Sala de prensa

Es enternecedor ver como El Mundo y El Pais conciden en algo, y con tanto entusiasmo.

Existe en Espana algun periodico de larga tirada que mencione de vez en cuando alguna idea esceptica?

Es enternecedor ver como El Mundo y El Pais conciden en algo, y con tanto entusiasmo.

Existe en Espana algun periodico de larga tirada que mencione de vez en cuando alguna idea esceptica?

Pues parece que si. Hoy he visto en el ABC el siguiente artículo de Ramón Pérez-Maura
http://www.abc.es/lasfirmasdeabc/20140509/abci-apocalipticos-integrados-201405081452.html

El hecho de que existan medios de prensa que tengan una visión distinta ... ya es un consuelo

Shameless Climate McCarthyism on full display – scientist forced to resign

Wikipedia says:

McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason without proper regard for evidence. It also means “the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism.

 

La civilización egipcia decayó por culpa de un cambio climático rápido. Al menos no dicen que fue el CO2.
http://www.elperiodico.com/es/noticias/sociedad/cambio-climatico-pudo-provocar-caida-imperio-egipcio-3277975

El cielo se nos va a caer encima.

http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2014/05/21/actualidad/1400676551_309118.html

supongo que te refieres a esta noticia

El insigne Catedrático nos obsequia con una nueva clase de Física Aplicada:

¿Por qué tras el 'verano' de San Isidro nos hemos helado esta semana?

 

Sin leer el artículo sabréis ya que el culpable es "el cambio climático"....

El insigne Catedrático nos obsequia con una nueva clase de Física Aplicada:

¿Por qué tras el 'verano' de San Isidro nos hemos helado esta semana?

 

Sin leer el artículo sabréis ya que el culpable es "el cambio climático"....

Por favor ¿Esto no debería ir en el hilo " ¡Hay que joderse con el C.C.! "?

Aqui deben ponerse cosas serias,...

Muchos prefieren imponer un control casi policíaco sobre las nuevas ideas e investigaciones. Pero, en realidad y pese a todas sus presiones, el sistema de peer review no forma parte del método científico.

Did Isaac Newton Need Peer Review?

But it turns out that peer review is only the scientific community’s most recent method of providing this scrutiny—and it’s worth asking if science is, in fact, “real” only if it’s been approved by anonymous referees.
A few years ago I began writing a book about the history of Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious scientific publications. I was incredibly surprised to learn that Nature published some papers without peer review up until 1973. In fact, many of the most influential texts in the history of science were never put through the peer review process, including Isaac Newton’s 1687 Principia Mathematica, Albert Einstein’s 1905 paper on relativity, and James Watson and Francis Crick’s 1953 Nature paper on the structure of DNA.

 

Muchos prefieren imponer un control casi policíaco sobre las nuevas ideas e investigaciones. Pero, en realidad y pese a todas sus presiones, el sistema de peer review no forma parte del método científico.

Did Isaac Newton Need Peer Review?

But it turns out that peer review is only the scientific community’s most recent method of providing this scrutiny—and it’s worth asking if science is, in fact, “real” only if it’s been approved by anonymous referees.
A few years ago I began writing a book about the history of Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious scientific publications. I was incredibly surprised to learn that Nature published some papers without peer review up until 1973. In fact, many of the most influential texts in the history of science were never put through the peer review process, including Isaac Newton’s 1687 Principia Mathematica, Albert Einstein’s 1905 paper on relativity, and James Watson and Francis Crick’s 1953 Nature paper on the structure of DNA.

 

Tambien habia un enorme consenso cuando Galileo fue condenado por sus hereticas ideas... Quizas la inquisicion invento el peer review?

Cita de: hrizzo en Lunes 26 Mayo 2014 15:12:05 pm

Muchos prefieren imponer un control casi policíaco sobre las nuevas ideas e investigaciones. Pero, en realidad y pese a todas sus presiones, el sistema de peer review no forma parte del método científico.

Did Isaac Newton Need Peer Review?

But it turns out that peer review is only the scientific community’s most recent method of providing this scrutiny—and it’s worth asking if science is, in fact, “real” only if it’s been approved by anonymous referees.
A few years ago I began writing a book about the history of Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious scientific publications. I was incredibly surprised to learn that Nature published some papers without peer review up until 1973. In fact, many of the most influential texts in the history of science were never put through the peer review process, including Isaac Newton’s 1687 Principia Mathematica, Albert Einstein’s 1905 paper on relativity, and James Watson and Francis Crick’s 1953 Nature paper on the structure of DNA.

 

Tambien habia un enorme consenso cuando Galileo fue condenado por sus hereticas ideas... Quizas la inquisicion invento el peer review?

La inquisición no tenía tan mala leche.

Prohíben a los meteorólogos canadienses hablar del cambio climático


http://www.designntrend.com/articles/14673/20140529/canadian-weather-forecasters-forbidden-talking-climate-change.htm

Joanne Nova acaba de publicar esta noticia en su blog:

BIG NEWS Part I: Historic development — New Solar climate model coming

We’ve been working on this for a year and a half, gradually building up the pieces bit by bit, gradually filling in a picture that is now almost complete. We’ve been bursting to tell the world about it for months, but always noting it would be better if developed and tested before it went public. (But how long is a piece of string!) The big danger is that an inadequately explained or prepared alternate explanation of how the climate works will not be given proper consideration, and thereafter ignored as “debunked”. There is never a perfect time, but we’ve reached the point where the theory will be tested and developed better by open review. It’s time to set it free…
We explore some climate datasets and find something interesting, which provides a clue to building up a solar model. We think we have deduced the nature of the indirect solar force that largely influences temperature here on Earth. We get a physical model with physical interpretations (that is, not just curve fitting), working models, and decent fit to observed data.
Both the CO2 model and the new solar model are viable explanations of the global warming of the last century. Any linear mix (e.g. 60% CO2, 40% solar) also fits the observed temperatures. On the performance of the models over the last century, we cannot tell which is correct. However, over the next decade the models predict dramatically different things: the CO2 model of course predicts continued warming, while the solar model predicts a sharp fall in temperature very soon.
The fans of the CO2 dominant models are not going to be happy. It seems the climate is an 80-20 sort of thing, where there is a dominant influence responsible for 80% of climate change and a tail of 20% of other factors. It turns out that the CO2 concentration is not the 80% factor, but in the 20% tail. An indirect solar influence seems to be the main factor.

El tiempo y la naturaleza se encargarán de probar o refutar esta nueva conjetura.