How come Wikipedia's page on global warming only shows data through 2004?

Question

The planet has cooled a lot since then, enough to wipe out the temperature rise of the last 100 years. Why isn't that being reported there?

Answer 1

The Earth is cooling.  Here, look at the trends from NASA:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Answer 2

Because someone probably decided that they didn't like the information Wikipedia had in it, so they removed, replaced, changed . . . who knows.  That's why when people cite it, you may as well be citing TMZ because it's just as reliable.

Oh, and for the record, Dana likes to cite Wikipedia all the time.  He also regularly uses his own blog.  How reliable!  Anyone on the opposite side of the spectrum could do that too, but then he'd probably accuse them of being a right wing propagandist hired by Big Oil and George Bush to destroy the cause.  But when he does it, it's pure science without an agenda or bias.  What a joke!

Answer 3

Wikipedia has been growing less impartial in recent years. While it started out with noble intentions, it's sudden explosion in popularity has caused in influx of "highly motivated" people who aim to keep it "in line".

Pages about historic events have links to the wackiest of conspiracy theories. American history is being dilluted to the point where Wiki posts stuff like "Credit for inventing the electric telephone remains in dispute"  (on it's history of the telephone page.) It does? Oh, right I forgot some guy before Bell kinda sorta was mentioned to maybe have perhaps THOUGHT it would be cool to talk over a wire. Of course!

Global warming is being pushed heavily right now. Anything or anyone that does not conform to the theory is marginalized or outright removed. Wether or not you agree or disagree with global warming no one can reasonably argue that the debate and education about this topic has been fair and impartial.

Answer 4

No it hasn't.  I can't speak for Wikipedia, but just look at the temperature data yourself (linked below).  The planet has not cooled whatsoever.  There was a cold January (that's called a weather variation, by the way, due to a strong La Nina cycle), and temperatures have since returned to normal (meaning hot).

*edit* you criticize Wikipedia for not showing all the data, then you show a graph that stops in January.  I told you, that was a cold month and temperatures have since returned to normal.  See the links below.

Answer 5

wtf +2

Answer 6

Someone made the comment that Dana's link shows global cooling... if you look at the best fit lines you see that there is an obvious trend which is global warming.  Although there is weather variation which could lead to a slightly colder year it doesn't mean that the overall trend is null.

Answer 7

It is just me, but does Dana's link prove your point.

Hadcru shows cooling over the past couple of years.

GISS and NCDC has leveled off.

Campble's links does the same.  Look at the graph at the year 2004 and 2008 it is almost a straight line.

Answer 8

The last 4 years of cooling is an "inconvenient truth". And as far as the above answerer is concerned. It's funny how they will use Wiki incessantly to back up their points but when it's off...they "can't speak for it".

Answer 9

NOAA has records up the the present date. See the sources. I am not sure why Wikipedia hasn't been updated.

Answer 10

Maybe because it's not true.

You really need to understand the difference between a statistical outlier, which happens every few years, and a climatologically significant trend. I can play that game too. How come your denialist website hasn't reported that the global temperature increase  in the last 5 months (January to May 2008) is greater than the global temperature increase in the previous 156 years (October 1851 to January 2008)? Well?

Wipes out 100 years worth of global warming? Utter claptrap. Here's the same HADCRUT3 dataset showing the whole 158 years of monthly data:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3185/2590...

Now find out where we were in 1908, and compare it to where we are today. End of story.

Answer 11

because they are taken over by the hissing pissing hyperventilating global warming n***s

Answer 12

Because wikkipedia is like a blog site for different topics it's no ones real job to go in and update stuff it's up to the users to do that also things you find on wikkipedia may not always be completely true because anyone has a computer even a four year old can get on wikkipedia and change all the info.

Answer 13

Haha, I love how you criticize wikipedia for not being up to date when your information isn't up to date, either.

http://chriscolose.files.wordpress.com/2...

An equal but opposite trend occured in Feb/March.

Dr Jello: that data indicates warming