PDA

View Full Version : Study: ‘Huge discrepancies’ between global climate predictions and hard data



malloc
08-07-2011, 04:06 AM
Study: ‘Huge discrepancies’ between global climate predictions and hard data

Global warming may occur more slowly and correct itself more quickly than computer models have been predicting, a new study says.

The study, published in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing by Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist in the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, reports the atmosphere may shed heat much more quickly than previously thought — a potentially serious problem for the computer models used to predict global climate trends.

For his study, Spencer compared a half dozen climate model predictions with actual satellite data during an 18-month period 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 in a 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, the study reports that the atmosphere begins to shed heat earlier in the warming process than predicted. A major part of current global climate theory holds that CO2 traps heat in the atmosphere, resulting in more cloud cover and more heat — a positive feedback cycle.

Spencer’s analysis of satellite data shows the climate system starting to shed heat more than three months before the typical warming event reaches its peak.

Read More (http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/29/study-huge-discrepancies-between-global-climate-predictions-and-hard-data/#ixzz1UKOCTusB)


Another nail in the coffin of the AGW hoax. Looks like alarmists have been lying their asses off about how much heat CO2 traps, and none of their models or predictions ever line up with reality. People and organizations involved in propagating this myth are being given billions in grant money from Democrats, and in exchange, they keep the level of alarm and hysteria turned up to give Democrats credence. Nevermind the fact that this type of political bullshit is putting entire economies, and the very livelihood of developed nations at risk.

The Night Owl
09-05-2011, 01:15 PM
The latest "nail" seems to have popped out.


Journal editor resigns over 'problematic' climate paper

By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News

The editor of a science journal has resigned after admitting that a recent paper casting doubt on man-made climate change should not have been published.

The paper, by US scientists Roy Spencer and William Braswell, claimed that computer models of climate inflated projections of temperature increase.

It was seized on by "sceptic" bloggers, but attacked by mainstream scientists.

Wolfgang Wagner, editor of Remote Sensing journal, says he agrees with their criticisms and is stepping down.

...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14768574

Articulate_Ape
09-05-2011, 04:46 PM
Stupid editor was endangering the AGW gravy train. He should have known better than that.

malloc
09-05-2011, 05:07 PM
Stupid editor was endangering the AGW gravy train. He should have known better than that.

Yup, you mess with the federal funding flow, you've got to go.