No make use of the Proper Data Sets that the Atmospheric Scientists make use of and research there that has to Pass Peer Review and Joe Bastardi has the proper

No make use of the Proper Data Sets that the Atmospheric Scientists make use of and research there that has to Pass Peer Review and Joe Bastardi has the proper Credentials there and his view more than matches your view point so look at his statements but he's not specializing Climate Research as his specificity in his Atmospheric Sciences background. But ask him about ACE and how relevant that data set is there along with Terabytes of other Data from the Remote Sensing Weather/Atmospheric satellites that the Climate Researchers have poured over for there related research into the matter! There is also plenty of Aviation Related Atmospheric data sets that go back further on the weather readings from Aircraft that get automatically recorded and fed into the weather modeling data sets and that info goes back further as does the Atmospheric weather balloons and those soundings! You did a good job with the limited statistics of your extremely limited sampling of the Atmospheric Historical record but that limited sampling lacks any finer granularity there compared to what the professionals have worked through in their research. And in no way should anyone not go back as far as possible for any datasets including tree rings and other indirect methods of sampling further back in the historical records there. And where did I actually say that one should not go back as far as possible for as much data as possible. I just stated that the datasets get less detailed the further back one goes but that still comprises more data than you have made use of to come to your conclusion!