On 19 Mar., 09:56, "Brian Blair" wrote:
are they not from diff sites though?

ie it would be a decent comparison if the sites were both pro and amateur in
the same location.

brian
aberfeldy

Indeed they are all from different sites. But given a strong Westerly
gale covering most of Denmark I considered it a good moment to make
some rather obvious comparisons. The point I am trying to make is that
if one is to be taken seriously as an amateur meteorologist one should
at least attend to the obvious. The online software updating systems
and inexpensive weather stations have given the amateur a chance to
contribute.(within the limitations of their equipment) That chance
would seem to have been missed in many cases. Rainwater gauges
deliberately fixed under the eaves of one's bungalow and wind
measurement devices a couple of feet from the ground surrounded in
bushes are just a couple of examples which I have read about
online.These obvious flaws were openly admitted to by the website
owner! I am not criticising anybody here but if you choose to publish
your weather data online then do at least make an effort. Or all
amateur observers will always get tarred with the same brush. If you
nearest professional station is saying 24 m/s Westerly you really have
got to be kidding by publishing a 3 m/s Easterly reading online. :-)