Other Answers (5)

• Sounds like there could be some flawed usage of statistics, and even possible that one or more physicists could have come to the study with prejudices. Could even be bad research involved by one or more of the participants.
  
  Not everyone believes in global warming as a problem, and a lot of people, good scientists, believe that man%26#039;s part in global warming is insignificant and even possibly, irrelevant. Not the least, is the very real data that suggest that this is a normal temperature trend.
  
  All scientists have their weaknesses and strengths, and not a few of them have very real biases that skew their work. I%26#039;m not saying that is Mr. Henrik%26#039;s problem at all. Rather, it is just a statement of fact about people in general.
  
  Slona, Wolfendale, Cosmic Rays and Global Warming, 30th Annual Cosmic Ray Conference
  
  http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0706...
  
  and two more informal critiques:
  
  http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...
  
  http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...
  
  The bottom line is that climatologists are well aware of Svensmark%26#039;s arguments, and very few of them (if any) are buying them. Several have pretty much taken them apart.
  
  Anything%26#039;s possible, but this theory seems disproven. For a world leader to delay action on global warming because of this theory would be folly, and they%26#039;re not.
  
  Mark - Is providing 4 references to scientific analyses %26quot;denying it%26quot;?
  
  
  Science is just tying together observation data into a hypothesis, and seeing if predictions thereof can be verified. So a lot of science is taking the same data and looking at it in new ways.
  
  Folks have been observing stuff falling to earth since the dawn of mankind, but Issac Newton gave it insight.
  
  And a lot of science doesn%26#039;t pan out. Just because you study something and hope for a result doesn%26#039;t make it going to happen. Most of it is trial and error, slogging through until something clicks.