"Unbiased information." That's a good one. Why I linked to realclimate.org is because, unlike so many denialist sites, they cite the actual studies and the data that are the basis of our understanding. In that sense, realclimate.org is one of the absolute least biased sites you can possibly refer to: they are biased only in that they accurately and dutifully report on the data.
By the way, when you refer to "the climategate scandal," you really don't do yourself any favors. There is no "climategate scandal" other than that a well-coordinated group of hackers (in the negative sense of the word) committed criminal acts in order to embarrass scientists and undermine the perceived validity of their work. Indeed, in that sense, "climategate" is much like the Watergate scandal, and you seem to be throwing your lot in with the villains of this story. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you aren't evil, manipulative or duplicitous, but merely ignorant. There's many good (read, well-cited) sources dedicated to debunking the poisonous myth that is "climategate," such as http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2009/12/the_climategat.... For more general information, please see http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to....
That article is about one of the IPCC authors validating a 'denialists' claim. It is the climategate scientists that broke the law, but the statute of limitations had expired (it is only six months, the law is seriously flawed), so they haven't been prosecuted. Here is another example of someone going directly from the raw data and finding no warming
http://www.bestinclass.dk/index.php/2010/01/global-warming/
Dude, calm down. Missionary zeal on a topic this contentious makes you look like a conspiracy nut. Be happy that reasoned skepticism is respectable again, and don't try to force other people to change their minds at a pace of your choosing.
By the way, when you refer to "the climategate scandal," you really don't do yourself any favors. There is no "climategate scandal" other than that a well-coordinated group of hackers (in the negative sense of the word) committed criminal acts in order to embarrass scientists and undermine the perceived validity of their work. Indeed, in that sense, "climategate" is much like the Watergate scandal, and you seem to be throwing your lot in with the villains of this story. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you aren't evil, manipulative or duplicitous, but merely ignorant. There's many good (read, well-cited) sources dedicated to debunking the poisonous myth that is "climategate," such as http://scienceblogs.com/islandofdoubt/2009/12/the_climategat.... For more general information, please see http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to....