New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

Dark Knight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2004
Messages
21,649
Reaction score
82
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.

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.htm

I wonder if Al Gore will give his Nobel Peace Prize back, now?
 
...I wonder if Al Gore will give his Nobel Peace Prize back, now?

Not until your link works, at least. ;)

I don't think Al Gore has to apologize for popularizing something that had achieved scientific near-consensus.

If it turns out the scientists were wrong, Al Gore and I and everyone else will revise our understanding of the facts. That's how science works.

As opposed to organized religion, where people just keep believing the same old nonsense despite the utter lack of supporting evidence.
 
Lots of information out there on Dr. Spencer. He's a wing-nut. :crazy: I don't think Al Gore needs to worry about the status of his Nobel.
 
Not until your link works, at least. ;)

I don't think Al Gore has to apologize for popularizing something that had achieved scientific near-consensus.

If it turns out the scientists were wrong, Al Gore and I and everyone else will revise our understanding of the facts. That's how science works.

As opposed to organized religion, where people just keep believing the same old nonsense despite the utter lack of supporting evidence.

Friggin' links!!! LOL! Hopefully this one will work. And Al Gore cherry picked his science for his movie, that's pretty well known, and made a small fortune off of his little crusade.

I wouldn't bring religion into this if I were you, because it's not only OT (and an uncalled for insult) but I'll wipe the floor with you, lol! :crazy:

Try this link: http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
 
I don't understand why no link is wanting to work!!!! GAH! :doh:
 
I think I'll believe the anecdotal evidence (glaciers melting, oceans warming) that documentaries produced by people that have visited the affected areas, before I'll consider modelling by NASA.
 
I think I'll believe the anecdotal evidence (glaciers melting, oceans warming) that documentaries produced by people that have visited the affected areas, before I'll consider modelling by NASA.

really? Anecdotal over proof?
 
really? Anecdotal over proof?

I won't argue that anecdotal evidence has its limitations.

But many scientists are pointing out that Spencer has misread his own modeling.
 
Friggin' links!!! LOL! Hopefully this one will work. And Al Gore cherry picked his science for his movie, that's pretty well known, and made a small fortune off of his little crusade.

I wouldn't bring religion into this if I were you, because it's not only OT (and an uncalled for insult) but I'll wipe the floor with you, lol! :crazy:

Try this link: http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html

I stand by my post and its contents. Religion is only OT here when some believer gets offended. The rest of the time it is discussed with some regularity.

What I was responding to was the smugness with which each challenge to climate change science is greeted, as if the fact that science doesn't always give us absolute certainty were a weakness. In fact, the ability of science to correct itself is its strength. As a rule, organized religions have not demonstrated the same ability.

And BTW, Al Gore isn't infallible, but his aim was to make a concept understandable to the general public. He's not a scientist himself nor does he claim to be one.
 
I stand by my post and its contents. Religion is only OT here when some believer gets offended. The rest of the time it is discussed with some regularity.

Well no, it's OT because it has nothing to do with climate change. :waitasec:
 
I tend to agree with DK, Nova, that religion doesn't actually have anything to do with global warming, or, as I'd prefer to call it, climate change.

And I'm left wondering two things:

If I had posted this link, would you have said the same thing? Somehow, I doubt it, as religion is not something someone connects readily to me...but it is to DK. KWIM?

And second, what a great deflection of discussion about the topic - global warming - into religion.

With the latter, I think that the discussion should be about the science of global warming/climate change, and let's leave God out of this...after all, one of the main tenants of climate change is that it's man-made...so let's talk about that.

Best-
Herding Cats
 
I tend to agree with DK, Nova, that religion doesn't actually have anything to do with global warming, or, as I'd prefer to call it, climate change.

And I'm left wondering two things:

If I had posted this link, would you have said the same thing? Somehow, I doubt it, as religion is not something someone connects readily to me...but it is to DK. KWIM?

And second, what a great deflection of discussion about the topic - global warming - into religion.

With the latter, I think that the discussion should be about the science of global warming/climate change, and let's leave God out of this...after all, one of the main tenants of climate change is that it's man-made...so let's talk about that.

Best-
Herding Cats

Thanks, and my biggest concern is that no group of scientists can disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that any changes in the climate are not a part of earth's natural cycle. We obviously know that the earth's climate has changed dramatically on numerous occasions over it's history. The reason that worries me, is because if it is, in fact, just part of the cycle, then we cannot stop it, and this would be the first time it's happened with the earth so populated and industrialized. The end result could be catastrophic if we do NOT start to make adaptations for what may be inevitable, and not controlled by man.
 
I tend to agree with DK, Nova, that religion doesn't actually have anything to do with global warming, or, as I'd prefer to call it, climate change.

And I'm left wondering two things:

If I had posted this link, would you have said the same thing? Somehow, I doubt it, as religion is not something someone connects readily to me...but it is to DK. KWIM?

And second, what a great deflection of discussion about the topic - global warming - into religion.

With the latter, I think that the discussion should be about the science of global warming/climate change, and let's leave God out of this...after all, one of the main tenants of climate change is that it's man-made...so let's talk about that.

Best-
Herding Cats

a. It was just a remark and hardly a "deflection."

b. You are probably right that the identity of the OP brought the comment to my mind. But am I to blame if some posters associate themselves with religious faith?

But c. I was responding to the smugness with regards to Al Gore and, by extension, scientific consensus. In my experience, that smugness is very much connected to religious "certainty", at least in posts here. (Atheists can be smug, too, of course, but non-belief isn't inherently hostile to questioning.)

