I would expect you to know that satellites alone don't have the ability to read surface temperatures, mainly due to cloud cover. The RSS dataset does include some data on ocean surface temperatures but it's mixed with temperature readings taken from buoys. Furthermore, it only goes back to early 2000's.
Right, so satellite temperature data
isn't surface data its
troposphere data.
That's the first point in the debate, you are comparing apples to oranges.
The second, and more important point is what you call the 'proper' data.
UAH has gone through multiple revisions based on errors like not correcting for satellite drift, over the years and you seem to link only to old and faulty data.
That's what you call 'proper'.
The errors and corrections are noted in this story:
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...rian-climate-scientists-temperature-estimates
And here:
What Christy and Spencer focus on is the temperatures measured far above the Earth’s surface in the troposphere and the stratosphere. Generally, over the past few decades these two scientists have claimed the troposphere temperatures are not rising very rapidly. This argument has been picked up to deny the reality of human caused climate change – but it has been found to be wrong.
What kinds of errors have been made? Well first, let’s understand how these two researchers measure atmospheric temperatures. They are not using thermometers, rather they are using microwave signals from the atmosphere to deduce temperatures. The microwave sensors are on satellites which rapidly circle the planet.
Some of the problems they have struggled with relate to satellite altitudes (they slowly fall over their lifetimes, and this orbital decay biases the readings); satellite drift (their orbits shift east-west a small amount causing an error); they errantly include stratosphere temperatures in their lower atmosphere readings; and they have incorrect temperature calibration on the satellites. It’s pretty deep stuff, but I have written about the errors multiple times here, and here for people who want a deeper dive into the details.
The list of corrections to the UAH set are also noted here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAH_satellite_temperature_dataset
So where that leaves us is that I link to the new corrected temperature sets, which agree with the surface temp sets, and you stick with the old and faulty sets because they fit your confirmation bias.
That is what you are calling 'proper'.
And of course, Roy Spencer is a creationist, so there's that as well.
