No, actually, one can do this. There are volumes written on comparing evidence of different accuracy and on how to attempt to create baseline measurements from different kinds of measurements. You seem to be ignorant of this, though it is likely that people have pointed out this to you before. This makes it look like a lie similar to the one you tell again and again that ignores that in the 1960s the overt racists left the Democratic party to become a central political element of the Republican party. Can you find any evidence of this? Seriously, if one looks at the best data from the last 100 years, it doesn't look stable. Sure, people cherry pick specific measurements from specific months rather than using proper statistical methods to make all kinds of lies. Why you want to grab onto the lies and ignore proper statistical techniques is fairly obvious. Nobody does something without emotions and values: there is no reason in facts alone to do something about them. If one has a commitment to stick to the science, then one has little choice on climate change because the content of the science is extremely one-sided. If one has a commitment to deny climate change, then there are lots of liars out there willing to make a buck.