It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
www.wnd.com...
History of climate gets 'erased' online
More than 5,000 entries tailored to hype global-warming agenda
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.
Another case of revisionist history, tailored to fit the needs of the GW advocates. Their version of the scientific method consists of throwing out anything that does not fit neatly into their misguided theories. That include not only data, but rewriting 400 years of history to try to erase the Medieval Warming Period that occurred starting at around 1000CE.
For those that prefer REAL history, rather than GW revisionist lies, please refer to this link:
www.theresilientearth.com.../medieval-warm-period-rediscovered
An excerpt follows:
Medieval Warm Period Rediscovered
Submitted by Doug L. Hoffman on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 12:38
A recent article in the journal Science has provided a new, detailed climate record for the Medieval Climate Anomaly (MCA), also know as the Medieval Warm Period. It was the most recent pre-industrial warm period, noted in Europe and elsewhere around the globe. The researchers present a 947-year-long multi-decadal North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) reconstruction and find a persistent positive NAO during the MCA. The interesting thing is that the MCA had basically been removed from the climate record by Michael Mann's infamous “hockey stick” history graph that was adopted by the IPCC a decade ago.
More interesting, Trouet et al., based their work in part on a tree-ring–based drought reconstruction for Morocco (1049–2002) and a millennial-length speleothem-based precipitation proxy for Scotland (900–1993), a methodology similar to Mann's work. Unlike Mann, these researchers found significant climate warming during the MCA. According to the report: “The Morocco and Scotland reconstructions contain substantial multi-decadal variability that is characterized by antiphase oscillatory behavior over the last millennium.” Their reconstruction can be seen in the figure from the article seen below.
I suggest that those that are interested in the details, please peruse the link, as it provides charts and data that are quite interesting.
In concluding, the link concludes:
The bottom line? Once again the climate models used by the IPCC and other climate catastrophists are shown to be inaccurate, incomplete and not up to the job of predicting future climatic conditions.
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by seethelight
wiki edits can be undone
representative example
note the most recent edits - to remove vandalism
what do you think that means ??????????
Originally posted by Mindmelding
This thread gives insight into the mind of a psychopath, for what we have here is an aspect of ponerology.
Psychopaths are ego motivated and form no love based attachments in their life. They suffer from emotional atrophy, and as such are stuck in the narcissistic "me me me" phase of a 3 year old. This has some astonishing implications, one of which is that they, the psychopaths, have no concept of objective reality. They function on a basis of declared reality, what they declare as real is what they think of, process, as real. This is why they are such pathological liars, because they, out of a disease of the emotions which affects their thought processes, literally have no concept of truth.
This episode, the complete rewriting of history with no respect to truth so as to promote a personal agenda, is typical of how a psychopath operates, and although there is a possibility that the person involved is a normal human with simply acquired psychopathic behavior patterns, I think it's more probable that this is actually a case of full blown psychopathy.
We can't trust recorded history much further back than a century, because it has been rewritten by psychopaths to further their own agendas, their combine of lies. This is a stable dynamic in human history, there are at this moment possibly around 350 million psychopaths in the total human population, spread out through all racial profiles more or less equally, although specific subgroups, such as for example the askhenazi, may or may not have slightly higher incidences they don't really alter the overall picture or dynamic. This is not a racial issue, it's a species issue. We have all met psychopaths. And I dare say that if we try we will all remember those vain, self important, lieing and manipulating types that always seem eager to take credit for the work of other. We have all met the parasite, if we remember we are all aware of the main problem behind human society and civilization.
This wikipedia and climategate related example is paradigmatic, kudos to the OP. Star and flag, so people become more aware of what is going on each and every day, all over the world. They live, they lie. It's time to wake up and free ourselves from their influence, throw them out into the sun and let them deal with their own worthlessness. For our own evolution into a better, more loving and balanced, species.
... Wikipedia is now the most widely used and influential reference source on the Internet and therefore in the world, with more than 50 million unique visitors a month.
In theory Wikipedia is a “people’s encyclopedia” written and edited by the people who read it - anyone with an Internet connection. So on controversial topics, one might expect to see a broad range of opinion.
Not on global warming. On global warming we get consensus, Gore-style: a consensus forged by censorship, intimidation, and deceit.
I first noticed this when I entered a correction to a Wikipedia page on the work of Naomi Oreskes, author of the now-infamous paper, published in the prestigious journal Science, claiming to have exhaustively reviewed the scientific literature and found not one single article dissenting from the alarmist version of global warming.
Of course Oreskes’s conclusions were absurd, and have been widely ridiculed. I myself have profiled dozens of truly world-eminent scientists whose work casts doubt on the Gore-U.N. version of global warming. Following the references in my book The Deniers, one can find hundreds of refereed papers that cast doubt on some aspect of the Gore/U.N. case, and that only scratches the surface....
Originally posted by Long Lance
i can corroborate this, there's at least one other site (MSM net presence, though) featuring an article on the subject:
... Wikipedia is now the most widely used and influential reference source on the Internet and therefore in the world, with more than 50 million unique visitors a month.
In theory Wikipedia is a “people’s encyclopedia” written and edited by the people who read it - anyone with an Internet connection. So on controversial topics, one might expect to see a broad range of opinion.
Not on global warming. On global warming we get consensus, Gore-style: a consensus forged by censorship, intimidation, and deceit.
I first noticed this when I entered a correction to a Wikipedia page on the work of Naomi Oreskes, author of the now-infamous paper, published in the prestigious journal Science, claiming to have exhaustively reviewed the scientific literature and found not one single article dissenting from the alarmist version of global warming.
Of course Oreskes’s conclusions were absurd, and have been widely ridiculed. I myself have profiled dozens of truly world-eminent scientists whose work casts doubt on the Gore-U.N. version of global warming. Following the references in my book The Deniers, one can find hundreds of refereed papers that cast doubt on some aspect of the Gore/U.N. case, and that only scratches the surface....
it seems as if Wikipedia's main problem wasn't rogue editors scattering falsehoods throughout the database (noise), but an organised, internal effort to paint any desired (by whom?) picture (bias). such a systematic error appears to become inevitable once a certain threshold is passed as a project grows visible ('critical mass, so to speak).
i think it's time to address that issue rather than proceed with cyclically abandoning such efforts as they become infested by deceit.
Originally posted by seethelight
Originally posted by seethelight
Again, this story isn't true. So I wouldn't worry about it too much.
Originally posted by donhuangenaro
Originally posted by seethelight
this chart you used:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/82569fcce94b.jpg[/atsimg]
is very well explained by Lord Christopher Monckton in this clip (2:20):
and he says it's a fraud...
also, he is scientists too, so I will take your advice and believe him...
Originally posted by Long Lance
Originally posted by seethelight
Again, this story isn't true. So I wouldn't worry about it too much.
no source is trustworthy and i'm not talking about 100%. wikipedia is not an exception and the 'return on investment' is high when you get to influence and control the most used source on the internet.
as the medium's reach grows, so do the stakes. the MSM is just older, not that much different.
His contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 - the correction of a table inserted by IPCC bureaucrats that had overstated tenfold the observed contribution of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets to sea-level rise - earned him the status of Nobel Peace Laureate
Originally posted by seethelight
A) He's not a scientist.
B) He also thinks people with AIDS ahould be put into camps FOREVER.