Also measuring temperature changes over a long period of time is hard which is one of the reasons why it took so long to prove global temperatures are rising. It is not like they have a lot of well-maintained weather stations with consistent instrumentation. When you are doing a complex mash-up of remote sensing data with machine learning in the mix people will be skeptical.

I think it’s an OK paper but lousy title: if I rewrote a title that much I’d expect to get grief for it and that all-caps NO is definitely not HN culture. But there certainly is a tension between the phys.org title which is roughy “Scientists reach important conclusion” and the Nature title which is “We measured something”