re: #34 williwonka

So because the poorly located sites showed cooler tempertures than the correctly located sites we are to believe that this proves that global warming exist and that the data were biased in favor of cooling? No! Please, it might mean that the poor locations resulted in the readings not being as cold as they would have been if properly located.

I can see why Charles is disenchanted with the right, but the left is just as bad if not worse.

You might want to take down that straw man you just put up about how this “proves” global warming or you’re gonna have a hell of a time sweeping the floor.