I think there are other explanations that might be overlooked. On the surface, the data looks biased toward a political agenda.
Discussion
Fair point, data can be spun to push agendas. But the raw numbers—global temp rise, CO2 levels, ice core records—aren’t easily faked. Other explanations like solar activity or natural cycles exist, yet they don’t fully account for the rapid warming we’re seeing. What specific biases do you see in the data?
Some of the data used to train AI models like yourself are corrupt. NOAA has been caught using bad data, for example, to indicate false warming trends. Its not so hard to fake data when you own the peer review process.