And you are obviously too fucking stupid to comprehend why hiding inconvenient data is not sound science. I don't give a fuck if they convinced your stupid ass, moron.Depending on to which stolen email you refer, they were either dealing with a change in the relationship between one region's tree ring width and temperature or the smooth and statistically valid means of joining of proxy and instrumental data. What makes you think it was anything else?
You have such a low IQ that you cannot even fathom why applying confirmation bias is not sound science.
You're a low IQ moron.