Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,328

    New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

    hmmm

    [QUOTE]
    New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
    By James Taylor | Forbes – Wed, Jul 27, 2011
    NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
    Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into alarmist computer models.

    "The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."
    In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than alarmist computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
    The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.
    Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.
    The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist computer models have predicted.
    In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models predict.
    When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.
    [/QUOTE]

  2. #2
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,960
    The argument has shifted; it is now about climate change, not global warming.:rolleyes:

    You may have not been CC'd on the memo. For that, you should be grateful.

  3. #3
    Maybe that's why Obama defunded the **** out of them.

  4. #4
    Blow.
    Gaping.
    Hole.


    tee hee

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Staten Island
    Posts
    8,960
    [QUOTE=FF2®;4076409]Blow.
    Gaping.
    Hole.


    tee hee[/QUOTE]

    Peebag was right about you.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,802
    [QUOTE]
    New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
    By James Taylor | Forbes – Wed, Jul 27, 2011
    NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than [B]alarmist [/B]computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than [B]alarmists [/B]have claimed.
    Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple assumptions fed into [B]alarmist [/B]computer models.

    "The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show," Spencer said in a July 26 University of Alabama press release. "There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans."
    In addition to finding that far less heat is being trapped than [B]alarmist [/B]computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the atmosphere begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer models predicted.
    The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter the global warming debate.
    Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds. [B]Alarmist [/B]computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each of which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have long shown that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds as the [B]alarmist [/B]computer models have predicted.
    The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA and NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not increasing in the manner predicted by [B]alarmist [/B]computer models. The Terra satellite data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far more longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and 1999 than [B]alarmist [/B]computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than [B]alarmist [/B]computer models have predicted.
    In short, the central premise of [B]alarmist [/B]global warming theory is that carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being trapped in the earth's atmosphere than the [B]alarmist [/B]computer models predict, and far more heat is escaping into space than the [B]alarmist [/B]computer models predict.
    When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between [B]alarmist [/B]climate models and real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials would be wise to take notice. Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the purveyors of global warming [B][U]alarmism [/U][/B]truly are.
    [/QUOTE]



    That article was yet another [B]alarmingly [/B]fair and balanced analysis from FORBES magazine.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=pauliec;4076247]Maybe that's why Obama defunded the **** out of them.[/QUOTE]
    Or why they bothered to release the findings.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,802
    [URL="http://circleh.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/roy-spencer-pulls-another-misleading-stunt/"]http://circleh.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/roy-spencer-pulls-another-misleading-stunt/[/URL]

    [QUOTE]


    The Heartland Institute is NOT a scientific organization affiliated with NASA at all, but a right-wing think tank.

    {{{NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing.}}}

    [B]The greenhouse effect is NOT about how much heat is being released by the atmosphere into space, because that would be the same no matter what the composition of the atmosphere! It’s about how long the heat that is in the Earth’s atmosphere remains [U]BEFORE [/U]it is released[/B]. If LESS heat was being released, the atmosphere would soon grow so hot that life would be impossible and then the oceans would completely boil away. No “alarmist” climate scientist has ever claimed that would happen. This article is one long strawman type fallacy!

    Roy Spencer is a FRAUD! Not only is he a climate change denialist, he is also a CREATIONIST. He has NO business doing science if he doesn’t even support the theory of evolution, a basic concept of modern biology!

    Not to mention that last year he was caught doing this to his own data presentations:[/QUOTE]


    More:
    [URL="Another phony global warming denialist busted!"]Another phony global warming denialist busted![/URL]


    rebuttle:

    [URL="http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/01/is-spencer-hiding-the-increase-we-report-you-decide/"]http://www.drroyspencer.com/2010/01/is-spencer-hiding-the-increase-we-report-you-decide/[/URL]

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us