New Video : Smoking Gun Of Temperature Fraud

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to New Video : Smoking Gun Of Temperature Fraud

  1. KevinPaul says:

    Eke! Hows-your-father caught with his pants down…….will he end up sharing a cell with a homosexual Hells’ Angel? Hope soo.

  2. grilledtomoatoes says:

    Bravo! Again.

  3. John L Kelly says:

    Tony, when are you, Anthony Watts, and others of your side of this issue, going to submit a major law suite against NOAA over this? We citizens need to be represented.
    The only way you all are going to hit them where it hurts is to have a court support your claims. I know this is going to take time, as always, but in the mean time you all can be literally raising hell, all over the place.
    Don’t you think that it is finally time to gather thousands in DC and make the national news? Its the only way you will have enough ‘Pull’ to wake everyone up. And you can count on me to go there and join you.

    • D. Boss says:

      It would take some very deep pockets, and considerable intestinal fortitude to file suit like this. Though I agree something should be done to hold the fraudsters accountable.

      Some first steps:
      1) Are the gov entities immune from criminal or civil actions? If so, laws must be written/changed first.
      2)Assuming laws have to be written or changed – must hold individuals and department heads liable for fraud, or even just altering records.
      3) The liability upon the court’s judgement should be immediate termination of employment or contract; prohibition from ever working for, receiving monies from any Fed gov agency or school; and fines/incarceration if warranted.
      4) The agency where the fraud took place must retract the fraudulent information and rectify public records and disclosures, including buying print and other media time for such announcements.

      Etc…

      There may be legislation like this already on the books. In any event some discretion or allowance for legitimate correction of raw data has to be allowed. But then how/who decides. This muddies the waters and is probably why/how the various justifications for “adjustment” of historic or current data has been perpetrated as outright fraud as Tony et al routinely shows.

      So no matter if laws exist or need to be enacted, such suits or complaints will be a hard slog to win. (hence my opening sentence)

  4. Richard Smith says:

    A brilliant piece of sleuthing. The scale of the historic alterations to the temperature data is absolutely staggering.

  5. CHRISTOPHER HIGGINSON says:

    Snopes is well known for being unreliable or worse: wrong!

    • Gator says:

      Popular myth-busting website Snopes originally gained recognition for being the go-to site for disproving outlandish urban legends -such as the presence of UFOs in Haiti or the existence of human-animal hybrids in the Amazon jungle.

      Recently, however, the site has tried to pose as a political fact-checker. But Snopes’ “fact-checking” looks more like playing defense for prominent Democrats like Hillary Clinton and it’s political “fact-checker” describes herself as a liberal and has called Republicans “regressive” and afraid of “female agency.”

      Snopes’ main political fact-checker is a writer named Kim Lacapria. Before writing for Snopes, Lacapria wrote for Inquisitr, a blog that — oddly enough — is known for publishing fake quotes and even downright hoaxes as much as anything else.

      While at Inquisitr, the future “fact-checker” consistently displayed clear partisanship (RELATED: Snopes Caught Lying About Lack Of American Flags At Democratic Convention)

      She described herself as “openly left-leaning” and a liberal. She trashed the Tea Party as “teahadists.” She called Bill Clinton “one of our greatest” presidents. She claimed that conservatives only criticized Lena Dunham’s comparison of voting to sex because they “fear female agency.”

      She once wrote: “Like many GOP ideas about the poor, the panic about using food stamps for alcohol, pornography or guns seems to have been cut from whole cloth–or more likely, the ideas many have about the fantasy of poverty.” (A simple fact-check would show that food stamp fraud does occur and costs taxpayers tens of millions.)

      Lacapria even accused the Bush administration of being “at least guilty of criminal negligience” in the September 11 attacks. (The future “fact-checker” offered no evidence to support her accusation.)

      Her columns apparently failed to impress her readership, oftentimes failing to get more than 10-20 shares.

      After blogging the Inquisitr, Lacapria joined Snopes, where she regularly plays defense for her fellow liberals.

      She wrote a “fact check” article about Jimmy Carter’s unilateral ban of Iranian nationals from entering the country that looks more like an opinion column arguing against Donald Trump’s proposed Muslim ban.

      Similarly, Lacapria — in another “fact check” article — argued Hillary Clinton hadn’t included Benghazi at all in her infamous “we didn’t lose a single person in Libya” gaffe. Lacapria claimed Clinton only meant to refer to the 2011 invasion of Libya (but not the 2012 Benghazi attack) but offered little fact-based evidence to support her claim.

      After the Orlando terror attack, Lacapria claimed that just because Omar Mateen was a registered Democrat with an active voter registration status didn’t mean he was actually a Democrat. Her “fact check” argued that he might “have chosen a random political affiliation when he initially registered.”

      Lacapria even tried to contradict the former Facebook workers who admitted that Facebook regularly censors conservative news, dismissing the news as “rumors.”

      In that “fact check” article, Lacapria argued that “Facebook Trending’s blacklisting of ‘junk topics’ was not only not a scandalous development, but to be expected following the social network’s crackdown on fake news sites.” The opinion-heavy article was mockingly titled: The Algorithm Is Gonna Get You.

      Lacapria again played defense for Clinton in a fact check article when she claimed: “Outrage over an expensive Armani jacket worn by Hillary Clinton was peppered with inaccurate details.”

      One of the “inaccurate details” cited by Lacapria was that, “The cost of men’s suits worn by fellow politicians didn’t appear in the article for contrast.” She also argued the speech Clinton gave while wearing the $12,495 jacket, which discussed “raising wages and reducing inequality,” wasn’t actually about income inequality.

      Snipes is a partisan site that sanitizes leftist BS, and packages it as “facts” to sell to the masses. It is a leftist propaganda site.

      ‘Fact checking’ website Snopes on verge of collapse after founder is accused of fraud, lies, and putting prostitutes and his honeymoon on expenses (and it hasn’t told its readers THOSE facts)

      ‘Fact-checking’ website Snopes is asking its users for help in a GoFundMe saying an ‘outside vendor’ is ‘holding it hostage’

      But the site which claims to be ‘transparent’ and to tell people the facts they need to know hasn’t told those donating everything that is going on

      In fact it is at the center of a bitter legal battle with its CEO being accused of fraud, lies, conspiracy and putting prostitutes and his honeymoon on expenses

      David Mikkelson set up company which owns Snopes.com in 2003 with then wife Barbara but she sold her 50 per cent stake during bitter divorce

      Owners of company which provided it with tech and advertising services bought her stake but have now fallen out with Mikkelson and call him a fraudster

      Case could see judge order site closed – despite it being chosen by Facebook to arbitrate on fake news

      The best fake fact checking site that leftist money can buy!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.