Leading Scientist on Global Warming Has Heart Attack During Debate While Delegates Storm Out Over Impasse Over the Agreement

This video is simply incredible. During a television debate on global warming, Henrik Svensmark was hit by a heart attack.

Henrik Svensmark is a physicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen
Reports indicate that he is alright and that his pacemaker kicked in.

It really captures the increasing shrill debate over the issue. Delegates have been storming out of the conference in Copenhagen, here.

Lumumba Stanislaus Di-Aping, the negotiator for the so-called Group of 77 developing countries, walked out of negotiations and said that no progress was occurring. The hostility explodes into the open after the leaking of a Danish report, here

34 thoughts on “Leading Scientist on Global Warming Has Heart Attack During Debate While Delegates Storm Out Over Impasse Over the Agreement”

  1. Brochure reveals Gore accurately cited scientist’s prediction of ice-free Arctic — It is the Scientist who has the explaining to do — not Gore


    But Dr. Maslowski essentially threw Gore under the bus, according to a December 15, 2009 article in the UK Times:

    ‘It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr. Maslowski said. ‘I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.’ Mr. Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr. Maslowski as a ‘ballpark figure’ several years ago in a conversation with Mr. Gore.” The UK Times characterized it as Gore’s “embarrassing error.”

  2. Gyges:

    “but I’ve got a sick toddler, so am cutting myself a little slack editing wise.”

    Just a cold I hope, nothing serious?

    no need to apologize, you whip my ass on a regular basis and I might start thinking you are just a big softy.

  3. Byron,

    BTW I realize that the answer might not be “Because Xenon is a better insulator,” and might be something like “because Xenon is easier to work with.” I honestly don’t know and am too lazy today to look it up (I am mildly interested in the answer though).

    If I miss-categorized your point, based on my assumption I apologize. Also, that whole “higher quantity” thing was poorly worded, but I’ve got a sick toddler, so am cutting myself a little slack editing wise.

  4. Byron and Robert,

    Right, things can possess a certain property (in this case conductivity) but other things can possess a higher quantity of it.
    Now, care to apply that to your atmospheric gas\Xenon comment?

  5. Gyges:

    They arent, the conductivity of copper wire is much higher than that of wood. Most probably the sap in the tree is what carries the charge.

  6. Who said that trees are “so good at conducting electricity”? They are better than air, but not nearly as good as copper.

    Trees are just the path of least resistance. (literally)

  7. Byron,

    Lightening hits trees because they provide a way for the charge to reach the ground right? If they’re so good at conducting electricity, why do we use copper wiring?

  8. Philosopher:

    you ought to add Thomas Sowell’s book “Knowledge and Decision” to your reading list.

  9. John Puma:

    the specific heat of CO2 and other atmospheric gasses is about the same.

    A question, if CO2 is such a good insulator why do they use Argon, Krypton and Xenon in insulated glass windows?

  10. John misunderstand Robert’s point. Svensmark theory (check out his book “Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change”)is that cosmic rays raining down on us drive lower cloud formation/cover that has a historical and high correlation with temperature trends. The sun’s forcing effect is not radiant energy, but the magnetic shield (solar wind) it gives from varying amounts of cosmic rays raining down. High sunspot activity equals high shield equals less cloud cover and warming trends. Low sunspot activity (like the current abnormally long cycle)equals less protection equals the current cooling trend we are in now.

    Svensmark is an environmental and scientific hero whose work will be properly recognized soon. I applaud his moral courage and hope he is fine and fully recovered.

  11. Whatever energy the sun imparts to the earth, the more CO2 in the atmosphere the more of the imparted energy will be retained.

    The obvious presence of “natural” (not human caused) causes for warming of the earth does NOT preclude additional warming (or even cooling!) caused by human activity.

    “But we try to pretend, you see, that the external world exists altogether independently of us.” Alan Watts

  12. “His research over the past ten years has been instrumental in debunking the theory of man-made anthropomorphic global warming. Henrik Svensmark has produced compelling evidence that the temporary increase in global temperatures recorded prior to 1997 was caused chiefly by solar flare activity rather than CO2 emissions. Solar flare activity is caused by changes in the size of sunspots on the sun, resulting in more or less solar wind.”


Comments are closed.