>
Houston..... we've got a problem
Pay back is hell when screw with NASA’s flight program.
>Houston..... we've got a problem
“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.”
As a young scientist I attended a seminar given by someone modelling a biocatalyic reaction. After the talk a co-worker I didn’t really know asked me what I thought. I told him that modelling such reactions wasn’t worth a bucket of spit and that it would just be easier to actually DO the experiment. He got a strange look on his face and walked away. Found out later he modeled biological reactions.
In any case good scientists have a motto, “when real data disagrees with your model, you need a new model”.
No way! You mean this state we’ve been in for the last 10,000 years is a stable equilibrium? One in which the restorative forces increase faster than the perturbative forces when it is stressed? One that has survived volcanoes, sunspots, massive deforestation, and who knows what else? I call bullshit! The conservatives are obviously guilty, and therefore there must be something they are guilty of, something big. Climate change that is going to destroy all the climates in the solar system is the only thing big enough to fit that bill. Kill all conservatives! Global warming! Increase the debt ceiling!
Global Warming is so ‘00s. The politically correct term is “climate disruption.”
Maybe this new study is NASA’s way of saying “thanks” to Obama for his cuts to their budget - the money train was gone so now they can tell the truth about the global warming bs?
The Global Warming, Climate Change, whatever is BS intended to create a new industry of 'Carbon Credit Exchange'. The people pushing Global Warming also have invested heavily in the 'Carbon Credit Exchange' industry. Al Gore was planning on being a billionaire.
This will be my argument with the next warming bozo I encounter.
But, but, but I thought the “science” was settled. Al Gore said so. Only ignorant, denilialist, flat-earther, spam-sucking trailer trash had doubts about the THEORY of anthropomorphic global warming.
We can only hope for a wide enough dissemination of truth to jeopardize Algore's future earnings. Maybe he'll even have to sell his $8.875M California digs.
July 26, 2011 · 10:52 am
Spencer, R.W.; Braswell, W.D. On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance. Remote Sens. 2011, 3, 1603-1613.
The University of Alabama has issues a news release on it which reads
Climate models get energy balance wrong, make too hot forecasts of global warming
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (July 26, 2011) — Data from NASA’s Terra satellite shows that when the climate warms, Earth’s atmosphere is apparently more efficient at releasing energy to space than models used to forecast climate change have been programmed to “believe.”
The result is climate forecasts that are warming substantially faster than the atmosphere, says Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville.
The previously unexplained differences between model-based forecasts of rapid global warming and meteorological data showing a slower rate of warming have been the source of often contentious debate and controversy for more than two decades.
In research published this week in the journal “Remote Sensing” http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf, Spencer and UA Huntsville’s Dr. Danny Braswell compared what a half dozen climate models say the atmosphere should do to satellite data showing what the atmosphere actually did during the 18 months before and after warming events between 2000 and 2011.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Spencer said. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
Not only does the atmosphere release more energy than previously thought, it starts releasing it earlier in a warming cycle. The models forecast that the climate should continue to absorb solar energy until a warming event peaks. Instead, the satellite data shows the climate system starting to shed energy more than three months before the typical warming event reaches its peak.
“At the peak, satellites show energy being lost while climate models show energy still being gained,” Spencer said.
This is the first time scientists have looked at radiative balances during the months before and after these transient temperature peaks.
Applied to long-term climate change, the research might indicate that the climate is less sensitive to warming due to increased carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere than climate modelers have theorized. A major underpinning of global warming theory is that the slight warming caused by enhanced greenhouse gases should change cloud cover in ways that cause additional warming, which would be a positive feedback cycle.
Instead, the natural ebb and flow of clouds, solar radiation, heat rising from the oceans and a myriad of other factors added to the different time lags in which they impact the atmosphere might make it impossible to isolate or accurately identify which piece of Earth’s changing climate is feedback from manmade greenhouse gases.
“There are simply too many variables to reliably gauge the right number for that,” Spencer said. “The main finding from this research is that there is no solution to the problem of measuring atmospheric feedback, due mostly to our inability to distinguish between radiative forcing and radiative feedback in our observations.”
For this experiment, the UA Huntsville team used surface temperature data gathered by the Hadley Climate Research Unit in Great Britain. The radiant energy data was collected by the Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) instruments aboard NASA’s Terra satellite.
The six climate models were chosen from those used by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The UA Huntsville team used the three models programmed using the greatest sensitivity to radiative forcing and the three that programmed in the least sensitivity.
http://vidcall.com/index.php/videos/show/2090/#chooseVidcallMailWin-coming-soon
Poor Australians got caught in Algore’s trap. :(
Global warming scientist under investigation
Is It Over for Global Warming Alarmism?
New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
New Study of NASA Data May Debunk Global Warming Predictions
Global Warming on Free Republic
This news is probably going to hurt the employment rate in the short term.
Think of what will happen to the Marxist environmental-crisis alarmism industry?
These people may have to start looking for new jobs. MAYBE. Or perhaps these very productive individuals can be bought out by the media government conglomeration and entertainment industry where LIEberal fiction is best suited, I suppose.
Dems will drop the GW scam soon - too much stuff out there saying it’s bogus. The next liberal scam: ‘running out of water - we’re all going to die’...
Gore will do ‘water credits’ with poor corrupt countries while running a hundred large water fountains in his yard.
Big fountains will pop up in Hollywood.
It’ll be ‘water everywhere’ for liberal elites - they’ll be ‘buying’ Gore’s water credits...filling their pools, running their fountains. Smug elite STARS’ will lecture middle class Americans not to bathe or wash their SUV’s. Or brush their teeth. Elite liberals wearing baseball caps, wagging their fingers at us will try to convince us they’re part of the common folks... Liberal gazillionairs think we’re easy to fool.
Of course the only people who will buy such idiocy are their shills in the MSM...and they’ll push the message to the great unwashed... along with the ‘scientists’ - those paid off in grant moeny...
God I hate liberals.
