New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hold In Global Warming Alarmism

[edthecynic]

"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"

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News

Just another distorted bit of denier propaganda from a Heartland Institute stooge for the fossil fuel industry, James Taylor, who's spinning a new paper by denier cult scientist, creationist and general science flake, Roy Spencer. It's all hype and spin and has no real significance.

You forgot, Stuttering LimpTard's climatologist, who was caught fudging the satellite data by using the opposite sign to calculate diurnal satellite drift, to show cooling when the globe was waring. That Roy Spencer!

 

[edthecynic]

Actually global cooling is on it's way in. But I could use some warming after three unusually cold winters and short summers in a row.

That's the REAL hoax. We've been at a solar minimum. Check back in a few years.

I have been checking back every few years and the globe keeps cooling and we can expect more of it.

Your fat ass is not the globe! The globe has not cooled for decades!!!

 

[wirebender]

How can you believe an article that's obviously biased? The fact that they use the word "alarmism" and "gaping hole" indicates an agenda rather than a dispassionate assessment of the data.

Have you bothered to read the data? Doesn't look good for your team.

 

[westwall]

How can you believe an article that's obviously biased? The fact that they use the word "alarmism" and "gaping hole" indicates an agenda rather than a dispassionate assessment of the data.

Have you bothered to read the data? Doesn't look good for your team.

Please, don't confuse their computer models with facts. It makes their brains hurt.

 

[daveman]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

 

[wirebender]

[
I can just imagine you hunched over the keyboard going over all the data presented by the other side. You didn't get that data in an email from Phil Jones, did you?

konradv doesn't "do" data. It's all way over his head. He is a mouthpiece waiting for his handlers to tell him what to say about this development.

 

[Foxfyre]

"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"

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News

How can you believe an article that's obviously biased? The fact that they use the word "alarmism" and "gaping hole" indicates an agenda rather than a dispassionate assessment of the data.

I don't use articles to make a case for anything UNLESS the article is written by a credentialed expert on the subject. I do use articles that pull information together and refer us to the sources they used. In this case the article references a study and links to the study published/peer reviewed in RemoteSensing. Now if you wish to challenge the credentials or bias of that organiztion go for it. But you'll look like a blooming partisan idiot if you do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"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"

New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News

How can you believe an article that's obviously biased? The fact that they use the word "alarmism" and "gaping hole" indicates an agenda rather than a dispassionate assessment of the data.

Yep, the article is biased. The data, however, proves that the Earth is losing more heat than climate models predict. That means that all the models that are predicated on the Earth retaining heat at a higher rate are actually wrong.

 

[Dr.House]

Have you analyzed the data yourself or just swallowed what an obviously biased author laid out for you? All I saw in that article was a "hit piece", but since you obviously have inside information or already did extensive research, show it to us, please.

My refusal to do your homework doesn't discredit the data from NASA...

You can pretend it does if you want....

You're the one that didn't do his homework. You're just parroting whatever fits your bias. If you've read something other than that article, which doesn't say much except to throw around loaded words, show us.

Show me how the NASA data already posted for you in the article is discredited...

Show me how the NASA data is biased....

You're the one making the "bias" claim - Now do your homework...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How can you believe an article that's obviously biased? The fact that they use the word "alarmism" and "gaping hole" indicates an agenda rather than a dispassionate assessment of the data.

Like the other side's dispassionate assessment of the data? Really? You alarmist started this slippery slope back in the 70's making dire predictions based on models and not facts. You guys play loose and fast with (falsified) data and now you want some decorum?

Sciencific fraud of this magnitude would have completely and totally invalidated any arguement people were trying to propose:

1. Manipulate the data supporting the claims of a sudden and dangerous increase in the earth’s temperature;

2. Not disclose private doubts about whether the world was actually heating up;
Suppress evidence that contradicted the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming (AGW);

3. Disguise the facts around the Medieval Warm Period, when the earth was warmer that it is today;

4. Suppress opposition by squeezing dissenting scientists out of the peer review process.

You got a lot of nerve man.

I've got nerve? You're the that ascribes to a position that doesn't meet the logic test!!!

The energy-trapping properties of CO2 and the other GHGs are well documented.

The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen 30-40%, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution.

Therefore, if the trend continues, how can we expect anything but warming?


That's the logic behind AGW. If you notice in the article, it doesn't say that energy isn't being trapped, just that the rate is slower than some expect. Well, that's really a go-hum conclusion, since AGW proponents aren't unanimous in their predictions of how fast warming is coming, anyway. Just that it's coming.

Some facts that you miss. Despite the fact that GHGs have increased dramatically over the last decade the temperature has remained relatively constant. Does that simple fact not tell you anything? It certainly tells me something, but I guess I actually use my brain to think.

 

[Dr.House]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

AGW fundies are a queer bunch....

 

[Foxfyre]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

AGW fundies are a queer bunch....

