Top Obama Official Squeals: ‘We Faked Climate Change Data’

Top Obama official Steven Koonin confessed to the Wall Street Journal that Obama's administration lied about climate change science.

Top Obama official Steven Koonin has become the latest Democrat to roll over and stab his former comrades in the back, telling the Wall Street Journal that Obama’s administration manipulated ‘climate change’ data to trick the public into accepting Democrat policies.

What you saw coming out of the press releases about climate data, climate analysis, was, I’d say, misleading, sometimes just wrong,” said Koonin, former Undersecretary of the Department of Energy, referring to the Obama administration’s manipulations and lies.

According to Koonin’s explosive confession, departments responsible for environmental science either “misrepresented data” or “completely fabricated results” to justify the destructive policies of the Obama administration.

Scientists at NASA and the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) colluded with press officers to create deceitful press releases that propped up the former president’s agenda.

The Obama administration lived by Joseph Goebbels’ mantra: People will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it often enough people will start to accept it as truth.

Sadly, many people around the world accepted the lies of the corrupt Obama administration. As a result, the economy stagnated, and elites such as Al Gore and Hillary Clinton made a killing.

NOAA was manipulating data

Koonin isn’t the only Obama-era Democrat official squealing on his former colleagues and blowing the whistle on the morally bankrupt Obama administration.

Retired principle climate scientist Dr. John Bates testified before a House Committee in February claiming that the NOAA was manipulating data.

Dr. Bates claimed that “the Karl study” was politically motivated, unscientific, and unsupported by data. “The Karl study” was a report designed to make excuses for the slowing of global temperature growth.

The Obama administration peddled lies and pseudoscience to “prove” that climate change is a real and dangerous phenomenon to justify their policies of increased regulation and size of government.

Corrupt scientists, motivated by politics and dirty money, completely abandoned the scientific method to support their Democratic paymasters. An entire industry, including the mercenary mainstream media, has been created around the easily debunked lie that the earth is getting warmer.

In 2007 Al Gore predicted that the polar ice caps would have completely melted away by 2013, but instead, since that time, they have grown larger.

Climate scientists were forced to change the name of their theory from Global Warming to Climate Change, because the enough people woke up to the fact that data did not support the big lie that the earth was warming.

Now it is becoming clear that climate change is also not supported by evidence.

Professional climate alarmists like Al Gore may have made millions peddling their pseudoscience and propaganda to the gullible masses, but their claims are simply not supported by any real science.

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry

Baxter Dmitry is a writer at News Punch. He covers politics, business and entertainment. Speaking truth to power since he learned to talk, Baxter has travelled in over 80 countries and won arguments in every single one. Live without fear.
Follow: @baxter_dmitry
Baxter Dmitry
  • Black Swan

    ” We do have a generous surplus of well crafted lies, spun with great effort by shills and Sociopath’s. They are never more loud or more evident than around the watering holes of money and power.” 1 WB

  • monica

    Joseph Goebbels’ mantra: People will believe a big lie sooner than a
    little one; and if you repeat it often enough people will start to
    accept it as truth.= NAZI doctrines adopted by a fucking lier – OBAMA is nothing but a piece of shit and should be put in jail with his co-mates Hillary Clinton (another lying piece of shit)

  • user user

    It tells you what we are up against and fighting for. These scientists are selling lies for money..

  • thestormy

    I’m old enough to remember that we were told we would freeze to death due to climate change. LOL!!! The earth does change temperature & it is normal,always has & always will !! It is a U.N. Agenda 21 scam to take $$$$$$ from productive nations & give it to unproductive nations with the exception of China who resisted it. China is the worlds largest polluter ! Al Gore is getting wealthy off of this scam while he jets around the world leaving his,” carbon footprint,” & building many mansions. The Hollywood elite do the same ,all hypocrites !!!!

  • Franco Brocardo

    Barak Obama is The Cabal.

  • sk6actual

    Like …ya’ know, we knew that a’ready … he manipulated anything he could get his hands on over 8 years.

  • BillyWood
    • Brian Tasker

      How convenient that in Australia the Rothchild’s created a Bank to trade in Carbon Credits. That was immediately after the Carbon Tax was created. The Carbon Tax, an intangible, created “out of thin air”, obviously gifted them huge profits also created “out of thin air”.

  • Otipua08

    More rubbish! When the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was set up in 1988, it wasn’t called the International Panel on Global Warming! Incidentally all the data supports the fact the Earth is warming, even the deniers favourite data set UAH, which just minimises it and is out of step with the other major data sets !”Climate scientists were forced to change the name of their theory from Global Warming to Climate Change, because the enough people woke up to the fact that data did not support the big lie that the earth was warming.”

    • Jesse

      Sadly – you’re trying to argue with science vs conspiracy theory nutcases. You’ll never win. We’ll never win. Holy fuck Trump is in power and doing his best to destroy the earth as we know at by simply pretending climate change doesn’t exist. He’s been defunding and deregulating every single thing he can that has a positive environmental cause.

