Little Doubt Remains About Liberal Media Beinng Involved In Global Warming Hoax

Hats off and thanks to source for publishing the following article.  Who would think that Wikipedia would be used as a propaganda tool of the liberal media for political purposes?  It sure isn't supportive of any kind of real scientific search for the truth about global warming.  It is a classic case of "buyer beware".  It is all the more reason to be skeptical and questioning about everything that comes from the mainstream media.

Also, bear in mind that wikipedia is used as a prime source of "knowledge" by our children in public schools.  Is it any wonder why they buy into ridiculous myths like man-caused global warming/climate change?  Wake up people.  The liberal elite and their mainstream media are treating us like mushrooms, keeping us in the dark and feeding us Bull$hit.
Peter

Wikipedia Begins Media Whitewash of Climate Criminal Peter Gleick

Written by John O'Sullivan | February 21 2012

Wikipedia, the “free online encyclopedia,” has set about swiftly whitewashing the self-confessed criminal conduct of climatologist, Dr. Peter Gleick. Skeptics will regard such action as further evidence that the website is an organ of man-made global warming propaganda.

Despite his full public admission to be a co-conspirator in criminal activities against the Heartland Institute, a charity sympathetic to skeptics, Wikipedia is at pains to hide the fact Peter Gleick yesterday admitted to this felony published here at the Huffington Post.

In it’s latest entry (H/T: Paul Sheridan) added today (February 21, 2012) the Wikipedia entry for fraudster, Peter Gleick reads thus:
“On February 20, 2012, Gleick issued a statement in the Huffington Post explaining that he had received anonymous documents in the mail that seemed to contain details on the climate program strategy of The Heartland Institute, a pro-business think tank. He admitted to soliciting and receiving additional material from the Institute "under someone else's name," calling his actions "a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics."^[17] Andrew Revkin wrote at the New York Times that "Gleick has admitted to an act that leaves his reputation in ruins ... " ^[18]”

How many other media outlets that claim to serve the public but are in fact controlled by our self-serving elite, will also engage in this despicable cover up?
Source

#Gator2012-02-21 17:33

Once again, Gleick is not a climatologist. I actually studied climatology at a major university and am offended that this charlatan would be elevated past the title of activist.
Gleick is at best a 'hydroclimatologist'...

'The American hydrologist Walter Langbein (1967) defined hydroclimatology as the study of the influence of climate upon the waters of the land.'

So, again, not a climatologst. Big difference. This would be like calling a geographer a geologist.

I prefer to call him a felon.

Climate Change Fraud: Not A Conspiracy?

The leaked Emails and data in the ClimateGate Scandal are just beginning to reveal the depth and breadth of the lies, distortion, and fraud. Consider the following article and the manipulation of articles published on Wikipedia, the most widely used source of information in the world. Talk about peer-review, and trusted journalism!!!!

I would guess that any student in the world with access to the internet has used Wikipedia as a source of information when asked to write a paper or a report on "global warming" or climate change. The following tailoring of information, even re-writing history explains how we have an entire generation of young people who believe this outrageously stupid myth of man-caused global warming.

People have and are being deceived on a huge scale. Is this "cooking the books" a criminal activity? I don't know. I do know it is a disgrace and shameful.
Peter

Wikipedia’s climate doctor

Written by Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post December 20 2009

How Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles

The Climategate Emails describe how a small band of climatologists cooked the books to make the last century seem dangerously warm.

The emails also describe how the band plotted to rewrite history as well as science, particularly by eliminating the Medieval Warm Period, a 400 year period that began around 1000 AD.

The Climategate Emails reveal something else, too: the enlistment of the most widely read source of information in the world — Wikipedia — in the wholesale rewriting of this history.

The Medieval Warm Period, which followed the meanness and cold of the Dark Ages, was a great time in human history — it allowed humans around the world to bask in a glorious warmth that vastly improved agriculture, increased life spans and otherwise bettered the human condition.

Global Warming-- Can You Trust Wikipedia?

Well, I guess we live and learn. The revolutionary online encyclopedia Wikipedia, which allows anyone and everyone to enter and edit information, has proven inaccuracies and is being banned as a reference source by many major universities. This is unfortunate because when seeking information on a subject such as global warming, it provides a wealth of information.



It seems there are more than a few unethical people publishing inaccurate and biased information on Wikipedia. People who have an agenda, an ax-to-grind, people who purposely want to mislead us, mold us, and shape our opinion. It sounds a lot like Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany's Propaganda Minister at work, doesn't it? He was master of "the so-called Big Lie technique of mass propaganda."



This unfortunate revelation about Wikipedia is rather ironic and timely, because it makes me think about the mass of distorted and frightening information being spread by the people claiming we have a looming crisis of global warming and catastrophic climate change caused by mankind's burning of fossil fuels. Could it be that Propaganda Minister and Prophet Al Gore is spreading a big lie about global warming?


By insisting that students not rely on Wikipedia, by making them think for themselves and cross reference their information, universities are taking a step in the right direction. I hope I will be swamped by people vigorously defending Wikipedia, because it truly is a wonderful source of information. The lesson is don't trust everything you read.



To see the article about universities banning Wikipedia, go here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17740041/