Re:cult of global warming (Score 5, Informative)

he MUST be in the pocket of big business.

Actually he probably wants to promote the book he is going to publish. So he definitely is in it for the money. Also, he selectively quotes results, while omitting contrary findings. Just a few aspects from the artikel:

While sea-ice has diminished in the Arctic since 1978, it has grown by 8% in the Southern Ocean.... Why is east Antarctica getting colder?" It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming.

Other sources present a completely different picture :

'The greatest temperature rise on Earth over the past five decades has been found on the Antarctic peninsula, which stretches north from the continent towards South America,' said Dr John Turner. 'Temperatures have risen 5C on the peninsula.' That figure is 10 times the average global temperature rise for the same period. In addition, researchers reported last October that in just over a month, an entire Antarctic ice shelf, bigger than Gloucestershire, had disintegrated and disappeared, with its loss directly linked to man-made global warming.

Also, why does not he mention the fact that the original Svensmark paper has been disproofed? His claim

But more than 10 years have passed since Henrik Svensmark in Copenhagen first pointed out a much more powerful mechanism. He saw from compilations of weather satellite data that cloudiness varies according to how many atomic particles are coming in from exploded stars. More cosmic rays, more clouds.

is simply wrong: See Damen and Laut, 2004, available at http://www.realclimate.org/damon&laut_2004.pdf

An update with the correct data (from the International Satellite Cloud Climatology Program,ISCCP) shows that the development of total global cloud cover since 1992 has been in clear contradiction to the hypothesis proposed by the authors

So decide for yourself how unbiased the author is.