I think many here confuse the very rigorous science of collecting data and the less vigorous means available to interpret it. This is further complicated by having to adopt proxies to derive measurements for which no actual techniques exist.
https://www.clim-past.net/13/629/2017/cp-13-629-2017.pdf
There is also a problem potentially when combining terrestrial and satellite data sets and believing satellite data replicating that from ground stations.
Had we relied on satellite data exclusively who knows how big the ozone hole would be. However the exceedingly antique Dobsons photometer saved the day and embarrassed NASA.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/joe-farman-scientist-who-first-uncovered-the-hole-in-the-ozone-layer-8624438.html

Blind belief in the consensus of the IPCC leads to all sorts of problems = just ask mr macron.(if you can find him among the yellow jackets)

I have collected, collated, and interpreted data all my working life. All is not always what it seems.I have learnt to trust nothing and question everything.

If you insist on being led by the nose by the pontificating of the guardian that is up to you. I know better.





Dobson