Posted on 12/21/2009 7:22:06 PM PST by Man50D
A new report reveals a British scientist and Wikipedia administrator rewrote climate history, editing more than 5,000 unique articles in the online encyclopedia to cover traces of a medieval warming period – something Climategate scientists saw as a major roadblock in the effort to spread the global warming message.
Recently hacked e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit expose a plot to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period, a 400-year era that began around A.D. 1000, the Financial Post's Lawrence Solomon reports.
The warming period is said to have improved agriculture and increased life spans, but scientists at the center of the Climategate e-mail scandal believed the era undermined their goal of spreading concern about global warming as it pertains to today's climate.
Solomon noted the warming period presented a dilemma long before the Climategate e-mail scandal.
A 1995 e-mail predating the recent Climate Research Unit scandal was sent to geophysicist David Deming. A major climate-change researcher told Deming, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period."
Some scientists later expressed concern about erasing the period.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Heck anyone can go on Wikipedia and check out all the changes, when they were made, who made them, what exactly was added, what exactly was removed — it’s all there and recorded.
If anyone thinks that something was removed that should be added back in — you can do it. You just have to provide the reference and then you write it back in, giving the reference. It’s not that hard to do.
So... go to it, if you want to... :-)
and now...time to get rid of the present warm period.
SWOOSH!
that’s the sound of me flushing climatologists down the shitter!
I already did that once on israel...by mistake. I thought I was submitting a suggestion. I didnt’ realize everything I typed would instantly appear on the official wiki entry for israel for all to see.
"Remember Winston, East Asia has always been at war with Oceania."
And I see the owner is begging for bucks to keep Wikipedia alive … just let this abomination die.
Hmmm if I were you I would do some research before making such pronouncements expecially when talking about Wikipedia and Climate change.
See link: Lawrence Solomon: Wikipedia’s climate doctor-Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles
21:42, 15 November 2004 William M. Connolley (talk | contribs) (Remove rubbish. Look at Temperature record of the past 1000 years where this has been addressed for some time now.)
17:47, 5 February 2005 William M. Connolley (talk | contribs) (Rm unnecessary “cooling” bit; rm gratuitous questioning of IPCC; restore qualifier of Dalys stuff)
10:09, 16 November 2004 William M. Connolley (talk | contribs) (Move unseemly fighting over IPCC history to own page so it doesn’t deface the MWP page.)
# 23:01, 15 November 2004 William M. Connolley (talk | contribs) (Rewrite, using t-rec-1000-y textt, since Ed refuses to read it otherwise. And its probably useful to have it here too.)
# (cur) (prev) 22:05, 15 November 2004 Ed Poor (talk | contribs) (The United Nations climate panel initially accepted the existence of the Medieval Warm Period (see Temperature record of the past 1000 years) - NPOV requires mentioning dissenteng views, doc.)
and so on.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Medieval_Warm_Period&dir=prev&action=history
Perhaps you missed this part?
The hits and the fraud just keeps coming...
Yeah - ‘Wikipedia’ is a good source of info...
Anyone can edit anything- and not political bias here... no sirreee
You dude that did the editing had Wiki admin rights. Banning up to 2000 other contributors along the way.
The central problem in the GW crisis is the tree-ring data.
The scientists measure and the tree ring width, and then have tried to reason that the amount of growth is an indicator of the temperature.
This is a mistake. The growth is a combination of factors.
Not all trees respond the same to these factors, either.
Without using a large number of trees to get an average, and without comparative temperatures to show a history of correlation, they are worthless.
The tree-ring data is good , really , for one thing. It counts the numbers of years , plus or minus a few.
It is not an accurate recording of temperature. It might be a good indicator of C02, though.
I already did that once on israel...by mistake. I thought I was submitting a suggestion. I didnt’ realize everything I typed would instantly appear on the official wiki entry for israel for all to see.
LOL... yeah, I imagine it was... :-)
And I see the owner is begging for bucks to keep Wikipedia alive … just let this abomination die.
It won't die, because it's a good information resource. All that is necessary is for conservatives to get just as involved as anyone else. Just like we work on elections, you can work on Wikipedia, too... :-)
Hmmm if I were you I would do some research before making such pronouncements expecially when talking about Wikipedia and Climate change.
I saw and read that, but you realize that we're talking about now and it's a fine time to take care of all this stuff... so I say "get to it"... :-)
And now we’ve got material and resources to rebut it and get it back in again, so I say, “go to it” for anyone who has references and resources to use, plus time to do it and work at it.
This is the best time to do it, since this has come out in the news...
Perhaps you missed this part?
I didn't miss it. I'm saying that because you read it, and others read it -- this is the perfect time to correct it... :-)
You dude that did the editing had Wiki admin rights. Banning up to 2000 other contributors along the way.
I understand that, and this is what makes it a perfect time for conservatives to set things straight. You've got the information now to make things right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.