The Opinionator (At Wikipedia, one man engineers the debate on global warming ...)

Financial Post ^ | May 4, 2008 | Lawrence Solomon

[CedarDave]

Next to Al Gore, William Connolley may be the world's most influential person in the global warming debate. He has a PhD in mathematics and worked as a climate modeller, but those accomplishments don't explain his influence ...

~~snip~~

But Connolley is a big shot on Wikipedia ... William Connolley's opinions ... count for a great deal at Wikipedia, even though some might not think them particularly worthy of note. "It is his view that there is a consensus in the scientific community about climate change topics such as global warming, and that the various reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summarize this consensus," states his Wikipedia page, in the section called "Biography."

Connolley is not only a big shot on Wikipedia, he's a big shot at Wikipedia -- an administrator with unusual editorial clout. Using that clout, this 40-something scientist of minor relevance gets to tear down scientists of great accomplishment. Because Wikipedia has become the single biggest reference source in the world, and global warming is one of the most sought-after subjects, the ability to control information on Wikipedia by taking down authoritative scientists is no trifling matter.

One such scientist is Fred Singer, the First Director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service, the recipient of a White House commendation for his early design of space satellites; the recipient of a NASA commendation for research on particle clouds ...

Under Connolley's supervision, Singer is relentlessly smeared, and has been for years, as a kook who believes in Martians and a hack in the pay of the oil industry. When a smear is inadequate, or when a fair-minded Wikipedian tries to correct a smear, Connolley and his cohorts are there to widen the smear or remove the correction, often rebuking the Wikipedian in the process.

[CedarDave]

Solomon concludes the article by noting that Wikipedia has rules and a code of civility that article editors are supposed to follow, but that "those rules and codes don't apply to Connolley, or to those he favours."

Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and Urban Renaissance Institute, and author of The Deniers.

[Havok]

what an a-hole

[VeniVidiVici]

Connolley no longer works as a climate modeller -- he now works as a software engineer for a company called Cambridge Silicon Radio. And as an engineer of opinion at Wikipedia. - Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe and Urban Renaissance Institute, and author of The Deniers.

I hope his handlers check his code for backdoors, smears, childish statements and innuendo. Looking at his childish behavior on Wikipedia there stands a good chance it is there.

Something that could come back and bite Cambridge Silicon at a later date.

[CedarDave]

Do you know if Solomon’s C-SPAN interview is archived on their website. My cable service doesn’t provide C-SPAN 2.

[The Great RJ]

Connolley must be part of the global warming Inquisition who seeks to root out heretics that deny the dogma of St.Algore.

[CedarDave]

Global warming PING!!

[CedarDave]

Connolley must be part of the global warming Inquisition who seeks to root out heretics that deny the dogma of St. Algore.

Indeed. That seems like his current mission.

[ClearCase_guy]

Wikipedia has it's uses -- if I forget what year the Battle of Poitiers was fought, I would go to wikipedia and I don't think I'd be steered wrong.

But Global Warming?? On wikipedia?? Why would I believe ANYTHING they say??

[muawiyah]

William Connolley sounds like some sort of Stasi ~

[SpaceBar]

And school kids across America forced to write a report on global warming after a compulsory viewing of An Inconvenient Truth go to Wikipedia only to have the lie further reinforced.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

The Great Global Warming Swindle Video - Back On The Net!!(Mash Here!)

---

[Lancey Howard]

There needs to be a serious competitor to Wikipedia - - something more honest and reliable.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

Agreed. Wikipedia is an adequate resource for non-controversial topics. But anything controversial at all, don’t even bother. And the problem is, this doesn’t just extend to things like Islam or global warming. Try looking up information about Macedonia sometime, and you’ll see interesting edit wars going on between Macedonians (FYROM) who are adamant that the ancient Macedonians were NOT Greek, and Greeks who think they were.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

There needs to be a serious competitor to Wikipedia - - something more honest and reliable.

