Wikipedia Airbrushes List of Climate Sceptic Scientists Out of History

Wikipedia has deleted its ‘List of Scientists Who Disagree with the Scientific Consensus on Global Warming’. Stalin — who set the template for airbrushing inconvenient people out of history — would no doubt have heartily approved of this wanton act of censorship.

But what would probably have pleased him more is the magnificently twisted justification offered by the editor responsible.

“The result was delete. This is because I see a consensus here that there is no value in having a list that combines the qualities of a) being a scientist, in the general sense of that word, and b) disagreeing with the scientific consensus on global warming.”

What this Wikipedia editor is saying, in other words, is that if you’re a scientist who doesn’t believe in global warming then that automatically makes you not a scientist.

In fact many tens of thousands of scientists are sceptical of catastrophic man-made global warming theory, including some of the most eminent experts in the field, among them physicists Dr Richard Lindzen of MIT and Dr Will Happer of Princeton.

But the kind of intolerant leftists who tend to edit Wikipedia pages don’t want you to know this.

Their archived debate as to whether the ‘List of Scientists Who Disagree with the Scientific Consensus on Global Warming’ offers a fascinating, if not exactly surprising, insight into their mindset.

The editors variously refer to these often eminent scientists as “cranks” and “a club of fools”.

One says:

Cranks are well-known to maintain such lists of authoritative-sounding people to bolster their own legitimacy, and this list is just another in this genre. Long past time to kill it.

Another says:

The list is synthesis to mislead the reader into thinking there is significant doubt about the reality of global warming.

This one really, really fancies himself. His contribution is probably best read in the voice of Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons, whom I’d also guess he physically resembles:

Even ten years ago it was clear to me and others that this article had become a badly written nexus of non-notable fringe theories and advocacy for religious points of view. Ten years on, a dozen scientists formerly denying climate change have died. Outside of another dozen die-hards in the United States, virtually no credentialed scientist does not think that climate change is man-made and will, on the whole, have deleterious effects on us and our world. As a scientific community, we also have much more information and data, and the consensus has gotten stronger (close to 99.9 % of scientists agree) as the obituary pages continue to publish the memorials to those who disagree with scientific consensus. Everyone has moved on with their lives. In the meanwhile, I’ve earned a master’s of art in teaching secondary science. I still find students who don’t believe in evolution, and in some quarters, natural selection remains controversial, but absolutely nobody — not teachers, not students, not scholars — seriously denies climate change any more. A list that purports to list the dozen or so people who still deny it to their grave is shrinking each day, and is an example of fraudulently spreading doubt and uncertainty, as noted by Johnuniq. At some time in the past ten years, climate change denial-ism has become the next alchemyether, and astronomy. Sure there are a handful of believers in this, Area 51cold fusionOccultism in NazismAIDS denialism, and the Age of Aquarius, but it’s so few that to list them in an article is to give extreme undue weight to that side. The list also is written as a Gish gallop – a whole series of illogical arguments with their own adherents designed to obfuscate the lack of evidence of the other side. Bearian (talk) 18:13, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

A few brave contrarian voices try to argue against censorship.

One makes the point that the scientists on the list aren’t exactly cranks:

Let’s take a look at the list of people responsible for your so called “fringe theories advanced for religious purposes,” shall we?

  • Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace;
  • Ivan Giaver, who won the Nobel Peace Prize;
  • Judith Curry, retired head of the Atmospheric Sciences Department of the Georgia Institute of Technology;
  • Richard Lindzen, retired head of the Atmospheric Sciences Department of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and member of the National Academy of Sciences (you know, that thing Einstein was a member of);
  • Vincent Courtillot, a member of the French Academy of Sciences;
  • Khabibullo Abdussamatov, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences;
  • John Christy, who is a professor at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, who keeps the temperature data used by NOAA and NASSA, and who contributes to the IPCC reports;
  • Roy Spencer, who keeps the data with John Christy;
  • Frederich Seitz, former President of the National Academy of Sciences.

Another has to point out that one of the purposes of Wikipedia is to help people research stuff:

This is a valid list article since it helps people find scientists of this type.

But the best response is this one:

With apologies to people who have been conned into believing that the WP climate area is sound … Who are we kidding here? This is an important, long standing article that gives a tiny sliver of balance to grotesquely POV, essentially permanently vandalized, articles on Climate

Not, of course, that his valiant contribution made any difference. Wikipedia gave up trying to be a neutral source of information long ago. If you don’t share its leftist values, you’re really not welcome there.

Source: Breitbart

Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture Announced that over 700 Scientists from Around the World have Signed Statement Against Darwinism

Another 100 scientists have joined the ranks of scientists from around the world publicly stating their doubts about the adequacy of Darwin’s theory of evolution. “Darwinism is a trivial idea that has been elevated to the status of the scientific theory that governs modern biology,” says dissent list signer Dr. Michael Egnor. Egnor is a […]

Paper: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

Summary There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In […]

Communist Defector and Christian Convert Orestes Brownson: “The Great Object was to get Rid of Christianity, and to Convert our Churches into Halls of Science”

It has taken more than a century and a half for the government schools to degenerate into the militantly anti-Christian, nightmarish system that it is today. However, the socialist propagandists of the 1830s did indeed intend that their proposed system would take us to our present predicament. One of the architects of the public-school movement during that period was co-founder with Robert Dale Owen and Frances Wright of “The Working Men’s Party” in New York, Orestes Brownson, He was a very influential New England writer-editor-philosopher, then a disciple of socialist Robert Owen who converted to Christianity, broke with his former comrades and exposed their plot. He wrote in An Oration on Liberal Studies (1853), p. 19:

It is far easier to educate for evil than for good, for children since the Fall take to evil as naturally as ducks take to water. The enemies of religion and society understand this perfectly well, and hence whenever in their power they seize upon the schools, and seek to control the education of the young. To accomplish their purposes, they have only to exclude religion from the schools, under the plea of excluding sectarianism, and instead of teaching religion, teach as Frances Wright was accustomed to say, knowledge, and they may soon have a community whose thoughts and affections will be exclusively of the earth earthy.

It is not without design that I have mentioned the name of Frances Wright, the favorite pupil of Jeremy Bentham, and famous infidel lecturer through our country, some twenty years ago; for I happen to know, what may not be known to you all, that she and her friends were the great movers in the scheme of godless education, now the fashion in our country. I knew this remarkable woman well, and it was my shame to share, for a time, many of her views, for which I ask pardon of God and of my countrymen. I was for a brief time in her confidence, and one of those selected to carry into execution her plans. The great object was to get rid of Christianity, and to convert our Churches into Halls of science. The plan was not to make open attacks on religion, although we might belabor the clergy and bring them into contempt where we could; but to establish a system of state, we said, national schools, from which all religion was to be excluded, in which nothing was to be taught but such knowledge as is verifiable by the senses, and to which all parents were to be compelled by law to send their children. Our complete plan was to take the children from their parents at the age of twelve or eighteen months, and to have them nursed, fed, clothed and trained in these schools at the public expense; but at any rate, we were to have godless schools for all the children of the country, to which the parents would be compelled by law to send them.