Re:Tree cover loss – 2001-2020
by emn13 on Wednesday March 16, 2022 @03:33AM
(#30696209)
Thanks for the link; that's helpful. It also confirms that the worry that indeed it's quite tricky to interpret this data; even with the best of intentions errors are quite plausible.
It's still interesting, it just means we should see these efforts as narrow, potentially distorted perspectives on the ground truth; and therefore we need to remain open to the fact that other reasonable perspectives might show different trends.
It's still interesting, it just means we should see these efforts as narrow, potentially distorted perspectives on the ground truth; and therefore we need to remain open to the fact that other reasonable perspectives might show different trends.