SteeleRudux.

I can't dodge a question if you never asked it. Now that you've asked it here's my answer.

The tempatures should not be adjusted and still be considered anything reliable. That isn't data. That's making it say what you want it to say.

Keep the real temperature records, the real data. And add an explaination to hypothesize why it's warmer in urban areas then it is in remote areas. But keep the real data. If the hypothesis fits the data then it's a plasible explaination. If the data is adjusted to meet the required hypothesize then there is no research being done, no actual data being recorded.

Now speaking of dodging the question, how about the one I asked you. Do you have any reliable data of temperature records rising in the remote places far from cities and homes? I'm not asking to prove my point that there isn't data out there. I'm asking so you have an oppurtunity to challange my point that the island effect is all there is to global warming data. If you have something to point to, then do it. If not, then that is a big hole in the climite change narrative. All that reasurch and lacking a criticial piece of data.

To Steele Redux.

It's been a few days. Am I to assume that you have no actual data to point to from outside of a city that already is known for the island heat effect. Nothing to contribute to a record of warming in the world outside of the cities?

'Cause you know, this isn't the first time you drop off when confronted with something that you have no answer for. Even if it was a direct question for you.