Raw Temperature Data
 

Oh yeah that's not bias at all.
Basically says we can adjust the temperature to get the results we want.
If they were doing real science some one would still be going around to the temperature monitoring stations, even if it's only the easy to get ones, pulling samples with a bucket and checking them with a period correct thermometer.

Oh and work with industrial resistance temperature detectors commonly known as RTD. You want to know what happens when. You put them in a corrosive wet environment? Any corrosion on the connections will interfere with the milivolt signal and then you know what happens?
They start to read high. How convenient.

bias
 

So you didn't comprehend it.

If that's what you call it when someone questions your religion then yes.

bias
 

You didn't comprehend the article. Perhaps to many syllables?

religion
 

'Don't know anything about that. Never met a religious person.
'Comprehension' ? Is that what you're referring to?
That would have anything to do with comprehension.
When you question someone's religion you're questioning their religion.
Ditto for belief system or world-view.
Your comment indicated that you didn't comprehend the information on raw temperature data. That's just an observation on my part.
It's the only logical conclusion I can draw from your comment.

3% is the only number that matters.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/1675/mo...t-problem.aspx

Quite a sheltered upbringing. I begin to understand.

If you apply the tenements of the controlling documents strictly, I can see why he would have never met a religious person. Lot of ersatz christians for example. I expect the same is true from all religions.

matters
 

What 'matters' to most Americans has nothing to do with raw temperature data.
Within 72-hours, the media can completely change the American conversation.
That's been a fact since 1900.
Which Vladimir Putin just demonstrated quite clearly.