Klimaskeptikerne dækker over en blandet (og uenig) skare, i Danmark med seriøse forskere som astrofysikeren Henrik Svensmark (Wikipedia.dk), 
Indhold
På dansk
Berlingske.dk
Global opvarmning frosset ihjel. Af Lars Henrik Aagaard (12. februar 2010; online på Internet Archive). Scroll ned.
“Klimaskeptikere har kronede dage. Først kom ‘Climategate’, så kom det hule resultat af COP15 i et snedækket København, så kom afsløringen af en indlysende fejl i FN-klimapanelet IPCCs seneste rapport, og endelig satte den vedvarende kulde og sne den definitive trumf på.”
DR
TV: Kampagnen mod klimaet. Tilrettelæggelse Mads Ellesøe (10. august 2020, 60 min.)
“En gruppe mænd har i årtier forsøgt at forhindre, at der bliver gjort noget ved klimaforandringer. Nu fortæller en række insidere om, hvordan de har gjort det. Det her er historien om en kampagne, der i årevis har afsporet kampen.”
Forskerforum
Klimabekymrede kontra skeptikerne (pdf) (nr.228, oktober 2009)
“Klimaforskere kastebold i spil mellem politikere, medier og meningsfløje op til klima-topmødet i december.”
Tema: Klimaforskning: Kamp om mediernes opmærksomhed – Klimaforskning som politisk kampplads – Jyllands-Posten: Mikrofonholder for klimaskeptikere (s.8-11). Scroll ned.
Information.dk
Emne: Klimaskeptikerne
Klimaskeptikere er få og fagligt letpåklædte. Af Jørgen Steen Nielsen (22. juni 2010)
“De får ikke skrevet eller godkendt mange videnskabelige artikler, og der er ikke mange i forskermiljøet, der finder det berettiget at citere dem, viser ny undersøgelse af de forskere, der fortsat bestrider, at klimaændringerne er menneskeskabte.”
Tvivlens købmænd kommer til kort. Af Jørgen Steen Nielsen (20. juni 2010). Interview med videnskabshistorikeren Naomi Oreskes, som har skrevet en ny bog [Merchants of Doubt] om alliancen mellem industriinteresser og konservative videnskabsmænd. Se anmeldelse af bogen nedenfor (Ecologist).
Klimakrig: En skæbnesvanger sejr for klimaskeptikerne. Af Jørgen Steen Nielsen (26. marts 2010)
“Meningsmålingerne synes at være med klimaskeptikerne i de store engelsksprogede lande. Folk har mistet tilliden til forskerne og er kommet i tvivl om klimatruslen. Men jo hidsigere skeptikerne bliver i deres angreb på videnskaben, desto hurtigere vil deres demagogiske kampagne brænde ud.”
‘Vi tog fejl, og vi har ret’. Af Jørgen Steen Nielsen (12. februar 2010)
“Klimaforskere i klemme. Klimaskeptikere triumferer og afblæser den menneskeskabte opvarmning efter dobbeltfejl i forskerverdenen. Desværre holder klimaforskernes budskab stadig: Planeten er truet.”
Modkraft.dk
Klimabenægtere på krigsstien. Af Finn Kjeller (27. september 2013)
“FN’s nye klimarapport forsøges miskrediteret af velfinansierede ‘skeptikere’. Olieselskaber spytter i kassen for at skabe tvivl og udskyde klimatiltag.”
Skeptica.dk
Er drivhuseffekten nu borte med sneen? Af Mogens Winther (28. december 2009)
“Trods lokale danske snestorme viser den globale temperatur viser sig at være en af de varmeste nogensinde målt.”
Videnskab.dk
Klimaskepsis 2.0: sådan nedvurderer ‘eksperter’, debattører og politikere klimaudfordringen. Af Jens Friis Lund og Stefan Gaarsmand Jacobsen (17. april 2020)
“En ny form for klimaskepsis fremføres af eksperter og politikere, der fremstår, som om de forstår omfanget af problemet og tager sig af det. Men de foreslår helt utilstrækkelige løsninger, og når de udfordres, svarer de typisk, at vi må være realistiske.”