      What is really fucking weird though, is that there are so many people who support guys like Trump – they somehow think this multi-billionaire, International capitalist has got their backs or some shit.

      I can’t even fathom how dim you would have to be to think Trump has got your back (assuming you’re not in the top 0.0001% of the world’s richest people).

      Anyway – hopefully even one person reading your posts will at least have some doubts about denying climate change.

      You gotta love the irony about pasting an article that blatantly lies and then argues against the lies (Strawman essentially) and then all these sheep on this site rally behind it and accuse Liberals and Obama of manipulating the truth. Hmm…

  • Otipua08

    So much rubbish! “In 2007 Al Gore predicted that the polar ice caps would have completely melted away by 2013, but instead, since that time, they have grown larger.”

    • Mollie Norris

      Scientists don’t use data from unidentified sources

      The following figure shows the GHCN temperature anomaly data (blue) along with the same data shifted back
      69 years and down 0.3 degrees (red).

      • Otipua08

        Nice graphs. The first one shows the arctic has lost a quarter of it’s ice cover since 1979. The Antarctic has reversed its’ sea ice gains and globally there was 5 million KM2 less ice in Jan 2017 than Jan 1979.

        • Mollie Norris

          Arctic sea ice extent is cyclical, and dependent on PDO and AO:

          The North Pole was ice-free in 1987:

          The North Pole was ice-free in 1959:

          Polar ice extent is controlled by ocean currents, not anthropogenic causes.

          • Otipua08

            A photo? Of what? Yawn! Of course Arctic ice extent changes with natural cycles. No one says it doesn’t! The Arctic has warmed due to human greenhouse emissions faster than anywhere on the planet. This is why ice extent is on a downward trend and will not be recovering with natural cycles!

          • Mollie Norris

            Actually, a link showing cyclical acrtic ice extent correlated with PDO – sleaze on!
            Keep posting your idiotic unsourced graph to support your fiction – it’s evidently your best shot at marginally literate political sycophants, but climate is the described by pgysical science, not perception manipulation.

          • Otipua08

            Not that literate are you? Or is it just your eyesight. Look down bottom right! NSIDC!

          • Mollie Norris

            A Navy photo showing less arctic ice in the 1950s than in 2017 – you really can’t acknowledge facts and sell your agenda, huh?

          • Otipua08

            Photo shows a submarine, nothing else. You’ve posted a reference showing a 5million Km2 global decline in ice over the last 38 years. I assume you agree with your post. Facts don’t have an agenda. You obviously do. One based on ignorance!

          • Mollie Norris

            No, actually I posted a link to the Navy archive photo that includes a description of the photo. Literate? – you hide it well.

          • Otipua08

            Interesting links you posted. The first one, although 10 years out of date confirms…………… the climate is changing. Of course it’s changed more since then! ” “Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic,” he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.” What do you think climate change actually means?

          • Mollie Norris

            Climate has always changed on earth. Plans were made for a shipping route
            through the “Northwest Passage” when the Arctic meIted around 1900. It was navigated by Amundsen in 1903-1906. But ice soon closed it back up.

            When George Hunt attended the 1987 4th World Wilderness Conference in 1987, he was surprised that attendees included David Rockefeller, Maurice Strong, UN bureaucrats and heads of state, but no environmentalists. There were no prior conferences; the Fourth World is a Navajo term for the spirit world below the opening in the floor of a kiva. AGW is an excuse for murdering 95% of the world’s population.

            “Excerpts from a document of the Secretariat for World Order which was distributed at the Des Moines UNCED [United Nations Conference on Environment and Development] meeting (1991):
            We are the living sponsors of the great Cecil Rhodes will of 1877, in which Rhodes devoted his fortune to “The extension of British rule throughout the world… the colonization by British subjects of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia [Crete], the whole of
            South America, the islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, the seaboard of China and Japan, the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire….

            We stand with Lord Milner’s credo. We too, are “British Race Patriots” and our patriotism is “the speech, the tradition, the principles, the aspirations of the British
            Race.” Do you fear to take this stand, at the very last moment when this purpose can be realized? Do you not see that failure now, is to be pulled down by the billions of Lilliputians of lesser race who care little or nothing for the Anglo-Saxon system?”


            “An unfathomably wealthy banking and oil dynasty has been hijacking
            governments, media organs, universities, non-profits, and other power
            centers to expand its control over the economy and the energy sector in
            particular, according to”a recently released investigation by a watchdog group. That dynasty, of course, is the Rockefeller family. In essence, they have largely created, bankrolled, and weaponized what is known as the “green” movement “as a means to expand their empire over the past three decades,” the report found. Under the guise of fighting alleged “man-made global-warming,” the
            Rockefeller family and its billions have been bankrolling everything from “climate” journalism (propaganda) efforts, politicians, and “academia” to politically motivated “investigations” of energy companies and non-profit organizations by government officials. Billionaire extremist George Soros also helped fund the efforts, according to the report by the Washington, D.C.-based watchdog Energy and Environment
            Legal Institute (E&E Legal) entitled The Rockefeller Way: The Family’s Covert “Climate Change” Plan.”


