Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1 "Wiki Is a liar:Climategate at Wikipedia." 
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Lawrence Solomon: Climategate at Wikipedia (Wiki is a liar)

    Since my Saturday column described how Wikipedia editors have been feverishly rewriting climate history over much of the decade, fair-minded Wikipedians have been doing their best to correct the record.

    No sooner than they remove gross distortions, however, than the distortions are replaced. William Connolley, a Climategate member and Wikipedia’s chief climate change propagandist, remains as active as ever. How does Wikipedia work and how does Connolley and his co-conspirators exercise control?

    How does Wikipedia work and how does Connolley and his co-conspirators exercise control? Take Wikipedia’s page for Medieval Warm Period, as an example. In the three days following my column’s appearance, this page alone was changed some 50 times in battles between Connolley’s crew and those who want a fair presentation of history.
    SNIP
    With the hockey stick graphs so thoroughly discredited, you’d think they would become a footnote to a discussion of the Medieval Warm Period, or an object of amusement and curiosity. But no, on the Wikipedia page for the Medieval Warm Period, the hockey stick graph appears prominently at the top, as if it is settled science.
    SNIP
    Because the hockey stick graph has become an icon of deceit and in no way an authority worthy of being cited, fair-minded Wikipedians tried to remove the graph from the page, as can be seen here. Exactly two minutes later, one of Connelley’s associates replaced the graph, restoring the page to Connelley’s original version, as seen here.

    Battles like this occurred on numerous fronts, until just after midnight on Dec 22, when Connolley reimposed his version of events and, for good measure, froze the page to prevent others from making changes -- and to prevent the public, even in two-minute windows, from realizing that today’s temperatures look modest in comparison to those in the past. In the World of Wikipedia, seen as here, the hockey stick graph, and Connolley’s version of history, still rules.

    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...wikipedia.aspx
    .........................................
    http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...#ixzz0avnieqY0
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    42,485
    How can this be? Wiki is Wilbur's bible.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Apache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Tree rats are watching you
    Posts
    7,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Rockntractor View Post
    How can this be? Wiki is Wilbur's bible.
    Wilbur, is your answer right there :eek::p
    Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
    Ronald Reagan

    We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
    Ronald Reagan

    R.I.P. Crockspot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    What makes anyone think those skeptic editors are in the right, claiming that temperature reconstructions are "a deception"? Why are they automatically trustworthy?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member hampshirebrit's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    TehYuk
    Posts
    3,727
    Wilbur, you may be (well let's face it, you are) a total knob-end on the AGW issue, but I'm glad you're back on CU.
    20010911
    nie vergessen, nie verzeihen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •