Wikipedia is Locked Down by Marxists

HarveyH55 wrote: Actually, mostly your obsession... You should know from all the articles cited in Wikipedia, that the entries are often opinion/interpretations, biased...

Wikipedia NPOV:
Wikipedia must not take sides.[112] All opinions and viewpoints, if attributable to external sources, must enjoy an appropriate share of coverage within an article. This is known as neutral point of view (NPOV).

Wikipedia entry on InfoWars contains:
InfoWars is a far-right American conspiracy theory and fake news website owned by Alex Jones.

The site has regularly published fake stories which have been linked to harassment of victims.

Wikipedia entry on CNN contains:
CNN (Cable News Network) is an American news-based pay television channel owned by CNN Worldwide

The network is known for its dramatic live coverage of breaking news, some of which has drawn criticism as overly sensationalistic, and for its efforts to be nonpartisan

Wikipedia entry on Fox News contains:
Fox News has been described as practicing biased reporting in favor of the Republican Party, the George W. Bush and Donald Trump administrations, and conservative causes while portraying the Democratic Party in a negative light. Critics have cited the channel as detrimental to the integrity of news overall

Guns
The gun culture of the United States can be considered unique among developed countries in terms of the large number of firearms owned by civilians, generally permissive regulations, and high levels of gun violence.

[pretending to speak for other countries]
The US attitude to guns generally perplexes those in other developed countries, who cannot understand the unusual permissiveness of American gun laws, and why the American public does not push for harsher gun control measures in the face of mass shootings.

Gender Identity
Categorizing males and females into social roles creates a problem, because individuals feel they have to be at one end of a linear spectrum and must identify themselves as man or woman, rather than being allowed to choose a section in between. Globally, communities interpret biological differences between men and women to create a set of social expectations that define the behaviors that are "appropriate" for men and women and determine women's and men's different access to rights, resources, power in society and health behaviors. Although the specific nature and degree of these differences vary from one society to the next, they still tend to typically favor men, creating an imbalance in power and gender inequalities within most societies. Many cultures have different systems of norms and beliefs based on gender, but there is no universal standard to a masculine or feminine role across all cultures. Social roles of men and women in relation to each other is based on the cultural norms of that society, which lead to the creation of gender systems. The gender system is the basis of social patterns in many societies, which include the separation of sexes, and the primacy of masculine norms.

Wealth Inequality
According to Jedediah Purdy, a researcher at the Duke School of Law, the inequality of wealth in the United States has constantly opened the eyes of the many problems and shortcomings of its financial system over at least the last fifty years of the debate. For years, people believed that distributive justice would produce a sustainable level of wealth inequality. It was also thought that a certain state would be able to effectively diminish the amount of inequality that would occur. Something that was for the most part not expected is the fact that the inequality levels created by the growing markets would lessen the power of that state and prevent the majority of the political community from actually being able to deliver on its plans of distributive justice, however it has just lately come to attention of the mass majority.

Global Warming
Global warming is the ongoing rise of the average temperature of the Earth's climate system and has been demonstrated by direct temperature measurements and by measurements of various effects of the warming.[1] It is a major aspect of climate change which, in addition to rising global surface temperatures,[2] also includes its effects, such as changes in precipitation. While there have been prehistoric periods of global warming, observed changes since the mid-20th century have been unprecedented in rate and scale.

Assault Rifle
An assault rifle is a selective-fire rifle that uses an intermediate cartridge and a detachable magazine.





...

IBdaMann wrote:
... but this is a sham. A great example is the Wiki entry for InfoWars which is HATED by the left and by mainstream media.

Wikipedia entry on InfoWars contains:
InfoWars is a far-right American conspiracy theory and fake news website owned by Alex Jones.
The site has regularly published fake stories which have been linked to harassment of victims.

tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 30...4b...

GasGuzzler wrote:
...about wiki, ...tmiddles and keepit consider it the Holy Bible and the answer to all questions spanning the universe.

duncan61 wrote:
GG you can not speak of what someone else thinks it calls for the operation of their mind.A Judge Judy quote.I am concerned that schools are teaching how bad we are for causing Climate Change

duncan61 wrote:
When Judy was trying a case it was not uncommon for one of the litigants to claim they knew what the other person was thinking at the time and Judy would respond with

You can not speak of what someone else thinks it calls for the operation of their mind.

You did this when you stated

Sad part is, too many like tmiddles and keepit consider it the Holy Bible and the answer to all questions spanning the universe.

I have just used Wiki to look up Nils-Axel Mörner its not all bad.I hope that clears it up.

duncan61 wrote:
You can not speak of what someone else thinks...

duncan61 wrote:
Tmiddles I am aware that your stance on AGW/CC is it is all true....

GasGuzzler wrote: Sad part is, too many like tmiddles and keepit consider it the Holy Bible and the answer to all questions spanning the universe.

tmiddles wrote: Keepit and I both use Wiki all the time and aren't ashamed to consider it a useful reference.

tmiddles wrote:Actually no I consider myself to be skeptic.

tmiddles wrote: Try making an argument and supporting it. I'm wrong a lot but you never bother to actually make a case.

IBdaMann wrote:

Guns
The gun culture of the United States can be considered unique among developed countries in terms of the large number of firearms owned by civilians, generally permissive regulations, and high levels of gun violence.

[pretending to speak for other countries]
The US attitude to guns generally perplexes those in other developed countries, who cannot understand the unusual permissiveness of American gun laws, and why the American public does not push for harsher gun control measures in the face of mass shootings.

IBdaMann wrote:...you appear to get everything wrong intentionally.

IBdaMann wrote:
You are not a skeptic. You are a bona fide warmizombie.

