oven thermostat comparison. The thermostat is used to maintain the baking temperature like cruise control on a car is used to maintain velocity. I cannot see the thermostat's reading unless I put a thermometer into the oven. But then how do I know that thermometer is right? Like in my car example, how do I know if the spedometer is right? A friend put the wrong size of tires on his car and his spedometer was inaccurate. That is the point. Accuracy and consistancy of measurement.
I hope this helps.
John M Reynolds
