| 05-02-2008 18:32 | Svensmarks klimamysterium (fra TV2) |
Michael
(198)
|
Anmeldelse: Svensmarks klimamysterium på TV2
Lars Oxfeldt Mortensens dokumentarfilm om Henrik Svensmarks teori om Solens påvirkning af klimaet, der blev vist på TV2 i aftes, var en sober gennemgang, men der var ikke meget plads til videnskabelig kritik.
Af Jens Ramskov, torsdag 17. jan 2008 kl. 10:26
Ingeniøren anmelder udsendelsen Klimamysteriet her
http://ing.dk/artikel/84833
Her følger selve udsendelsen:
Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gkgEUN_TyoA
The Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=mWVhYbMvXBU
Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=q3uB3vJIq4I
Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 4
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QmkhGcfKTFw
Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 5
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AmrfWfAgKCs
Climate Mystery - Klimamysteriet part 6
http://youtube.com/watch?v=MCRCoKQRbuk
Redigeret d. 05-02-2008 18:36 |
| 08-02-2008 00:18 | |
Søren_Søndergaard
(203)
|
@Michael
Super!
Det kunne blive interessant om den så opdages udenfor den snævre danske kreds.
Jeg har selv forsøgt at promovere den lidt på climateaudit.org
|
| 11-03-2008 20:42 | |
Michael
(198)
|
Knud Jahnke og Rasmus Benestad leverer kritik af Svensmark og Calders "klimamysteriet":
10 March 2008 A Galactic glitch
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/03/a-galactic-glitch/#more-534
Redigeret d. 11-03-2008 20:50 |
| 11-03-2008 20:59 | |
Frank Lansner
(2594)
|
Til dette skrev jeg i deres blog:
Interesting.
The authers mentions ONE point from this film - i had the same thought when i saw the film, and i may agree about the galaxy argument.
BUT BUT BUT:
WHY IS THIS THE ONLY THING YOU MENTION??
It is not at all the central point in the film, its just a little corner you for some reason chooses to focus on!
Why do you not deal with the SUBSTANCE of their SPLENDID WORK??
Are you afraid to touch the 99% of topics where they have made a very very good point?
This theory explains practically ALL historic temperatures 1000 times better than the CO2 hypothesis.
Please be objective, honest and scientific.
|
| 11-03-2008 21:29 | |
Michael
(198)
|
Frank Lansner skrev:
Til dette skrev jeg i deres blog:
Interesting.
The authers mentions ONE point from this film - i had the same thought when i saw the film, and i may agree about the galaxy argument.
BUT BUT BUT:
WHY IS THIS THE ONLY THING YOU MENTION??
It is not at all the central point in the film, its just a little corner you for some reason chooses to focus on!
Why do you not deal with the SUBSTANCE of their SPLENDID WORK??
Are you afraid to touch the 99% of topics where they have made a very very good point?
This theory explains practically ALL historic temperatures 1000 times better than the CO2 hypothesis.
Please be objective, honest and scientific.
Det handler vel om hvordan man tolker data. Så vidt jeg ved har Svensmark før lavet brølere i sin omgang med tal tilbage i halvfemserne.
Men jeg er ikke rigtig afklaret hvordan det står til i duellen mellem Svensmark og Mike Lockwood + Claus Fröhlich? Synes der mangler en peer reviewing af Svensmarks seneste svar?
Redigeret d. 11-03-2008 21:30 |
| 11-04-2008 13:31 | |
Boe Carslund-Sørensen
(2169)
|
Prøv denne artikel fra Information:
http://www.information.dk/157674
|
Til forsiden
Debatforum
PART 3/ Opdaterede
