Excellent analysis of the AGW conspiracy, also referred to as "the rigors of scientific inquiry".<quoted text>
As you've already seen, what you've offered is anecdotal evidence and the science "purists" here will dismiss it out of hand.
That's what they do.
Never mind that the reality of how temperature measurements were made back whenever, and by whomever, and under any ol' circumstance, they have to a "scientific" report before your offering is worth any consideration at all.
But before they actually read the report, they'll first seek to discount it by a verification of the author, the publication and the funding sources.
Having passed those measures, then comes the "peer review" hurdle, which moves depending on a variety of factors, which they'll decide later.
And then possibly if you've met their even increasing standards of acceptable evidence, they trot out an contrary study from their ever increasing vault and announce yours is wrong, because they have a "consensus" behind them.
They're quite comfortable with the closed loop they've created.
That's just what they do.
That's what they call "science".
Does not affect the FACTs that global warming is real, we are causing it, and there are things we can do about it.