The Most Fraudulent Climate Data

Essentially all government temperature graphs are fraudulent, but none more so than the NOAA Climate Extremes Index (CEI) – which shows summer maximum temperatures getting hotter and passing the heat of the 1930’s.

The sum of (a) percentage of the United States with maximum temperatures much below normal and (b) percentage of the United States with maximum temperatures much above normal.

U.S. Climate Extremes Index (CEI): Graph | Extremes | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

There is no basis for the NOAA claims – summer maximum temperatures have plummeted in the US to record or near record lows. The shape (but not the magnitude) of the CEI graphs is approximately correct prior to 1960, but after 1960 the NOAA data is completely fraudulent and has no basis in reality.


Most government climate fraudsters at least make some attempt at plausible deniability, but not so with NOAA’s climate extremes index. Even some people at the EPA seem to understand that summers in the 1930’s were much hotter.


This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to The Most Fraudulent Climate Data

  1. Disillusioned says:

    When will the criminals be indicted and go to prison?

    • R. Shearer says:

      First, they must be caught, which is unlikely because of the magnitude of the problems and anonymity of their methods. Sometimes lone wolfs are caught and punished.

      • Disillusioned says:

        I remember that. Beale has been a free man for two years.

        Tony keeps showing us that NOAA and NASA are cooking the data to support a failed theory, for which $billions continue being assigned/appropriated, keeping this fraudulent hyped-pothesis going.

        Given the choice, I would rather we lose a few hundred thousand to a ne’er-do-well slacker’s deceit, than to continue funding hundreds of $billions keeping this global scam going.

      • Disillusioned says:

        They’re government servants. They should be made to show us their work – show us why they keep changing the data. TOBs was garbage. Then they kept changing the data after TOBs.

        If they cannot justify why thermometers were not accurate in the past (and why they continue methodically warming cooling the past), charge them! Indict them!

        I understand, oh, there will be plenty of justifications. Did our grandfathers not know how to read thermometers? What (honest) justification could the criminals possibly have?

        • Disillusioned says:

          Strike “warming” from the middle paragraph in the above post. It should only say “cooling the past.”

  2. CO2isLife says:

    Tony, I just wrote a post supporting that your position. You may want to read it because it provides some charts that you have find useful.

    Climate Data Doesn’t Support CO2 Driving Climate Change and Global Temperatures

  3. Anon says:


    Is this an artifact of the data gridding you were writing about yesterday? As it will have the lossy effect of smoothing the extremes. Then if you compare the gridded data with untreated data (say a few weeks worth of extreme raw temperatures) the comparison will make it appear we are living in times of unprecedented extremes.

    Also, have you seen this?


    Colorado taxpayers could be on the hook for a sizable chunk of change if Boulder city’s climate lawsuit against various oil companies fails in the courts, according to a report Saturday from Western Wire.

    Boulder County signed a contingent fee agreement with Hannon Law Firm and a pro bono retainer agreement with the non-profit organization Earth Rights International (ERI) in April, the report noted. The contracts stipulate that Boulder taxpayers might have to pay as much as $1 million if the county’s lawsuit against ExxonMobil and Succor is unsuccessful.

    • tonyheller says:

      Oil & gas companies should quit selling fossil fuels to Boulder. It would cure the local morons in about six hours.

      • Anon says:

        Lol. That is actually what the presiding judge told the plaintiffs, in not the same words. After they listed all the damage caused by fossil fuels / CAGW, the judge then sent the plaintiffs away and asked them to present him with a list of all the benefits society has accrued from using fossil fuels. The trial does not seem to be going well for the plaintiffs, so your city council may be on the hook. Yikes…

  4. frederik wisse says:

    Here in Europe basically all established political parties , more or less globalist-style ,
    are still in their Parisian deep sleep and lead by Mr.Macron into transferring even more power towards the bureaucrats and you are experiencing how this really ends . Well we are experiencing here the results of the false doctrines , blaming carbondioxide for almost anything negative . Although it was Margareth Thatcher who started this idioacy
    as she saw it as an opportunity to break the power of coalminer-unions . Politics has nothing to do with science and it is about time here that people start realizing this . A frozen Arctic could be very helpful in this respect .Pseudo-scientists will find new explanations for this abberation of mother nature , securing a hefty income based upon exploitation of fear and anxiety . Thank you Tony for giving us faith and confidence.

    • arn says:

      Edmund de Rothschild tricked the Nations in 1992 at the UN summit in Rio into AGW.
      Mr Macron is a Rothschild banker.
      They pulled with him another Obama and made a nobody famous because Le Pen must not win.
      The trick worked well with Obama as Obama helped building the climate trading exchange in his political home chicago.(amazing coiincidence)
      Macrons job(besides to flood europe with more muslims and centralise power in europe) is to keep AGW alive and healthy.
      That’s the reason why Macron was so busy to give those US climate scientists a new job in France after they received a kick in the butt from trump.

Leave a Reply to Anon Cancel reply

