Wikipedia Rewrite History – Part II
By Paul Homewood
After much crowd sourcing, I can update the position regarding Wikipedia’s downgrading of Hurricane Camille. For those who missed the first part, it is here.
Currently, Wiki show Camille’s maximum 1-minute wind speeds as 175 mph.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille
It has always been accepted that Camille’s winds were at least 195 mph.
Using the History tab on Wiki, we can find that as recently as 4th March, a figure of 190 mph was given. (A quick flick through some of the previous entries shows the wind speed changing back and forth!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hurricane_Camille&oldid=649887353
It then seems to have changed to the new version of 175 mph on the 7th March, by somebody called CrazyC83.
As I think we would all agree, we should treat anything from Wiki with a large dose of scepticism. Certainly on anything controversial or complex, I would always check out the sources they give, or compare with others.
The problem, though, is that most people do treat Wikipedia as gospel.
Comments are closed.
Reblogged this on Centinel2012 and commented:
Control “history” and you control the present!
If you control the “present” the future is yours!
** Paul the fig was modified by NOAA ..see my comment in your original article
from NOAA http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/hrd/data_sub/re_anal.html
“The Atlantic Hurricane Database Re-analysis Project is an effort to extend and revise the National Hurricane Center’s North Atlantic hurricane database (or HURDAT). Going back to 1851 and revisiting storms in more recent years, information on tropical cyclones is revised using an enhanced collection of historical meteorological data in the context of today’s scientific understanding of hurricanes and analysis techniques.”
So again we see, just like everything from temperature records to unemployment data. NO data is safe from meddling, when it’s in the hands of the US government.
User Crazy83
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CrazyC83
Seems to have made 31,327 edits and is 1215th most prolific Wiki editors
As I keep saying: Wikipedia is not a reliable source on climate.
Is that a re-incarnation of william connolley?
I smell a stoat!!
rah posted a similar comment at WUWT, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/21/another-polar-bears-are-in-trouble-story-yawwwn/#comment-1889048 . My response there applies here:
The hurricane reanalysis project was started by Chris Landsea after he joined the NHC after his stint at Colorado State University where he studied under Bill Gray. From that experience he learned that the US hurricane record, especially for older storms, was quite poor and could be quite better. I’m not familiar with problems with Camille’s data, but it was such a small storm I wouldn’t be surprised if some data came from questionable estimates.
BTW, Landsea resigned from the IPCC in a dispute with Kenneth Trenberth. I had a lot of respect for him before that. Please read http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/science_policy_general/000318chris_landsea_leaves.html
If Landsea says Camille was 175 mph, it was probably 175 mph….
Then why did the C-130s of the Hurricane Hunters record a 190 mph wind speed less than 100 miles before it landed? And why the are you here after having found my post at WUWT?
You can say “probably” all you want. But an aircraft specifically fitted out for taking scientific measurements of Hurricanes took the 190 mph wind speed and if some one is going to change that or claim that such a change is correct, they better damned will bring some proof of why! Put up or shut up!
Why am I here after seeing your post at WUWT?
1) It was an interesting question, I wanted to see the take on things here. Why did you post the link if you didn’t want people to follow it? To say nothing of posting it in a polar vs grizzly bear post that has nothing to do with hurricanes. If I’m not welcome here, I can stay away.
2) I’m familiar with the Hurricane Reanalysis project, and was concerned that people might not understand why it exists.
Why did the hurricane hunters record a 190 mph wind speed less than 100 miles before it landed?
That may be a very good question. A number of hurricanes have weakened as they approach the Gulf coast, some have weakened dramatically. According to a non-Wikipedia, non-NHC reanalysis at http://extremeplanet.me/2012/06/20/hurricane-camille-was-not-a-category-five/ the last intercept was 150 miles and 24 hours out. An engine failure forced them to avoid the eyewall, so the 190 mph appears to have been an estimate. It is not supported by the physical damage near landfall.
The official report said that based on structural damage “velocities probably approached 175 kt” = 201 mph
It was also the US Weather Bureau who calculated 201 mph winds based on “observed winds at reconnaissance flight level and measured surface pressure”
http://www.coast.noaa.gov/hes/docs/postStorm/H_CAMILLE.pdf?redirect=301ocm
Trenberth, by observation of his recorded demeanor in public, is a bully. He bludgeoned Dr. Judith Curry at an open forum in 2014. He and his ilk likely are behind the obscure academic rise of KH. Watch for KH to soon be at NCAR as a mouthpiece. Just a hunch. They want the DHS $…”climate warming as hazard”…follow the money.
Paul, We can only hope that more students attend university…at least for our impact on current and future members of society. Most, if not all, faculty I know…state universities and colleges…inform students how unreliable WIKI is. No faculty I know, or know of, allow a student to use WIKI as a reference. As one of our blog colleagues mention in Part 1, WIKI sometimes has citations that might be useful. However, in the cyber space world, I direct my students to more reliable search methods. I know other faculty do, too. Our students, hopefully, can help inform their peers, parents, and others of the weakness of WIKI.
