NOAA US Data Tampering Update

According to NOAA, the US is burning up.

Climate at a Glance | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

But before data tampering, the US has been cooling for the past 90 years.  The claimed warming trend is entirely due to data tampering.

The data is altered in a spectacular hockey stick – with temperatures before the year 2000 progressively cooled, and temperatures after 2000 progressively warmed.

When plotted vs. CO2, it becomes clear that US warming is the ultimate junk science.  The data is being precisely altered to match CO2 theory, with an R² of 0.975.

Spreadsheet    Data

A lot of this fraud is done with good old fashioned “just making stuff up.” Almost half of the data is currently being fabricated. Forty-seven percent of the monthly US temperature data is marked by NOAA with an “E’ – which means it is estimated.

This junk science may seem really, really awful, but you are a racist if you don’t accept the reality of man-made warming data-tampering.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

21 Responses to NOAA US Data Tampering Update

  1. Dan Z. says:

    Absolutely incredible. I’ve been following you for a few years now and it’s still astounding. Great job.

    Are you going to do more videos? Or has YouTube acted to limit your videos’ reach?

  2. Joe in Wyo says:

    Wow. Those graphical representations of the data are damning to the so called scientists…. sucks to be them when other folks become aware of their chicanery…
    Great job as usual Tony!

  3. Louis Hooffstetter says:

    “47% of the monthly US temperature data is marked by NOAA with an “E’ – which means it is estimated.”
    Or as you have pointed out, fabricated.

    We need to contact the White House and call attention to this fraud. Benjamin Friedman needs to either correct this, or step aside.

    • garyh845 says:

      Call the House Science Committee – need a hearing on this alone (before they loose the House).

      House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
      2321 Rayburn House Office Building
      Washington, DC 20515
      Phone: 202-225-6371
      Fax: 202-226-0113

  4. Gerald Machnee says:

    We need an official comment from terak.

  5. Alan Tomalty says:

    Tony why havent you brought all of your findings to a US prosecutor’s office?

  6. Anon says:

    Hi Tony,

    Off topic, but about fraud. Check the video out in this story. It is absolutely unbelievable:


    This is tied into Putin’s comments at the Helsinki Press Conference last week about $400,000,000 going from Bill Browder to the Clinton Campaign. The video probably won’t be up for long as it has been banned in Europe & the United States. I guarantee it will be one of the most shocking videos you have seen in a long time. And it is also pertinent to Climate Change, where one story gets out and the obsequious press just echoes it and the perps rely on the media. I did not think I wanted to see the film, but after the first 10 mins I was hooked. One of the most shocking web of lies you will ever see and hugely responsible for all the Russia hysteria, all the enrich an American Billionaire. wow!

  7. Andy DC says:

    NOAA has taken out all of the evil data that is racist, sexist and homophobic, and also has expunged any data that clearly flies in the face of settled science.

    • Josh says:

      Which is exactly why NOAA is purposely changing the data in all the rural counties to show warming when there is none since rural areas are deep red.

  8. GW says:

    After 18 months of the Trump administration, I could not be more disappointed that this crap is still going on and these hucksters still have jobs. But I guess ill get there when it becomes 24 months, 30 months, etc., etc.

    • Gator says:

      Rome was not burned in a day…

    • RAH says:

      Withdraw from the Paris agreement, massive reforms of the EPA, dealing with illegal immigration, trade wars to try and level the playing field and gain economic leverage on China, tax cuts, negotiating with Putin, dealing with Rocket Man, making the economy work, dealing with an attempted silent coup and a hostile press, an uncompliant congress and senate, rolling back a plethora of administrative regulations, more court appointments than any other president in history in the amount of time in office, etc, etc, etc. All of that is nothing compared to squashing the likes of Gavin and the boobs at NOAA.

      Makes me wonder what your politics are GW.

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        I always ask people what they do besides voting every couple of years and commenting on the internet. Some of them came up with very imaginative and useful things to do.

  9. jackson says:

    the relationship between the temp. adjustments and the CO2 is absolutely beautiful.
    It looks like an unconscious bias has directed the adjustments to some degree…

    • Jason Calley says:

      Hey jackson, “It looks like an unconscious bias has directed the adjustments to some degree…”

      I am not sure if you are being tongue in cheek or if you are serious. Personally, I did at one time go through a period where I thought that perhaps the CAGW “scientists” were suffering from confirmation bias. The fact is, they have been put on notice so many, many times of obvious errors in procedure and methodology that it is no longer reasonable to give them such benefit of a doubt. If an idiot came to you claiming that 5+5=9, and you showed him over and over that 5+5=10, you might not be surprised if he still persisted in his error. After all, he’s an idiot, right? On the other hand, if a mathematician claimed that 5+5=9, it should only take once to convince him of his error. The leading scientists of CAGW are experts in the field, not idiots (I expect to get some disagreement on this). They have been shown multiple times, definitively, explicitly and provably, that they are in error but instead of fixing their mistakes they just scream louder. If they were idiots they might be simply wrong, but since they are experts, they can no longer claim that. They are just liars, and the damage they have done to the reputation of science is incalculable.

  10. DM says:

    HadCRUT data is similarly flawed. For more info, click
    Skip down to the “Executive Summary” part.

  11. Kelton Peery says:


    Is the detailed method of how NOAA is making these “adjustments” available to the public? Do we know exactly what NOAA is doing in these manipulations and estimates? Have the methods and formulas for these adjustments been analyzed outside of NOAA?

    It seems to me that if NOAA has fudged the data, it should be evident by looking closely at what they are doing specifically and in detail.

  12. Are “pre-massaged” and “post-massaged” data available on NOAA’s website?

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.