Re: Wikipedia Promoting Global Warming Hysteria?

In article <g5ivfb$9j4$1$8300dec7@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Joe
<joe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> Cary Kittrell wrote:
> > In article
<fae6cffd-9200-4400-9460-7a4abfcc3edb@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
"leonard78sp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <leonard78sp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >>  Wikipedia Promoting Global Warming Hysteria?
> >>
> >>  Noel Sheppard, NewsBusters.org
> >>
> >>  Two weeks ago, a parent-teacher council blamed the
> >>  online research source Wikipedia for falling test scores
> >>  in Scotland.
> >>
> >>  On Tuesday, Canadian columnist Lawrence Solomon
> >>  blamed Wikipedia for helping to spread global warming
> >>  hysteria around the world. The connection? Oftentimes
> >>  "inaccurate or deliberately misleading information"
> >>  published by Wikipedia being taken as fact by
> >>    unsuspecting readers.
> >>
> >>  In the case of climate change, such inaccurate or
> >>  deliberately misleading information acts to solidify the
> >>  myth being espoused by Nobel Laureate Al Gore as
> >>  millions of people across the globe believe Wikipedia
> >>  is a purely factual resource.
> >>
> >>       [Eco-fascists and islamofascists right or wrong
> >>        get preference in every dispute]
> > 
> > Lessee here, on one hand we've got someone who froths
> > "Ecofascists", but provides nothing beyond that.
> > 
> > On the other hand, we've got the National Academy
> > of Sciences, the creme de la creme of scientific
> > overachievers in this country.
> > 
> > What to choose, what to choose?....
> > 
> > -- cary
> 
> Oh, offhand I'd say you should believe those who say that there is an 
> 'underlying warming trend' even though there hasn't been any warming for

> a decade 

Oh, I dunno...this looks pretty trendy for me, over the last decade.
And further:


   
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2007/ann/global-jan-dec-error-bar-pg.gif
    
    
Or, you could look at it this way:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3045976.ece
    
-- cary

> and we don't yet have access to temperature records for the 
> next fifty years...