P.S. I did not list the link to the Ph.D. scientist weather historian
Sorry…my comments are usually, too long…
In Part 1 of WIKI, I did not publically list the link to the Ph.D. Climatologist weather historian mentioned in deference to his privacy in a town full of “warmists” or “warministas” along with my respect for his battle with an inherited neurological disease.
Paul, this whole situation has me curious. As soon as I can find the time, I plan to check on a couple of other hurricanes, to see if they are making more recent ones, more powerful.
archive.org and the Wayback Machine is your friend. Here is the snapshot for the Wikipedia entry for Camille on Jun 21,2004:
Hurricane Camille – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Hurricane Camille is a Category 5 hurricane that struck the Mississippi Gulf Coast region on the 17th and 18th of August 1969.
Camille is considered the first- or second-worst storm ever to hit the mainland United States. Camille had winds in excess of 210 mph (340 km/h) and a storm surge of over 24 feet (6 m).”
http://web.archive.org/web/20040621114556/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille
Everyone knows that wikipedia is a political organization with useful idiots posing as “editors”, attempting to change history and reality on a daily basis. Well maybe not everybody knows this, lol.
In an effort to be more helpful with my comment, I began flipping through the 157 captures of the Camille web page by the Wayback Machine at archive.org…
The article first began changing on September 5, 2005, or thereabouts (emphasis mine).
Hurricane Camille – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Camille produced the fifth lowest barometric pressure ever recorded in the Atlantic basin, a scant 905 millibars; the only hurricane to hit the United States with a lower pressure at landfall was the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935, which measured 892 millibars. The true intensity of Camille can only be approximated, as no meteorogical equipment survived the extreme conditions at landfall, but Camille is estimated to have had sustained winds of 190 mph at landfall, with gusts exceeding 210mph (340 km/h). Camille retained the record for the highest storm surge measured in the United States, at over 24 feet (7.3 metres) (see storm surge profile) until Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Camille turned eastward as it moved inland, unleashing torrential rains of up to 31 inches (790 mm) as far north as southern Virginia. By this point it had been downgraded to a tropical depression, but it re-emerged into the Atlantic Ocean east of Virginia, where it briefly became a tropical storm again before dissipating.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20050905154815/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille
There have been many edits to this web page, including both format and content. According to the last Wayback Machine capture, on January 14, 2015, the maximum sustained wind speeds were still 190 mph…
Hurricane Camille – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“The storm formed on August 14 and rapidly deepened. It scraped the western edge of Cuba at Category 2 intensity. Camille rapidly deepened once again over the Gulf of Mexico and made landfall with a pressure of 900 mbar (hPa; 26.58 inHg), estimated sustained winds of 190 mph (310 km/h), and a peak official storm surge of 24 feet (7.3 m). The hurricane flattened nearly everything along the coast of the U.S. state of Mississippi, and caused additional flooding and deaths inland while crossing the Appalachian Mountains of Virginia. In total, Camille killed 259 people and caused $1.42 billion (1969 USD, $9.13 billion 2015 USD) in damages. To this day, a complete understanding of the reasons for the system’s power, extremely rapid intensification over open water and strength at landfall has not been achieved.”
http://web.archive.org/web/20150114040741/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille
The number of people killed changed, too. I really think the take-away message here is …. ignore Wikipedia, just like we need to ignore the governments. Wikipedia, just like the UN is a political organization, with a poerful cadre of useful idiots who believe things that aren’t true. Whenever I am asked or tasked to believe something, I’ve trained my mind to think instead.
I hope this has been a helpful comment for you guys.
Alright, one more thing. The current article says one thing in the text and another thing in the sidebar…
Hurricane Camille – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Hurricane Camille was the third and strongest tropical cyclone and second hurricane during the 1969 Atlantic hurricane season. It was the second of three catastrophic Category 5 hurricanes to make landfall in the United States during the 20th century (the others being 1935’s Labor Day hurricane and 1992’s Hurricane Andrew), which it did near the mouth of the Mississippi River on the night of August 17. Estimates put sustained winds around 200 miles per hour (320 km/h) but the true speed will never be known since the weather equipment was destroyed at landfall.[2][3] Camille was the second strongest U.S. landfalling hurricane in recorded history (by wind pressure), second only to the Labor Day Hurricane in 1935 but holds the distinction of having the strongest winds. It was also the first modern Category 5 hurricane to ever receive a person’s name when making landfall in the United States.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Camille
And of course the sidebar as illustrated above by the author, says 175 mph max winds, so this isn’t even a perfect falsification of the record, and just continues to prove my point about useful idiots, and Wikipedia.
That’s enough time spent on this useless subject, lol, on to tilt at larger windmills!