In what it calls “Climategate II,” the London Daily Mail tabloid published an expose of data manipulation in preparation of the so-called “Pausebuster Paper,” which purported to erase the awkward “pause” in warming beginning in 1998, where temperatures didn’t conform to the computer models, refusing to show the rates of “warming” which the modelers desired. Climategate I, also by the Daily Mail, was the leaking of the e-mails (also showing data manipulation) of climate scientists at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

Dr. John Bates, a top scientist just retired from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), has come forward with what the Daily Mail calls “irrefutable evidence” of manipulation, charging that lead author of the duplicitous paper, Thomas Karl, specifically chose unreliable data-sets for his “evidence,” to falsely indicate “maximized warming.” That paper, published in the June 2015 issue of Science, was heralded by Obama, Cameron, and the Greater British Greens in general, in the run-up to the Paris Climate talks later that year.

Specifically, says the Mail, “The sea dataset used by Thomas Karl and his colleagues — known as Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperatures version 4, or ERSSTv4, tripled the warming trend over the sea during the years 2000-2014 from just 0.036C per decade — as stated in version 3 — to 0.099C per decade. Individual measurements in some parts of the globe had increased by about 0.1C and this resulted in the dramatic increase of the overall global trend published by the Pausebuster paper. “

Compounding the fraud, Karl and his team then “adjusted” the data-set of temperature readings from floating bouys (considered much more reliable, since ships act as their own source of heat) and “adjusted” it upwards a full 0.12 degrees Centegrade, to make it “conform” to the chosen data from ships. In addition, the crew “ignored” another data-set, this one from satellites reading mid-atmosphere temperatures, which also did not fit their desired outcome. Another set — land-based data — suffered from computer software flaws which produced inconsistent, unreliable results.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) is currently investigating that specific NOAA paper from his Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. Smith was ridiculed for subpoenaing the “scientists,” even though Karl had since left Washington. As Smith explained it to the Daily Caller, “Dr. Bates’ revelations and NOAA’s obstruction certainly lend credence to what I’ve expected all along — that the Karl study used flawed data, was rushed to publication in an effort to support the president’s [Obama’s] climate change agenda, and ignored NOAA’s own standards for scientific study. The Committee thanks Dr. Bates, a Department of Commerce Gold Medal winner for creating and implementing a standard to produce and preserve climate data, for exposing the previous administration’s efforts to push their costly climate agenda at the expense of scientific integrity,” Smith said.

Ironically, that medal was given to Bates by Obama.