There already are - they're called "encyclopedias".

The problem with Wikipedia is that when you have an information source which anyone can edit, everyone WILL. I'd rather stick to trusting sources which are peer-reviewed and proofread by authorities in their fields.

[caver]

I’ve yet to understand the fascination with Wikipedia. It’s the same as using the New York Times as my source of information. Why would I do that?

[rlmorel]

Heck, I had someone point me to a Wired article about a piece of military hardware. Now, Wired is okay, but not my source for things military.

I agree with you completely on Wikipedia.

[Chesterbelloc]

Wikipedia does seem to have a “some pigs are more equal than others” problem.

[Arkinsaw]

Wikipedia does seem to have a “some pigs are more equal than others” problem.

It's not just Global Warming. The same thing happens with anyone's pet issue. People patrol their little fiefdom and beat back interlopers.

The NPOV policy just simply cannot work when confronted with human nature. The response to the fact that it won't work is to put more and more bureaucratic "fixes" around it. More rules, and more procedures to try to make the fundamentally flawed foundation work.

Reminds me a lot of the Soviet Union being converted from communist idealism to inefficient dogmatic bureaucracy...as a result of communist idealism and the reality of human nature colliding.

[Lancey Howard]

There already are - they're called "encyclopedias".

Thanks! I looked up "encyclopedias" - - Interesting!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia

[Publius6961]

What kind of a fool needs Wikepedia as anything other than a starting point for learning about something?

Certainly, no normal, educated, informed person uses it as their sole reference...

[Publius6961]

What kind of a fool needs Wikepedia as anything other than a starting point for learning about something?

Certainly, no normal, educated, informed person uses it as their sole reference...

[SW6906]

"And school kids across America forced to write a report on global warming after a compulsory viewing of An Inconvenient Truth go to Wikipedia only to have the lie further reinforced."

My daughter's elementary school does not allow using Wikipedia as a source.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Global Warming Scam News & Views

• Fight Global Warming Lies
• Beam me to Planet Gore !
• WeatherQuestions.Com (Dr. Roy Spencer, Official Climatologist, EIB Network)
• Reasoned Thinking Comes From Cooler Heads
• Schnitt's Global Warming Files
• Rush Limbaugh's E-Stack "Global Warming Hoax & Religion of Environmentalism" (Rush 24/7 subscription required)

Entrepreneur's Compilation of
The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet

• Part I ............. Documentaries
• Part II ...................... Lectures
• Part III ...................... Debates
• Part IV ............. Short Videos
• Part V ........................ Humor
• Part VI...Updates & Additions

[Entrepreneur]

Read more...

Wikipedia's zealots: The thought police at the supposedly independent site are fervently enforcing the climate orthodoxy

[CedarDave]

I saw that article. Thanks.

[steelyourfaith]

"Do you know if Solomon’s C-SPAN interview is archived on their website. My cable service doesn’t provide C-SPAN 2.

Yes.

Here it is.

[editor-surveyor]

Why do we try to legitimize wikipedia?

It’s apropaganda site, and nothing else.

Bury it!

[editor-surveyor]

"There needs to be a serious competitor to Wikipedia - - something more honest and reliable."

The porn shop down the street?

[VOA]

(additional info)
The BookTV segment on “The Deniers” will be reairing Tuesday May 27
at 3:15 AM EASTERN (set your video recorders!) on BookTV (C-Span2, weekends).
(This is on the tail-end of the Memorial Day Weekend)

Easier option is clicking the red “WATCH” button; if you have dial-up
you’ll probably get audio, but choppy stop-action video.

I watched the show last weekend; the discussion about the slanders
and defamation on Wikipedia occured (IIRC) about 25-30 minutes into
the presentation. Definitely worth watching, even if Solomon’s initial
reading presentation is not too scintillating.

http://www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=9369&SectionName=Politics&PlayMedia=No