Another reason to leave the climate cult: Tampering

1 CommentCommentary, Weather

NOAA’s claim that “data tampering” is just science is a flimsy excuse for fudging numbers to fit their narrative. They adjust historical climate data—cooling the past, warming the present—and call it “homogenization” to fix station quirks like relocations or time shifts. But let’s cut the crap: nearly half of their USHCN data is fake, marked with an “E” for “estimated” because stations didn’t even report. They’re not correcting; they’re inventing. Raw data often shows flat or cooling U.S. trends since the 1890s, yet NOAA’s tweaked version magically aligns with rising CO2, jacking up temperatures by 1.5°F. Coincidence? Hardly.

Critics like Real Climate Science and Tony Heller here, expose how urban heat fixes and time-of-observation tweaks suspiciously amplify warming. NOAA hides behind peer-reviewed jargon, citing studies like Hausfather’s 2016 paper, but cherry-picking pristine stations to validate their fudge-fest doesn’t make it legit.

Transparency’s a joke—try finding a clear breakdown of how they “estimate” missing data. This isn’t science refining itself; it’s a calculated rewrite of history to push a climate agenda. The raw data’s messy but honest. NOAA’s polished version? A sculpted lie.

They’re not fixing biases—they’re baking them in. Prove me wrong, NOAA. Show your work.

The media is complicit