          • Otipua08

            Conspiracy theories? Yawn. I like to stick to scientific facts! The North West passage is on track to be permanently open. Some back ground on your submarine photo, that you seen to imagine was taken at the North Pole.” At 11:15 p.m. EDT on August 3, 1958, Commander Anderson announced to his crew: “For the world, our country, and the Navy–the North Pole.” The Nautilus passed under the geographic North Pole without pausing.”

          • Otipua08

            The second sub to reach the pole. “Skate sought the Arctic where she operated under the ice for 10 days. During this time, she surfaced nine times through the ice, navigated over 2,400 miles (3,900 km) under it, and on 11 August, 9:47 pm EDT [3] (the week after USS Nautilus) became the second sea ship to reach the North Pole. Skate was unable to surface precisely at the Pole on the August voyage due to dangerous ice conditions as noted in the captain’s 1960 book, “Surface at the Pole: The Extraordinary Voyages of the USS Skate,”[4] where Calvert said, “Seldom had the ice seemed so heavy and so thick as it did in the immediate vicinity of the pole”.

          • Otipua08

            Plenty of ice First North Pole surfacing of USS Skate. 17 March 1959

          • Mollie Norris

            I’ll stick with the Navy Archive label on the photo.

          • Otipua08

            Feeling bored Mollie? Stay in your alternative fact bubble. You’ll be nice and safe there.

          • Mollie Norris
          • Otipua08
          • Mollie Norris

            You’re really a disinformation fan! Both temperature and CO2 have been higher in the past; the planet must have self-destructed many thousands of years ago, based on the political psyence “tipping point” meme.

          • Otipua08

            You’re really a science illiterate aren’t you? No one says either CO2 or temperature weren’t higher in the past. What they are saying, is the consequences for the current human generated changes will be catastrophic for humanity and the biosphere!

          • Mollie Norris

            “Tipping point” isn’t a scientific term; it’s a political term. Tipping point means a ‘point of no return’ to prior conditions:

            “The melting of the Arctic summer ice is considered to be the single
            greatest threat, and some scientists think we’ve already passed the
            tipping point.
            As sea ice melts and the Arctic warms, dark ocean water is exposed
            that absorbs more sunlight, thus reinforcing the warming. The transition
            to an ice-free Arctic summer can occur rapidly – within decades – and
            this has geopolitical implications, in addition to a whole ecosystem
            being disrupted.”

            Artic sea ice extent and thickness are cyclical.
            The EDF wouldn’t exist if it couldn’t sell BS like this tonon-scientist political sycophants like you.

          • Otipua08

            No, tipping point means a point at which a series of small changes or incidents becomes significant enough to cause a larger, more important change. A return to prior conditions has nothing to do with it. Arctic sea ice responds to what ever forcings are in play. A warming Arctic is the net result of the dominant forcings in play. These dominant forcings are caused by humans.

          • Otipua08
      • Otipua08

        The second graph? Not sure what that is supposed
        to convey, but it is 6 years out of date whatever it is!

        • Mollie Norris

          What’s the source of the data in your graph? – it’s not labeled.

  • Brian Tasker

    Unfortunately your credibility is somewhat lacking on this story as the WSJ did the article in 2014!!! Presented in April 2017. Run out of relevant news have we?

  • Sultan of Sanford
  • John

    Here is the biggest lie ever that they have brainwashed so many with.

  • James O’Connell

    There is no doubt that there have been wild exaggerations about those who emphasize man made warming and what we should do about it. The problem is the unscientific layman is confused by the evidence and the voices of conflicting interests. Nevertheless the bulk of scientists who say man made warming is happening are doing so because that is what their observation leads them to believe. The evidence gets complicated because it can be different changes for atmospheric temperature and sea temperatures. The Arctic ice is diminishing; that’s why ships can now navigate where they could not before. The story is more mixed with the Antarctic. The results of such warming is also open to debate as global warming will benefit some people such as the Russians who will have their crop times extended and disadvantage those n low coastal areas who may be flooded. Crop reliability will diminish in some areas and increase in others.

  • Sarah13chc

    I’d like to say I didn’t give one dime to all this crap, but unfortunately, I pay taxes….

  • Phil Johnson

    Trying to track the source of some of this dreck is like trapping an eel blindfolded. There is no authoritative citation to the generic, uncited-to “Scientists at NASA and the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration
    (NOAA) colluded with press officers to create deceitful press releases
    that propped up the former president’s agenda.”

    Also, the “Retired principle climate scientist Dr. John Bates testified before a
    House Committee in February claiming that the NOAA was manipulating
    data.” is without citation to authority. When, where exactly? this quote, with the “principal” spelled incorrectly, was also cited in a following article from Liberty News, which unabashedly published this article without fact-checking it — or the citations that allegedly support it.

    Those are even more elusive and I ran out of time and patience. Suffice it to say that my suspicions about the motive and learning of these authors have not been allayed.

    Grace and peace,
    aures lupi