Old news now, of course, but there’s a blog post by Carl Mears with nice pix and explanation. Notice this is TMT, not TLT, but at this point we’re largely arguing about the differences between the different groups, and its fine for that. It is, of course, all nicely published in proper style. By contrast, UAH version 6.0 (ahem, beta) was announced most of a year ago and is still not actually a paper, as far as I know. It would be hard for it to be; they’re now on beta 5. Don’t miss me snarking about how crap their code is. Reading the “beta 5” I’m struck by how ad-hoc the changes seem to be (“We therefore changed the AMSU5 reference Earth incidence angle (from 35.0 to 38.3 deg.)…”). By contrast with the professionalism of RSS, UAH seems amateurish.
Update: speaking of amateurish, there’s As it is, when John Christy and I are gone, the UAH global temperature dataset might well die with us by RS. He explains this by not-popular-views, but I think that’s just an excuse; more likely, he’s admitting that their code+methods are so tangled, that no-one else could pick them up. A bit part of any long-term monitoring is leaving it in a fit state for others to continue.