CLIMATEGATE: Wikibullies as well

We now know, thanks to a whistle-blower, that all the data and anything based on the CRU data is manipulated, massaged and tickled to present a lie. We also NIWA has done the same thing by using only nine sites two of which are remote islands thousands of kilometres from mainland New Zealand.

Now we find out that one of the Climat-nati, one who features extensively in the CRU emails, U.K. scientist and Green Party activist William Connolley undertook to hijack the Climate Change argument on Wikipedia.

Connolley took control of all things climate in the most used information source the world has ever known ? Wikipedia. Starting in February 2003, just when opposition to the claims of the band members were beginning to gel, Connolley set to work on the Wikipedia site. He rewrote Wikipedia?s articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug.11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band. Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world?s most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn?t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it ? more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred ? over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley?s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia?s blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy. With the release of the Climategate Emails, the disappearing trick has been exposed. The glorious Medieval Warm Period will remain in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk to describe how a band of zealots once tried to make it disappear.

That is an astonishing number of edits and his actions to get people banned is appalling. He should now be ostracized and permanently banned from Wikipedia edits. The cleansing disinfectant of bright sunshine is now bringing the utter corruption of the IPCC, the science behind their lies and the corruption of the scientists to the fore.

Now they have given Wikipedia as bad a name as them and covered Wikipedia with the stench of their corruption. I am still a big fan of Wikipedia and agree with Anthony Watts. The whole idea behind Wikipedia is summarised by the founder:

I believe in us. I believe that Wikipedia keeps getting better. That?s the whole idea. One person writes something, somebody improves it a little, and it keeps getting better, over time. If you find it useful today, imagine how much we can achieve together in 5, 10, 20 years.

This is where I agree with Anthony Watts:

In a perfect world, maybe. In a perfect world unicorns frolic in the park, free money falls from the sky, and people are honest and without bias 100% of the time. But when you have Wikibullies, such as Connolley and Peterson, your honor system goes up in smoke. Fact is Jimmy, your honor system is as corrupted as the peer review process is for climate science these days. In my view, don?t give Wikipedia another dime until they make some changes to provide for a more responsible information environment.

Making free reference information available to the public shouldn?t be a battle of wills between Wikibullies with an agenda and the rest of society.

Here?s where to write to complain to Wikipedia:

Wikimedia Foundation

Postal address

Wikimedia Foundation Inc.
149 New Montgomery Street, 3rd Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: +1-415-839-6885
Email: info(at)
Fax: +1-415-882-0495

(note: we get a large number of calls; email or fax is always a better first option)