What, exactly, were you hoping to learn by accusing Airparif and the EU of bias?

All this time I’ve been asking questions of you, hoping to learn about your thought process: Who should be performing these measurements? Who should be funding them? Who is someone without bias in the outcome of this process? What is an example of any result on any topic you accept as having been produced by an unbiased party with unbiased funding sources? What do you think are deficiencies in this research caused by the authors’ biases?

Not only won’t you even attempt to answer these excruciatingly simple questions, but you make it obvious that you have no desire to. So it seems more than just a little disingenuous to suddenly hold up “just asking questions” as a virtue when you have zero interest in answering any yourself.

You should try addressing my original question, rather than deflecting with yours. Have you provided any evidence of their independence?

But you clearly can't. I give up.

This is ridiculous. The standard isn’t “are they unbiased” because it is utterly unachievable. You know this and you cling to it anyway. What matters is whether their bias materially influenced their conclusions.

They have provided analysis and data backing that analysis. It is now up to you as a skeptic to find fault in that. “They are biased” is lazy, intellectually dishonest, and utterly unconvincing. It is a canned response that can be given to literally every conclusion ever reached and so can (and has been) dismissed out of hand.