More Spectacular Fraud From NOAA And The EPA

The NOAA/EPA graph is being touted by Democrats as proof that people who tell the truth about climate need to be jailed. It is intended to mislead people into believing that heavy rainfall events are due to your SUV.

Climate Change Indicators: Heavy Precipitation | Climate Change Indicators in the United States | US EPA

Climate change denial should be a crime | The Outline

Besides the utter insanity of Soviet mentality Democrats demanding compliance with their cult, the EPA graph itself is fraudulent. Had they extended their graph back to the start of records in 1895, the trend would have been the exact opposite.


Cherry picking starting points of graphs is standard operating procedure for criminals on the left.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to More Spectacular Fraud From NOAA And The EPA

  1. GW Smith says:

    Sometime the fraud is in NOT reporting the whole story.

    Most people would miss this. I did!

    Thanks, Tony.

  2. Paul Homewood says:

    Good spot Tony

    It is also worth remembering that heavy rainfall is the other side of the coin to drought. As we know, US droughts were far worse during the first half of the 20thC; it would be natural to expect fewer heavy rainfall events in those times.

    The other extremes graph, “Extremes in Days with/without rainfall”, which the EPA does not seem to mention highlight, shows both sides of the coin:

    One of the pieces of NOAA fraud is to imply that “extreme rainfall” is both bad and leads to floods. In fact, the opposite is often the case, meaning a return from drought to normal conditions

    • Andy DC says:

      I agree. Sometimes a heavy rain event nips drought in the bud, or what is required to break an ongoing drought.

      When crops are in jeopardy from hot, dry weather, a heavy, soaking rain is just what the doctor has ordered. Rain, even heavy rain, is not necessarily a bad thing. Any Iowa farmer can tell you that!

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      Besides, nature does not know what is “extreme rainfall”. Our landscapes are shaped more dramatically by occasional heavy precipitation than by steady but light erosion. Heavy downpours are normal weather events with an expected and understood morphological impact.

      “Extreme rainfall” is a political term, used for propaganda purposes.

    • Andy DC says:

      I suppose showing actual temperature records as Tony does constitutes a crime according to these idiots.

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        We know from history that it constituted a crime in the Soviet Union to contradict official propaganda and point out that workers in the USA did not starve.

  3. Steve Case says:

    Cherry picking, is tried and true.

  4. arn says:

    If climate change should be a crime:

    Who is the victim?
    Where is the crime?
    What is the crime?

    Not believing screaming pricks who failed with their apocalyptic predictions 99.9% is common sense and not a crime.
    Especially when these guys are targeting your wallet with their save-the-climate-attitude.
    Especially when these guys belong to the same group which are lying trough their teeth claiming that the religion of subjugation where jihad is mandatory(+legal slavery,+legal pedophilia,+legal stoning+72 sex slaves in paradise) is the religion of peace.

    The climate does not bother we(a)ther you believe in climate change or not.
    The climate does not feel discriminated when you do not believe in climate change.

    The only crime here is :targeting free speech.

    And the only new crime that should be punished by law is perversion.
    Hard punishments for everyone who promises one thing but get always the opposite as result.
    100% accountability(As these guys are so obsessed with the religion of peace,they should be comfortable with sharia law-style punishment:chopping hands+feet.)
    Then people would be much more carefull with their predictions.

  5. AZ1971 says:

    Regarding cherry picking of start/end dates, what can be gleaned from this example is that statistics can be manipulated for whatever purpose you want to emphasize.

  6. Anonymous Commentator says:

    “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

    ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    ’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

  7. Terry says:

    Can you please include the source of those two graphs?


  8. CheshireRed says:

    The terms of reference are carefully selected to enable them to present this graph in the first place. They’re very precisely worded.

    They’ve carefully framed the question to enable the targeting of the less than 20% of the US where arid areas usually get little or no rain…so the rain they DO get is necessarily delivered in a disproportionately small number of days – which they’ve then labelled as ‘extreme’ precipitation. (If it rained regularly then precipitation wouldn’t fall disproportionately on a few days, which would destroy the whole premise of the graph) So by definition they’ve deliberately targeted their terms to only cover drier areas in order to pretend that when it rains it’s an ‘extreme’ event!

    The presentation has been set-up to deliver a desired message rather than announce a genuine revelation that points to ‘climate change’. The whole premise of what they’re presenting is therefore exposed as being a cherry-picked exercise in propaganda. When it comes to the Green Blob was it ever thus.

  9. Kris Johanson says:

    Calling whole “classes” of people criminals has a name; it’s called Marxism/Leninism. You’re a “property owner”? ….that’s a crime against the proletariat, you get a bullet in the head. You’re “educated”? ….you’re off to dig defensive ditches around Petrograd. Pol Pot murdered people who “wore glasses”. Lumping everyone in “classes” is the classic language of Marxism-Communism

  10. Buck Turgidson says:

    Epa has zero business monkeying around in climate issues. Every climate initiative in epa should be shut down. Their mates over at noaa nasa and elsewhere spew out more than enough junk government science crap.

  11. Rob says:

    I’m actually surprised they didn’t start at the even lower section in 1917 or even 1930. I mean if you are going to cherry pick and present blatant BS then may as well go all out.

  12. fah says:

    I have no idea whether or how it might affect anything substantial in this post, but in the past I have looked at precipitation data and included another slight cut on the data: amount of precipitation in contiguous day rain events. I remember slight differences when looking at max rainfall occurring in single days, several days, or all groups of days with precipitation but bounded by dry days at either end. This would catch a large lingering storm front moving through, hurricane activity, etc. It cuts a little more into climatology and less into short time weather intensity.

  13. RAH says:

    The remnants of Harvey passed south of us and still had enough punch to cause local flooding in places in southern Indiana. Yesterday here 30 mi. NNE of Indianapolis was a dreary fall like day with cooler than average temps, overcast all day, and pretty good winds and it’s even cooler today though the skies are clearing and there is little wind.

    • Andy DC says:

      DC tied their record low max temperature for today (64).
      Baltimore broke their record low maximum (64) with a high today of 62.
      Dulles Airport broke their record low maximum temperature (70) by nine degrees, with a high of 61. Of course, Dulles records only go back to the early 1960’s.

      I woke up frozen half to death this morning, as no one (including myself) was prepared to put up the heat. Who would believe that DC could ever be this cold in very early September?

  14. TA says:

    “Lumping everyone in “classes” is the classic language of Marxism-Communism”

    Reminds me of the Democrats. They lump everyone into little groups, too, and end up causing divisions among those groups, which is their purpose. They stir up trouble, and then offer themselves as the solution.

  15. DClancy says:

    What is the data source for the chart going back to 1895?

  16. R. Shearer says:

    There was a nice piece from USA Today of all places regarding hurricane forecasting and touching on Hurricane Harvey’s precipitation in SE Texas. It was generally positive and mentions the legacy of Dr. Bill Gray.

  17. JRo says:

    Science Dogma Denial should be a crime.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *