If the facts speak for themselves then why not release the actual data?
We all know why now. It's because the data doesn't show warming until you massage, twist, and manipulate it .
That is what is misleading, their data does show warming. Here are the the most disturbing things about their data...
1) The hockeystick and all subsequent science was "proof" that the industrial age spewed CO2 and started MMGW. Problem is, they left out data that would have shown that it was cooling during the industrial age, not warming. The other problem was that about 1,000 years ago, during the medieval period, it was actually warmer for some time and the graph will the deleted data would have shown flux, punching holes in the Man Made portion of global warming. It would have been a non-starter.
2) The method of collecting the "average" temperatures included, among other things, rainfall amounts in tree rings, global data collectors positioned (and moved) and then satellite data. The tree ring studies assumed temps based on rainfall and drought. The positioned earthly data collectors had to be moved as urban sprawl caused island heating results. Rural data collectors had to be measured manually (site visits) and the records were suspect. Satellite data didn't seem to line up with other means and methods of collecting temperature records. Soooooo....they apparently either A) Cherry picked the data that helped their cause or B) performed algorithms to "balance" the means where they didn't think they got "good" data.
3) It is now apparent that they filled gaps or weak data points with extrapolations, means, averages, etc. which are all subject to subjectivity.
I for one do not doubt that the earth has gotten warmer. We went through the little ice age following the medieval warming period. Before both there were glaciers in North America. We have likely been in a global warming cycle. Ooorrr....we may have peaked and are turning back toward a long cold spell. Who knows? One thing is for sure, they do not know.