Klimabenægternes fem forfejlede grundargumenter. Af Mark Maslin (14. april 2020)
“De fleste har efterhånden indset klimaforandringernes alvor, men en mindre gruppe benægter vedholdent. Her er deres grundargumenter.”
Olieindustrien har i årtier forsøgt at skjule sandheden om klimaforandringer. Af Bo Carl Christensen (31. oktober 2019)
“Ny rapport samler års forskning: Olieindustrien har bevidst forsøgt at skævvride forståelsen for klimaforandringer i USA.” See the report: American misled (pdf) (George Mason University, October 2019, 14 p.).
Forsker afliver 5 myter om klimaforandringerne (9. oktober 2019)
“Den britiske forsker [Mark Maslin] tager fat i misforståelser, der igen og igen bliver fremført af benægtere af menneskeskabt global opvarmning.”
Er 97 procent af forskerne enige om, at klimaforandringer er menneskeskabte? Af Charlotte Price Persson (4. marts 2019)
“Jeg bliver ikke længere for alvor eksponeret for nogen, der sætter spørgsmålstegn ved, om mennesker er årsag til klimaforandringer,« siger dansk klimaprofessor.”
Tvisten om klimaet (19. maj 2008)
“De globale middeltemperaturer synes de seneste år at stagnere eller ligefrem at falde. Rokker det ved den almindelige opfattelse, at vores klode er ramt af en langsigtet global opvarmning? Eigil Kaas og Ole Humlum er stærkt uenige.”
Wikipedia.dk
In English
AlterNet
How the mountain of climate change evidence is being used to undermine the cause. By Bill McKibben (February 27, 2010)
“As the backlash against climate science grows, the number of Americans who believe humans are to blame for warming the planet is shrinking.”
How to answer the dumb things climate deniers say. By Joshua Frank (February 9, 2010)
“Below are a few responses to some of the more frequent statements these deniers toss our way.”
BBC
Climate scepticism: The top 10 (12 November 2007)
“What are some of the reasons why ‘climate sceptics’ dispute the evidence that human activities such as industrial emissions of greenhouse gases and deforestation are bringing potentially dangerous changes to the Earth’s climate?”
Center for Public Integrity
Topic: Climate Change Lobby (2009-2011)
Climate Action Against Disinformation
“A global coalition of over 50 leading climate and anti-disinformation organisations demanding robust, coordinated and proactive strategies to deal with the scale of the threat of climate misinformation and disinformation.”
Corporate Europe Observatory
Climate Crashers
“Exposing corporate lobbying and propaganda that undermine effective EU climate policy.”
Ecologist
Merchants of Doubt. By Phil England (10 September 2010). Review of Naomi Oreskes & Erik M. Conway’s book (Bloomsbury Press, 2010, 355 p.). “A hard-hitting new investigation report on the scientists prepared to distort the truth on the key issues of our time – from tobacco to climate change to coal fired power stations.” See also: What does Naomi Oreskes’ study on consensus show? (Skeptical Science).
The Guardian
Climate wars: Guardian special investigation, Part 1-12. By Fred Pearce (9 February 2010)
“In a major investigation, the leading science writer Fred Pearce uncovers the real story behind the hacked emails.”
In Defence of Marxism
Discussion document: Global Warming: A socialist perspective, Part 1. By Brian J. Baker (28 April 2008; online at Internet Archive)
“We start today a serialised article on Global Warming, written by one of our readers who challenges the scientific basis upon which the theory of human-caused climate change is based.” See links at the bottom of the article to Part 2-4.
Emil Reed replies to Brian J. Baker on climate change (9 May 2008)
“Brain J. Baker has given an extremely misleading picture of the state of knowledge about climate change.”
Global-warming deniers and climate change ideologues, Part 1: Basic questions. By Mauro Vanetti (23 May 2008)
“Baker ridicules the concept of ‘scientific consensus’. It is true that the scientific community does not operate in a vacuum and that it is very often subject to pressures of politics, religion, social rules, prejudices and also directly from the market. But this does not invalidate the concept of scientific consensus altogether.” See links at the bottom of the article to Part 2-5.
