Tuesday, June 26, 2007

The Greening of Wikipedia

The corruption of definitions. Remember "open source" knowledge? Wikipedia as the "mind dump" of the world? What's to prevent a government, party or faction from taking ownership of an open source project? Slashdot reports the German government is training contributors to write hundreds of articles about renewable resources in the Internet encyclopedia. "The German chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring a Wikipedian to coordinate the efforts. 'The challenge will be to motivate experts who have done good work in other projects to get involved in the community lexicon." But with government funding driving the posting of articles on Wikipedia at some point the community lexicon may become indistinguishable from the lexicon of the German Green Party.

Speaking of redefining the terms, Oxblog notes that some environmentalists have a solution to those who would deny the existence of Global Warming. Lock them up. Why? Because Climate Denial=Holocaust Denial. Accept the premise, accept the conclusion.

Guardian columnist and author George Monbiot wrote: "Almost everywhere, climate change denial now looks as stupid and unacceptable as Holocaust denial" ... Margo Kingston wrote: "David Irving is under arrest in Austria for Holocaust denial. Perhaps there is a case for making climate change denial an offence. It is a crime against humanity, after all."

Nothing follows.


Blogger 3Case said...

Stupid, arrogant people.

6/26/2007 09:05:00 PM  
Blogger Dymphna said...

A chapter from my Barnes and Noble stories:

I was in one of their places grabbing a latte and looking in the cookbooks and the science section. Too lazy to walk all the way down to history.

In one of the big aisles they had put up a display table featuring books on global warming. Not one single book -- out of twenty or so -- was critical. They were all in the "Henny-Penny-the-sky-is-falling" mode.

What can you say? It is B&N in a blue town. However, I went up to the desk and complained anyway. Politely, of course. I didn't take out my Uzi and mess up the windows or anything.

The next week they had added "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism". The P.I. G. has a little oinker as its icon. That ought to shake loose a few teeth.

Ironically, just a mile or so away from this bookstore is the office of our State Climatologist, Patrick J. Michaels. Mister Michaels (no Dr designation at UVA) has this to say about the subject:

The core issue over the next ten years will not be "How much will the climate warm?" but, rather, "Why did it warm so little?" My research also leads me to believe that the next decade will see the emergence of a paradigm of "robust earth," as opposed to the fashionable "fragility" concept. The papers listed below provide some evidence for these observations. It is entirely possible that human influence on the atmosphere is not necessarily deleterious and that it is simply another component of the dynamic planet. Tomorrow's scientific and science-policy leaders will have to recognize this verity in our attempts to maintain a productive and diverse planet.

From his page at the school

6/26/2007 09:20:00 PM  
Blogger PierreLegrand said...

The argument shouldn't be about whether it is getting warmer or colder but why do they believe they have the right to stifle opinion and what are we going to do about it.

6/26/2007 10:27:00 PM  
Blogger Charles said...

Most of the arguments are a function of where the technology is right now. However, right now the technology is changing. Here's a pretty good portent of how rapid and profound technological change will be in the next decade or so. In this experiment a Florida inventor uses the RF of platinum to fool water into "thinking" there's a catalyst present --as in carbon reformation--so that it separates into H & O2 in the presence of NaCl.

He burns saltwater.

Sound uninteresting? There's two amazing propositions at work here. First, unlike electrolysis, this process is net positive for energy production. Second. There's an immense number of catalytic reactions that may be cheaply immitated with radio waves. For example, most of the expense of hydrogen fuel cell bateries is in the cost of platinum. Eliminate platinum, and hydrogen fuel cell cars are suddenly competitive with gasoline.

Judge for yourself here.

6/26/2007 11:39:00 PM  
Blogger Sparks fly said...

Is it not possible to get the government money out of the "Great Global Warming"...hysteria,... bubble?

Global Warming is a tax. It is a United Nations tax which, without a doubt,if enacted, will be used to fund a global army. Everyone knows this, right? Global Warming must be enforced if that's the law. Right? The first Global warming dollar would go toward enforcement of Global Warming.

There is no real global warming. Most of the people who are pushing this are doing this for our own good. They know we would never vote to end the United States so, poor dears, we'll just have to call it something else. It is for their own good. They'll see, when it's all done, they will thank us. We will be seen as benign heroes who saw what had to be done and got it done; for the children, for peace. Won't it be grand. We will have a One World Government of our very own.

The whole world would become a low security prison. Let' see who would be president? Bill Clinton, or Blair or maybe George Bush,of course, Algore! Don't you hear them tempting these old men in the MSM almost daily. Who is doing this offering. Just exactly what are they offering? Do you know anyone who wants to expand the powers of the U.N.? Who is able to do that?

