Publications in atmospheric sciences typically neglect biases caused by regression dilution (bias of the ordinary least squares line fitting) and regression to the mean (RTM) in comparisons of uncertain data. We use synthetic observations mimicking real atmospheric data to demonstrate how the biases arise from random data uncertainties of measurements, model output, or satellite retrieval products. Further, we provide examples of typical methods of data comparisons that have a tendency to pronounce the biases. The results show, that data uncertainties can significantly bias data comparisons due to regression dilution and RTM, a fact that is known in statistics but disregarded in atmospheric sciences. Thus, we argue that often these biases are widely regarded as measurement or modeling errors, for instance, while they in fact are artificial. It is essential that atmospheric and geoscience communities become aware of and consider these features in research. Key Points Regression to the mean and regression dilution can cause artificial bias in comparisons of unbiased data We demonstrate how these effects are stronger when data uncertainty is larger These effects are widely neglected in atmospheric sciences, potentially causing bias in many published results