The climate debate is intensifying again as Democrats try to build support for the Green New Deal while opponents push back on efforts to overhaul the U.S. economy. 

Behind the urgency for the green new deal is a government report showing a climate tipping point around 2030 unless drastic action is taken.  Behind that report is a mountain of climate data, much of which is compiled by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, otherwise known as NOAA.

But some scientists are wary of the ominous climate forecasts since they never seem to come true.  But they're also blowing the whistle on the data behind those projections.

"The models simply are wrong every single time, so what they keep doing is adjusting the data they put into the model to try and approximate what's actually happening," said Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg.  He is also author of "The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science."

And how is this done?

"What they do is they lower the historic readings.  In other words, they go back and say, 'Well, these readings were not taken with good instruments at bad sites and so on.  So we have to adjust them.  Every single adjustment they make is to lower the temperatures from years ago.

"It then makes the apparent increase in temperature much greater than it actually is.  So this is the kind of corruption that's going on," said Ball.

Ball says these temperatures are not done surreptitiously but out in the open with the explanation that scientists are simply revising data, much like the government revises economic reports when additional information comes in.

"That's what they're saying but the changes they're making are not justified.  They're done to simply make sure that their forecasts are correct.  That's a different thing," said Ball.

Even with the allegedly manipulated data, Ball says the United Nations-sponsored scientists still can't make their forecasts come true.  In fact, he says scientists cannot even agree on global temperatures in a given year, differing by as much as a half-degree Celsius.

"If you've got a difference between two different agencies of half a degree Celsius just on one year's data, it illustrates how laughable the data is and how they're producing it," said Ball.

"I mean this is a total farce in terms of claiming any degree of accuracy or knowing what they're doing.  I don't know of any job in the world where you can be so wrong so often, and still keep your job," said Ball.

Listen to the full podcast to hear Ball further explain the cherry picking of data and why he believes we're heading deeper and deeper into a cooling pattern that will further confound efforts to convince the world that global temperatures are soaring out of control.