tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post5155339125266296495..comments2023-10-08T15:51:17.426+00:00Comments on Beyond Necessity: Wikipedia: major studies detect cooling over AntarticaEdward Ockhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-38074595170312830972011-12-21T03:20:43.124+00:002011-12-21T03:20:43.124+00:00Since you like logic, take a look at this entry ab...Since you like logic, take a look at this entry about Conceptual Graphs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_graph. The diagram shows "agent" where it should show "location" in the CG. The error has remained uncorrected for many months, and I use it in my presentations about lack of effective governance in Wikipedia.Malcolm Chisholmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06684641560106703066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-80223307153621089372011-11-29T18:28:43.692+00:002011-11-29T18:28:43.692+00:00Oh no for God's sake don't get into an arg...Oh no for God's sake don't get into an argument with Belette. We will never hear the end of it.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-91699351803185502202011-11-29T18:07:17.035+00:002011-11-29T18:07:17.035+00:00The latest data from NASA suggests warming:
&quo...The latest data from NASA suggests warming: <br /><br />""A recent result from the NASA/German Aerospace Center's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace) suggests that since 2006 there has been more ice loss from East Antarctica than previously thought."" <br /><br />The British on the other hand say...<i>it is not possible to say whether it is warming or cooling overall.</i><br /><br />So the revisions include the latest studies and are relevant are they not. That said, even granting temp. increases, it's fairly obvious that Gore/IPCC may have overestimated the dangers. The AGW hysteria often tends to overpower the AGW science.Jhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11567400697675996283noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-55302196787670082652011-11-28T20:35:46.451+00:002011-11-28T20:35:46.451+00:00>>Which brings me on to the main point, whic...>>Which brings me on to the main point, which I presume you know: most articles are watched for changes, not regularly re-read from scratch. Once something sneaks in and is layered over, it can stay for a long time.<br /><br />Precisely. Thanks for the point about the IP vandalism.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-57888540664763043592011-11-28T19:47:57.410+00:002011-11-28T19:47:57.410+00:00An interesting example.
When it was first added, ...An interesting example.<br /><br />When it was first added, it was reverted out again (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_of_Antarctica&diff=next&oldid=286332843). This was discussed on the talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Climate_of_Antarctica&diff=prev&oldid=286431108). <br /><br />The damage was done here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Climate_of_Antarctica&diff=290272401&oldid=290209022) when someone reverted anon vandalism after the bad edit was re-inserted, effectively hiding the bad shit.<br /><br />Which brings me on to the main point, which I presume you know: most articles are watched for changes, not regularly re-read from scratch. Once something sneaks in and is layered over, it can stay for a long time.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com