But at least they are predictable.

For the life of me though I wish I could understand where they are coming from. Are they so weak they don't want personal freedom? They have some kind of deep seated need for a nanny state to take care of them? Or do they hate and loathe the USA so much they WANT to hand over as much control as possible to foreign entities?

I would like to see another reason that they so consistently reject any information or data that reassures us that we aren't destroying the planet with global warming, but I can't come up with one. Normal people I think would welcome such news. At least hope that it might be valid. But they won't even look at it. And continue to accuse the rest of us of all manner of vile things because we do.

And frankly, that's really scary.

 

[daveman]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

AGW fundies are a queer bunch....

Ain't they just?

 

[daveman]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

AGW fundies are a queer bunch....

But at least they are predictable.

For the life of me though I wish I could understand where they are coming from. Are they so weak they don't want personal freedom? They have some kind of deep seated need for a nanny state to take care of them? Or do they hate and loathe the USA so much they WANT to hand over as much control as possible to foreign entities?

I would like to see another reason that they so consistently reject any information or data that reassures us that we aren't destroying the planet with global warming, but I can't come up with one. Normal people I think would welcome such news. At least hope that it might be valid. But they won't even look at it. And continue to accuse the rest of us of all manner of vile things because we do.

And frankly, that's really scary.

I really can't come up with any different justifications for believing the AGW cult, either. I think some, like Roxy, think they'll be given a seat at the big table once the revolution occurs. "I supported you on the internet! I deserve a reward for being faithful!"

They really can't conceive that they're nothing more than tools to be discarded when no longer useful.

 

[westwall]

The AGW cultists sure do get shrill when heresy is presented, don't they?

Like any fundamentalist cultist, they can't tolerate disagreement.

And the really funny thing is, they claim to support science. Of course, real science (as opposed to the dianetics-like cult bullshit they believe) doesn't support the way they conduct their "science".

And man, they don't like that being pointed out.

AGW fundies are a queer bunch....

But at least they are predictable.

For the life of me though I wish I could understand where they are coming from. Are they so weak they don't want personal freedom? They have some kind of deep seated need for a nanny state to take care of them? Or do they hate and loathe the USA so much they WANT to hand over as much control as possible to foreign entities?

I would like to see another reason that they so consistently reject any information or data that reassures us that we aren't destroying the planet with global warming, but I can't come up with one. Normal people I think would welcome such news. At least hope that it might be valid. But they won't even look at it. And continue to accuse the rest of us of all manner of vile things because we do.

And frankly, that's really scary.

It's a combination of all of the above. The majority are jealous of those who work hard or are smarter then them so do everything in their power to thwart advancement or gain based on those two ideals.

Some are true believers who think that other than them humanity doesn't deserve to live on this planet.

Some are power hungry and wish to control what others do because they are petty tyrants.

And some are just pure fraudsters who want to make money by stealing it from those who worked honestly for it and as they are fundamentally cowards who won't just go rob a bank, they rely on the government to pass regulations so they steal it safely at the barrel of the governments gun.

 

[Big Fitz]

Why is information like this newest NASA data important?

1. Because it refutes a lot of NASA data supporting global warming used by AGW alarmists to push their agenda.

2. Because we have a President and a majority in Congress all too eager to pass some kind of cap and trade bill that will put a hefty tax on every American and provide all manner of perks for their cronies but will relinquish much of America's energy sovereignty to authority of a one-world-government like authority run by people who absolutely do not have our best interests at heart.

3. Because it is one more incentive to fight those who would take away our choices, options, and opportunities based on what appears to be likely fuzzy science at best and outright intentional fraud at worst.

The money phrases from that Forbes article linked in the OP:

....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. . . .

"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. . . .

. . . .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.

PEER REVIEW PEER REVIEW PEER REVIEW PEER REVIEW!!!!!

HOORAYYYYYY!!! PEER REVIEW MAKES EVERYTHING CHOCK FULL OF taRRRRROOOOOOthiness!!!!!!!

So we were told when it agreed with AGW.

Now? Is it not so much?

Yes?

No??

Crickets???

 

[ShackledNation]

So global warming alarmists don't believe NASA but they will believe Al Gore and scientists who have been found guilty of distorting data? Surprise surprise.

 

[daveman]

So global warming alarmists don't believe NASA but they will believe Al Gore and scientists who have been found guilty of distorting data? Surprise surprise.

Oh, they believe the AGW cultist Hansen at NASA -- you know, the one who has violated Federal ethics rules by profiting from his AGW activities.

NASA Scientist Accused of Using Celeb Status Among Environmental Groups to Enrich Himself - FoxNews.com

 

[Jitto]

the fact that we are allow more heat in is already bad

 

[daveman]

the fact that we are allow more heat in is already bad

Ummm...how do we keep heat from getting in? Big umbrellas?