International Socialism
Why we should be sceptical of climate sceptics. By Suzanne Jeffery (Issue 129, Winter 2011, p.171-182)
“The climate sceptics have a political agenda rather than a scientific one. They want to defeat the argument that global warming requires action, regulation and legislation.”
Monthly Review
The scientific case for modern anthropogenic global warming. By John W. Farley (Vol.60, No.3, July-August 2008, p.68-90)
“Arguments against the radical journalist Alexander Cockburn, who forcefully proclaimed anthropogenic global warming to be a myth.”
MR Online
‘Conspiracy’ science: Mass media and the conservative backlash on global warming. By Anthony DiMaggio (March 10, 2010)
“Global warming graduated in the last few years to the status of one of the great enduring political issues of our time. Unfortunately, public discourse is taking a dramatic step backward in light of corporate media’s attacks on the scientific community.”
Natural Environment Researh Council (NERC)
NERC Climate change challenge: Summary of the debate (2009; online at Internet Archive)
“A panel of climate change experts answered questions about the science of climate change and discussed a range of scientific theories that try to explain the recent global warming … The web discussion forum has provided the opportunity for sceptics of the science of human-induced climate change to be frank about their views.”
Nature
Distorting the climate message. By Candis Callison (Vol.463, 2010, p.161-162). Review of James Hoggan, Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming (Greystone Books, 2009, 224 p.). “Their narrative deftly exposes a landscape of denial that is unrelenting, extensive, international and tactically rich. It is a convincing and riveting tale of conspiracy …”
New Scientist
Climate change: A guide for the perplexed (16 May 2007)
“For those who are not sure what to believe, here is our round-up of the most common climate myths and misconceptions.”
See also: Climate myths: Assessing the evidence (16 May 2007)
RealClimate
Index: Responses to common contrarian arguments
The Royal Society
Facts and fictions about climate change (3 September 2009)
“It has become fashionable in some parts of the UK media to portray the scientific evidence that has been collected about climate change and the impact of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities as an exaggeration.”
Climate change controversies: a simple guide (30 June 2007)
“The Society responds here to eight key arguments that are currently in circulation by setting out, in simple terms, where the weight of scientific evidence lies.”
Scientific American
Seven answers to climate contrarian nonsense. By John Rennie (November 30, 2009)
“Evidence for human interference with Earth’s climate continues to accumulate.”
Skeptical Science
“This website gets skeptical about global warming skepticism. Do their arguments have any scientific basis? What does the peer reviewed scientific literature say?”
The Skeptic’s Dictionary
Climate change deniers
“Climate change deniers are contrarians who challenge the evidence that human activities such as deforestation and human behaviors that result in more greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide are causing changes in our planet’s climate that may prove devastating and irreversible.” With links to sites and news stories.
SourceWatch
The climate change portal/Climate Change Skeptics Corner: “SourceWatch contains extensive documented information on so-called ‘climate change skeptics’, their claims and their known corporate or other financiers.”
Union of Concerned Scientists
Global Warming Skeptic Organizations (2013)
“Here’s a quick primer on several prominent global warming skeptic organizations, including examples of their disinformation efforts and funding sources from the fossil fuel industry.”
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Global warming controversy
- Climate change denial
- Business action on climate change
- Energy Lobby
- Public opinion on climate change
ZNet
Global warming & climate change (2007, online at Internet Archive)
“Alexander Cockburn wrote a piece critical of global warming theorists. ZNet asked George Monbiot to respond. Here is their exchange + Others respond.”
Se også på Socialistisk Bibliotek:
- Tag: Klima & Miljø / Climate & Environment
- Emneliste: Klimaet og den globale opvarmning
- Emneliste: Lomborgs bog Køl af og den globale opvarmning
- Emneliste: Lomborg og klodens tilstand
- Tidslinjen 27. september 2013 om 1. delrapport fra FNs klimapanel (ICPP)
- Linkbox: Al Gores ubekvemme sandhed