And d. Religious certainty has lately been very much a foe of science, at least in the U.S. Personally, I think science and faith can be reconciled, but not when faith takes the form of unquestioning and unquestionable dogma.

Finally e. It's funny how religious believers nowadays have no problem inserting themselves and their beliefs into questions of politics and science, but woe to he who mentions the fact.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thedebate/2005/10/global_warming__3.html
 
Thanks, and my biggest concern is that no group of scientists can disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that any changes in the climate are not a part of earth's natural cycle. We obviously know that the earth's climate has changed dramatically on numerous occasions over it's history. The reason that worries me, is because if it is, in fact, just part of the cycle, then we cannot stop it, and this would be the first time it's happened with the earth so populated and industrialized. The end result could be catastrophic if we do NOT start to make adaptations for what may be inevitable, and not controlled by man.

To me, the bottom line is that the things we need to do to reduce carbon emissions are many of the same steps we need to take to keep the oceans and atmosphere healthy, and to avoid burying ourselves in trash.

We don't have to be certain beyond a reasonable doubt that climate change is manmade to know we need to take action.
 
Sorry to basically respond to my own posts, but I was thinking about my part in the discussion here. I can't honestly say I didn't mean what I wrote, but I certainly didn't mean it to become such a big deal.

So, Dark Knight, I apologize for mentioning religion in this thread. I won't bring it up again, but I'm not trying to grab the last word: I hope you and HC and anyone else will feel free to add whatever comments you like.

As always, DK, I appreciate all the information you bring to WS. You are and have been a major contributor to what I know about the world and I greatly appreciate the time and energy you give here so freely.

And on a personal note, thanks for the comments on Fort Wayne. My sister found a great house there and is finding she likes the city very much.
 
Sorry to basically respond to my own posts, but I was thinking about my part in the discussion here. I can't honestly say I didn't mean what I wrote, but I certainly didn't mean it to become such a big deal.

So, Dark Knight, I apologize for mentioning religion in this thread. I won't bring it up again, but I'm not trying to grab the last word: I hope you and HC and anyone else will feel free to add whatever comments you like.

As always, DK, I appreciate all the information you bring to WS. You are and have been a major contributor to what I know about the world and I greatly appreciate the time and energy you give here so freely.

And on a personal note, thanks for the comments on Fort Wayne. My sister found a great house there and is finding she likes the city very much.

Well said, and thanks from me, Nova.

I think what you are saying about climate change is accurate. To keep things healthy for us as a species, we need to be better at reducing our footprint. I agree completely on that angle.

But I also agree that we need to learn how to adapt because this might be an inevitable, normal cycle...and irrespective of what personal habits we change, the climate change is going to occur, and we'd be very badly caught out if we weren't able to adapt and overcome, and learn how to live in a "brave new world".

If the discussion centers purely on one angle or another, then we're missing half of the solution/preparation/prevention (if possible) that we'll need. And that bothers me, and probably others...

And while I do consider Gore a politician, he's no scientist. He's a pol, and I know that pols lie and twist things to fit their own personal agenda. KWIM?

It'll be interesting to follow this particular story...we will see what happens.

Best-
Herding Cats
 
Well said, and thanks from me, Nova.

I think what you are saying about climate change is accurate. To keep things healthy for us as a species, we need to be better at reducing our footprint. I agree completely on that angle.

But I also agree that we need to learn how to adapt because this might be an inevitable, normal cycle...and irrespective of what personal habits we change, the climate change is going to occur, and we'd be very badly caught out if we weren't able to adapt and overcome, and learn how to live in a "brave new world".

If the discussion centers purely on one angle or another, then we're missing half of the solution/preparation/prevention (if possible) that we'll need. And that bothers me, and probably others...

And while I do consider Gore a politician, he's no scientist. He's a pol, and I know that pols lie and twist things to fit their own personal agenda. KWIM?

It'll be interesting to follow this particular story...we will see what happens.

Best-
Herding Cats

I do know what you mean about politicos, but Al Gore was functioning as a teacher when he wrote and produced An Inconvenient Truth. He certainly knew that well-funded parties would dissect the piece and greatly inflate any discrepancies, so I think the info he included was accurate to the best of his knowledge at the time.

I taught college students for years and I can tell you that every lecture is by definition an oversimplification of the material to some degree or another. My TAs and I used to discuss it all the time. It may be possible to be perfectly precise and accurate, but then you probably will make no sense to most of your listeners. So you choose what to include and inescapably distort some things in the process.

And you are right that Gore's aim was to persuade as well as to inform. And persuasive speech by its very nature will always lay itself open to criticism.

***

I agree that we should also be preparing to adapt even while we do our best to avoid making the problem worse.
 
Lots of information out there on Dr. Spencer. He's a wing-nut. :crazy: I don't think Al Gore needs to worry about the status of his Nobel.

Yeah, sounds like a real wing-nut to me! :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)

Roy W. Spencer is a climatologist and a Principal Research Scientist for the University of Alabama in Huntsville, as well as the U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR-E) on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has served as senior scientist for climate studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama.

He is known for his satellite-based temperature monitoring work, for which he was awarded the American Meteorological Society's Special Award. Spencer's research suggests that global warming is mostly natural, and that the climate system is quite insensitive to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions and aerosol pollution and suggests that natural, chaotic variations in low cloud cover may account for most observed warming.[1][2]
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
1,430
Total visitors
1,534

Forum statistics

Threads
589,162
Messages
17,915,052
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top