Evaluation 1037 by Anon (session_user_id: 5e3ac093358bc8f564af2b2090d62f4231fd359f)

What is your overall decision about this article?  
Are the selection criteria for the stations well explained?   Or, if this project does not have to do with time series met. stations, are the premises of the project well thought out and explained?  Is it a topic of special interest?  (It doesn't have to be, but if it is, say so).  
Yes. Long enough time period was a criterion for reliable data and wide geographical spread was a criterion applied to try and represent the region as a whole as well as possible. The topic appears to be of special interest to the IPCC as it is a semi-arid area with significant population and a vulnerability to water shortages which could be exacerbated by further warming.
Are the conclusions of the report quantitatively supported by the data?  
Yes. The idea that mitigation must be combined with adaptation strategies seems to be suggested by the future predictions of the models (both showing increased temperatures for the first half of the century to come). The conclusions about rainfall seem to be supported by most of the models' 2000-2099 comparisons on the Model Mapper for precipitation. The author recognises the high degree of error in modeled clouds though.
Are the data stations well quality-controlled? 
Yes. A lot of them have long consistent periods of data from 1900 (or at least from before 1950).