As you've already seen, what you've offered is anecdotal evidence and the science "purists" here will dismiss it out of hand.My great grandfather used to record temps back in 1920-1935. He said they drank wine and often made up temps for the log book. He said it was "close enough" for government work. Said everyone did it.
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".