Global Warming Doomsters’ Theories Wrong, Says NASA Study
Global warming proponents can catch up on the sleep they lost worrying about the planet getting hotter with each passing day. A NASA study which analyzes satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011, published in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing, reports that Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than global warming proponents’ computer models have predicted.
The data also supports prior studies which suggested that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap is far lesser heat than what have been claimed by the global warming doomsters.
The discrepancy between the model-based forecasts of rapid global warming and meteorological data showing a slower rate of warming has given rise to heated debates for more than two decades.
“The satellite observations suggest there is much more energy lost to space during and after warming than the climate models show,” Dr. Roy Spencer, study co-author and principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at The University of Alabama in Huntsville, said in a press release. “There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans.”
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Earlier Than Usual”
- Perfect Correlation
- Elon’s Hockey Stick
- Latest Climate News
- “Climate dread is everywhere”
- “The Atmosphere Is ‘Thirstier.’”
- Skynet Becomes Self Aware
- “We Have To Vote For It So That You Can See What’s In It”
- Diversity Is Our Strength
- “even within the lifetime of our children”
- 60 Years Of Progress in London
- The Anti-Greta
- “a persistent concern”
- Deadliest US Tornado Days
- The Other Side Of The Pond
- “HEMI V8 Roars Back”
- Big Pharma Sales Tool
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- 622 billion tons of new ice
- Fossil Fuels To Turn The UK Tropical
- 100% Tariffs On Chinese EV’s
- Fossil Fuels Cause Fungus
- Prophets Of Doom
- The Green New Deal Lives On
- Mission Accomplished!
Recent Comments
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- MLH on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on Perfect Correlation
- Jack the Insider on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Bob G on “Earlier Than Usual”
- John Francis on “Earlier Than Usual”
- John Francis on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Terry Shipman on “Earlier Than Usual”
- arn on “Earlier Than Usual”
- Gordon Vigurs on “Earlier Than Usual”
The history behind this research paper is more important than the results of the paper as this paper is defending a prior paper and disputing claims made by Dressler ( The Aggie Joke) No I did not forget the “R”!
I almost dropped by his site earlier to see if he had created another of his pretzel logic posts on hard science. Probably still cursing and stamping his little cloven hooves. “Damn you Gavin, how could you let this happen?!” Is it possible to ad hominem attack a satellite?
argumentum ad ??????? perhaps?
(that didn’t come out right)
It’s supposed to be “???????” or the cyrillic for sputnik. *sigh*
Now, that’s the hallmark of settled science.
The best science politicians will buy!
Even the liberal Guardian paper is taking Think Progress and Joe Romm to task on his contrived conspiracy linking the Murdochs to Climategate.
‘The Murdochs had nothing to do with ‘Climategate’ email hacking’
-Attempts by Climate Progress to link the UEA email hacking to News Corp have little basis in fact, and make advocates of climate action look silly-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2011/jul/29/climategate-email-hacking-murdochs
We know he did not miss it – he refuses to acknowledge it since it was not “peer reviewed”. The peers being his cabal.
Bagdad Romm strikes again.