One of the "big bucket guys" business is in DC, the other is in NY. There are a few places in the US that can claim that they have a slightly higher humidity than DC, but not enough to alter the results of the bucket test.
Unless the data are so flawed as to be practically useless.
If you have an honest set of data that does not inject a warm bias then one could claim evidence of warming. That, however, is not the case with the data collection practices with regard to surface temperatures.
I gave you clear evidence of past temperatures being altered. Here is a link to the source of a paper that has just been accepted for publication that brings the warm bias being injected into the data into sharp relief. There is ample evidence of fraudulence; whether you choose to look at it and see it for what it is is your decision. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him appreciate baroque chamber music.
http://www.surfacestations.org/
Again, if the data do not inject a warming bias, then they would indicate evidence of warming. That is not the case, however, with the surface temperature data being used to claim anthropogenic warming in the climate and, alas, the data from which your temperature anomoloy chart came. The science upon which the claims of man made climate change based is so shoddy, that frankly, if it weren't for the political power to be gained via the hoax, it would be laughed out of even elementary school science classes.
