Second expert panel shows "ClimateGate" was a ClimateSham

You see, a couple lines of programming do not constitute a report. Because it was printed does not mean it was used and because it says "fudge factor" does not mean anything was fudged in the report that was eventually produced. When I was beginning work on my thesis in the optics lab, we occasionally used the term "fudge factor" and often labelled our measurements in "arbitrary data units" to indicate that we were still in the midst of the process of calibrating measurements from photodetectors, in volts, to incident optical power in milliwatts.

This is not a matter of minor wrongdoing, nor of "merely" a few isolated cases of wrongdoing. This is a case of no wrongdoing whatsoever, except by the data thieves and their corporate sponsors.

It is now proven that scientists did absolutely nothing wrong and have suffered the most malicious, intentional defamation based on lies about the contents of stolen property. The "fudge factor" quote you stupidly parrot is the kind of language real scientists use when we're frustrated and commiserating with one another about the tedium of our work. It connotes the annoyance of having to spend literally weeks establishing a multiplication factor that does nothing more complicated than a decoder ring. But one does have to firmly establish exactly the right ratio before submitting one's work for publication. And until one has exactly the right figures, "fudge factor" is a more polite term than they were probably inclined to use. But we are professionals.
About Climate Change
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost