"Was the data that was replaced and lines modified fact or not?"
Hard to say - your english seems to be struggling. If you are suggesting some data was replaced or modified I guess you'd have to:
1) provide evidence of that; and,
2) give us some idea what on earth you are talking about.
My answer was "no"- neither fact or not, because this seems to be a figment of your imagination, with no reference to any particular context.
Preferably you provide that evidence to a peer reviewed climate journal, because I am not interested in doing forensic analysis in pursuit of your imaginary faults. If you've got a point I am sure you can prove it in the same forums that every scientist is required to present their arguments and evidence. When you paper is accepted and published and lauded, pop back and let us know.
"Are you saying the data from 1960 to 2000 on the three separate samples provided are incorrect because they all happened to be measured with non calibrated equipment at different times and locations?"
Hard to say, no idea what data you are talking about, nor what uncalibrated equipment. It hardly seems likely you'd be talking about anything from peer reviewed scientific work. But, again, if you believe you can show something was wrong the proper place for that would be via peer reviewed scientific journal response to whatever you are criticising.
