Thanks for the link tin ... Doing some research but it opens a can of worms perhaps
"Further, the land use/land cover in the vicinity of an observing site may also change with time. Such modifications to an observing site have the potential to alter a thermometer's microclimate exposure characteristics and/or change the bias of measurements, the impact of which can be a systematic shift in the mean level of temperature readings that is unrelated to true climate variation"
So if we take out the land use/ cover isn't that taking out a anthropogenic factor anyway? And isn't that what we are interested in? Wouldn't it be better to quote raw data and then explain factors affecting it in the footnotes rather than potentially corrupt the data by applying guestimates?
