Wikigate? Climategate Part Deux

Immediately prior to the Copenhagen climate collapse we saw released previously secret e-mail exchanges between the lead players in the global warming/climate change kerfuffle. As I explained here, the actions of those who’ve been advocating for significant changes to our global economic systems to save us from climate catastrophe brought their motivations and methodologies into question. Those who’ve accepted the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) either were undeterred by the content of the e-mails or unwilling to acknowledge their implication — that AGW proponents have been “cooking the books” for almost 20 years.

Further substantiation of the book-cooking hypothesis came to light this week. Lawrence Solomon chronicled in Canada’s National Post the activities of UK Green Party activist William Connolley. Connolley took it upon himself to edit a multitude of articles in Wikipedia that may have refuted or questioned any fact or fantasy that had been promulgated by the AGW zealots — over 5,000 articles in total.

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.

It was bad enough that the climate warmmongers proceeded to close down debate by excluding opposing views, shutting down debate, and spurning periodicals that offered a forum for contrarians. Were the climate Chicken Littles confident in their data, analysis, and conclusions they’d have no need to shut out opposing views much less completely rewrite thousands of articles on Wikipedia. Again, its their actions — their insistence on not allowing debate nor even the airing of alternative views — that makes a thoughtful person conclude they’ve something to hide.