Acts 17:26 "and HE (GOD) made from one (Adam) every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation..."

GOD has set in place many nations for our protection: if one nation is nuts we can move to another. And the powers of darkness struggle against GOD to form all the nations into One so that no person can escape, or get away from that demonic bureaucracy once established. You saw the way the police went after Bernie Getz. They don't go after Osama like that.

Hitler's Third Reich was a One World fantasy. And look at the damage that one small nation did in the world. Imagine what evil would follow if Algore were able to hijack America into a One World scheme with this Global Warming nonsense!

Billions of tax dollars are being spent to promote this dark madness. Get that money and redirect into something practical like a tax cut.

The 4th of July is coming and I have never felt so patriotic.

6/27/2007 01:09:00 AM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...

"Then the time has come for you to take the last step. You must love Big Brother. It is not enough to obey him; you must love him."

6/27/2007 04:12:00 AM  
Blogger Pascal Fervor said...


We are at war with global warming. We have always been at war with global warming. Fascism is our friend.

A boot, stomping on a human face, forever.

Good question. What do you propose we do about it?

6/27/2007 04:52:00 AM  
Blogger geoffb said...

We see once again how the left tangles and mangles language for it's own purposes. These three terms are used as if they mean the same thing.
"Climate Change", "Global Warming" and "Man Made Global Warming". They are not.
"Climate Change", the history of the Earth over hundreds of millions of years shows the climate is constantly changing.

"Global Warming", the Earth may or may not be warming. Since we can see that other bodies in the solar system (Mars, Pluto etc.) are warming, Earth may be doing so too. So far the evidence is weak.

"Man Made Global Warming" This is the one the left means when they use the other terms. Getting this one believed as a fact without any evidence is why they are tangling the language. By using these terms as interchangeable if you can "prove" the climate is changing (which it always does) then you have "proved" "Man Made Global Warming" and can then institute government controls over every aspect of human life. That has always been the real goal of the leftist elites, raw power.

6/27/2007 05:46:00 AM  
Blogger Karridine said...

Lock up "Global Warming" skeptics?

Holocaust = Past: Verifiable

"Warming" = Future: Possible, but NOT certain!

/maroons! Lock ME up, I dare ya!

6/27/2007 05:47:00 AM  
Blogger Stephen Renico said...


Room 101 for you!

6/27/2007 06:07:00 AM  
Blogger Clear Desk said...

Their semantics are impressive. The original fear was 'Global Warming' (after the pre-original fear of 'Global Cooling'). But now that even their data shows that it is not the ENTIRE globe that is warming, they have seemlessly adopted the term "Climate Change". So if you don't believe in global warming then you are denying global climate change. Does anyone know which period in the earth's history that the climate WASN'T changing?

6/27/2007 06:36:00 AM  
Blogger PeterBoston said...

How did what humans exhale and that which nourishes plants get to be pollution in the first place?

Notice that the conversation has moved from Global Warming to Climate Change? This one is a big loser for the lefties.

6/27/2007 07:40:00 AM  
Blogger Das said...

Wouldn't America's protected wetlands be a factor in global warming? Wetlands, as I understand it, are a prime source of methane gas...

6/27/2007 08:07:00 AM  
Blogger eggplant said...

Equating anthropogenic global warming skepticism to Holocaust denial is moonbat stupidity at its worst. Proof of anthropogenic global warming must pass two separate tests:

First, one must demonstrate that there is indeed global warming. I actually believe there is some evidence for this.

Secondly, one demonstrate that the observed global warming is due to human activity and not simply to natural Milankovith cycles.

This second test has not been satisfied and probably can not be without more data (we are currently near a Milankovith cycle peak based upon Antarctic ice core samples.)

What has been demonstrated by this moonbat stupidity about global warming is a hidden political agenda, e.g. watermelon environmentalism.

6/27/2007 04:25:00 PM  
Blogger Sigivald said...

A closer parsing of Kingston's words reveal something worse.

She's not calling climate change denial something akin to Holocaust Denial.

She's likening it, as a "Crime Against Humanity", to the Holocaust itself.

The mere act of denying that human beings are causing (significant, dangerous, specifically warming) climate change is equivalent to the deliberate slaughter of millions because of their ethnicity.

On the other hand, it's Kingston, so it's not like she has any moral authority to lose.

6/27/2007 09:25:00 PM  
Blogger Mannning said...

Step at a time the real scientists are getting heard. Their message? Climate temperature is a variable that courses through several kinds of cycles, and there is no need for fear. We can cope very nicely, thank you.

Fear-mongers, please stand down!

6/28/2007 02:06:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Powered by Blogger