If you ever get the idea that Wikipedia is useful
remember that it takes Global Warming as a foregone conclusion.
I especially like the tagline on the Discussion page:
This is not a forum for general discussion of editors’ personal beliefs about global warming.
Any such messages will be deleted.
There are a few little comments interspersed here and there by people who aren’t’ true believers, but it’s plain that they’ll be thrown out soon. One comment, by this guy, was straightforward enough that I followed his link, he seems to have an OK weblog.
There’s also a comment someone makes about “near record” decreasesin arctic ice, and another commentor mentions that NO mention is made of “Near record” increases in Antarctic ice. So there are people with smarts out there. Just not in control.
[…] unknown wrote an interesting post today!.Here’s a quick excerptremember that it takes Global Warming as a foregone conclusion. I especially like the tagline on the Discussion page:. This is not a forum for general discussion of editors’ personal beliefs about global warming. … […]
Wikipedia is an interesting thing. There are some things it is exceptionally good at in the area of information. For instance look up various wines and beers…
When it comes to politics and the mix of politics and science (which is what most “scientific studies” happen to be nowdays) it can provide you with insight into the prevailing pc thought – but not much else.
While I find it interesting and it has helped point me in the right direction for some types of information, I take everything I read there with a grain of salt – whether I believe they are correct or not.
Back in the day, when the Modern Language Association appeared to be the center of evil in the world, it was opined by all and sundry near and far that you would never see that crap in the hard sciences.
That science (and, by extension, engineering) were based on FACTS (dammit!) and none of that airy-fairy, artsy-farsty hand-waving BS would fly there.
Those crewcut guys with their sliderules and pocket protectors would just kick the ass of any hippie who tried to politicize science.
‘Member that?
Never the types to forego a challenge, the Left…
M
wiki is soooo biased. the entries just note matter of fact the left wing agenda. i seriously think about trying to edit it myself sometimes. but i think the usefulness of wiki has been tainted beyond repair.
Just as Sir Issac Newton said, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page
Mark, the problem is that the guys with crewcuts and slipsticks are mostly either dead or retired now.
The hippies have replaced them.
Just as the hippies will be replaced in the not too distant future by the intellectual and moral heirs of the guys with the crewcuts and the slipsticks…
http://www.coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2007/07/table-of-conten.html
If you want reasoned about Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory, this is the place. Also, the rest of the blog is pretty darn good, as well. I don’t agree with everything he says (Actually, except for his open immigration stance, I’m hard pressed to disagree with him), but I can respect a man who can logically support his arguments.
Dan
GAH! Reasoned DISCUSSION… discussion of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
Please accept my post-posting edit. Sheesh.
D