About This Blog
Being one of those alleged anti-science conservatives, as was mentioned in my last post, today I have the latest development in anti-science global warming skepticism. This information comes from that noted anti-science organization - NASA. This article is titled, New NASA Data Blows Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism:
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.
Ah, what will those anti-science wingnuts over at NASA come up with next ? Don't they know the science is settled ? Btw, have any of you checked out the pictures from anti-science NASA's Dawn spacecraft ? They were taken while Dawn was orbiting the dwarf planet Vesta in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, 117 million miles from earth. Not bad for a bunch of anti-science winger deniers, eh ?
Here's some more global warming anti-science from NASA:
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.
It has long been my position that some anthropogenic (man-made) global warming was occurring, but I was never convinced of the doomsday scenario painted by Al Gore and others in the alarmist camp. This latest data confirms my skepticism, and could explain why the IPCC's hockey stick graph about future warming was wrong from the moment it was published. I have always based my "anti-science" view on the, you know, reliability of the science, which is turning out to be most unreliable. It will be interesting to see what the reaction to this information will be from the AGW camp. Here's the bottom line:
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.
Indeed. At the very least, I would think some apologies from the AGW alarmists are in order for all the name-calling.
That about wraps it up for this alleged anti-science wingnut conservative/libertarian denier. Over and out.
P.S. - One prominent global warming scientist, whose work about Arctic polar bears helped "galvanize" the AGW hysteria (you all remember the picture of the sad polar bear on the thin sheet of ice, as if polar bears can't swim), has just been suspended and accused of scientific misconduct. You may also remember that the world's leading expert on polar bears, Dr. Mitchell Taylor, was banned by the global warmers a couple years ago, because Dr. Taylor said the polar bears were doing fine, that their numbers were increasing. The global warmers found his expert views most "unhelpful", so they didn't want to hear them. That's just the way those "pro-science" warmers roll.
- 2013 (55)
- 2012 (125)
- 2011 (167)
- 2010 (185)
- 2009 (228)
- 2008 (195)
- 2007 (72)