IBdaMann wrote:...you are the one who is affirmatively arguing Global Warming, Climate Change and Greenhosue Effect and it is you upon whom the full burden rests to support your case

IBdaMann wrote:
You are still on tap to illustrate how, despite more thermal energy flowing from warmer to cooler, nonetheless some thermal energy flows from cooler to warmer, and to do so without confusing electromagnetic energy for thermal energy.

tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 4b...justification of Wikipedia...

Into the Night wrote:
No matter what you argue, you cannot use this as a reference with either IBdaMann nor me.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
No matter what you argue, you cannot use this as a reference with either IBdaMann nor me.

Ah, what a clear instruction on what you will not accept.

So what will you accept?

Sort of a logical follow up question right?

Into the Night wrote:
See the rules of the Data Mine, which you so often misquote. RQAA.

Into the Night wrote:


Data collection began in 1958 and continues through today. This data is compensated for using reference stations away from volcanic plumes to remove the effects of local Mauna Loa volcanic activity. Data collected by NOAA and the Mauna Loa observatory. This graph shows CO2 content has increased from 318ppm to 400ppm (an increase of 22ppm over a span of 57 years). The increase is amazingly smooth, with variations due to seasonal changes.

The metholodogy of collection is to slowly pump air through a small cylindrical cell with flat windows on both ends. Infrared light is transmitted through one window, through the cell, through the second window, and is measured by a detector that is sensitive to infrared radiation. Calibration of the instrument is against references of known CO2 concentration samples.

Included to get this out of the way up front.

Into the Night wrote:

tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 4b...justification of Wikipedia...

* Wikipedia editors make stuff up.
* Wikipedia editors intentionally limit their 'sources' to those in favor of their agenda.

You cannot use Wikipedia as a reference with either IBdaMann or me, and probably for gfm as well. It's articles are biased, incomplete, are too often outright wrong, and even contain complete fabrications.

No matter what you argue, you cannot use this as a reference with either IBdaMann nor me.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
See the rules of the Data Mine, which you so often misquote. RQAA.

So Mauna Loa CO2 records? You accept that as reliable?

link

Into the Night wrote:


Data collection began in 1958 and continues through today. This data is compensated for using reference stations away from volcanic plumes to remove the effects of local Mauna Loa volcanic activity. Data collected by NOAA and the Mauna Loa observatory. This graph shows CO2 content has increased from 318ppm to 400ppm (an increase of 22ppm over a span of 57 years). The increase is amazingly smooth, with variations due to seasonal changes.

The metholodogy of collection is to slowly pump air through a small cylindrical cell with flat windows on both ends. Infrared light is transmitted through one window, through the cell, through the second window, and is measured by a detector that is sensitive to infrared radiation. Calibration of the instrument is against references of known CO2 concentration samples.

Included to get this out of the way up front.

"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN

tmiddles wrote:So Mauna Loa CO2 records? You accept that as reliable?

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:So Mauna Loa CO2 records? You accept that as reliable?

More dishonesty on your part. Why did you not include the answer to your question that Into the Night posted (on several occasions) in response as well?

Why are pretending that Into the Night has not answered your question exhaustively?

The Mauna Loa equipment is accurate and capable of providing valid datasets.

The Mauna Loa humans intentionally fudge the numbers in order to report predetermined "results" and "conclusions," rendering both, i.e. everything reported, invalid and summarily rejected.

.

tmiddles wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
See the rules of the Data Mine, which you so often misquote. RQAA.

So Mauna Loa CO2 records? You accept that as reliable?

IBdaMann wrote:...Mauna Loa ....fudge the numbers ....

Into the Night wrote:

tmiddles wrote:
So what will you accept?

See the rules of the Data Mine, which you so often misquote. RQAA.

Into the Night wrote:
Data collection began in 1958....

IBdaMann wrote:

Into the Night wrote:
I have already presented the data from Mauna Loa. This is the form and support I would expect of any data....

...I was wondering if you had any suggestion on acquiring global humidity and atmospheric water vapor data...

Into the Night wrote:

trafn wrote:...2. To you, how does this data impact questions concerning GHG's...

I also posted another set of data (...does not allow me to post the actual plots...) concerning the temperature ...near Seattle...I see no correlation with the temperatures in Seattle to the increase of carbon dioxide. I have examined charts...As far as I have been able to determine, there is no effective correlation between the two at all.

Into the Night wrote:

climate scientist wrote:...Just because you do not see a correlation ...does not mean that they are not linked.

Actually, yes it does. It exactly means they are not linked.

Into the Night wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
For example:...data...
10/21/2300Z 82.926°N 85.428°W -24.1°C 1001.7mb...
10/21/2200Z 82.926°N 85.428°W -23.7°C 1001.6mb

....Thank you for providing another source of reliable and verifiable data.

Into the Night wrote:Reliable data goes back to 1944 when we first started flying aircraft into hurricanes.

Into the Night wrote:As you can see, by any measure, hurricane activity seems to have NO correlation with either CO2 concentration, temperature...

Into the Night wrote:

Surface Detail wrote:
What is the source of your data?

IBdaMann wrote:
My source is terrible. If you don't accept it, I'll understand. I grabbed the first datums I encountered.

Surface Detail wrote:
Just provide a link to the source of your data, please.

You have the data in both Atlantic and Pacific basins. You no longer have an excuse to evade the conversation. Stop calling people names and proceed with your discussion.....You have been EVADING a sensible conversation by ...demanding data to be formatted in a particular way...Start having a discussion about the meaning of the data you have!

Into the Night wrote:
You might also note that a lot of data that conformed to the rules has been presented other than the individual station data. The Mauna Loa data, for example, has been presented in a form that completely follows the rules set up for the data mine.

tmiddles wrote:
...deleted Mantra 29...