New NASA Data Casts Doubt On Global Warming Models

bonch writes "Satellite data from NASA covering 2000 through 2011 cast doubt on current computer models predicting global warming, according to a new study. The data shows that much less heat is retained by carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere than is assumed in current models. 'There is a huge discrepancy between the data and the forecasts that is especially big over the oceans,' said Dr. Roy Spencer, a co-author of the study and research scientist at the University of Alabama." Note: the press release about the study is somewhat less over the top.

Comments

hmm

[nomadic]

Actually climatological modellers, the only people who can really speak authoritatively on the subject have been conflicted for a while. That's actually the best argument against global warming, but most deniers are so mindnumbingly stupid they miss that. Based on what I've read on the subject I am unconvinced of warming; but the risk is sufficiently high that the relatively low costs and side benefits of moving to alternative fuels and capping emissions is worth it.

The screwing fallacy, or the Cultist Unmasked

[SuperKendall]

The graph you referred to has been debunked.

There is no greater sign that AGW has passed utterly into the realm of religion than people like you that are willing to believe in it with only trumped-up data and no scientific basis remaining for just HOW we are supposed to be altering natural climatic change from the baseline changes already underway.

So keep on believing that the giant Spaghetti Monster of AGW has his noodly appendages in the cloud retaining the heats. Those of us who ALWAYS demanded to have the science behind this throughly vetted will just shake our heads and pass on by.

As the very least can you admit we don't need to bas as concerned about C02 emissions of everything?