It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Global Warming a Hoax? NASA Reveals Earth Releasing Heat into Space

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Not sure if anybody has seen this article with all the crazy stuff going on in the world but i just came across this article that seems to say that the info gathered by NASA's Terra satellite might be either inaccurate or misinterpreted.


With new data collected from NASA's Terra satellite, that established ecological model may be proven inaccurate.


here is the link Global Warming a Hoax? NASA Reveals Earth Releasing Heat into Space


Hypotheses based on the satellite's findings show that planet Earth actually releases heat into space, more than it retains it.


Thoughts???

Lets keep in mind there is big money is carbon taxes.....




posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Well you can't argue that the temperature is going up on average higher than it has in the past during these inter-glacial periods as that's just a matter of going outside and taking temperatures and comparing them to core samples.

So if earth is releasing more heat maybe it's because there is alot more heat to be released. I really can't debate NASA's data but they also can't debate the fact that the earth is warming outside of normal ranges since about 1920 either.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I'm not sure there's any doubt that earth's climate changes from time to time.
I'm not sure there's any doubt that earth's temperature has increased a small amount over the last hundred years or so.
I'm not sure there's any doubt that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased also.
There IS doubt about how much of that temperature rise is caused by humans, and the CO2.

And it has always been known that earth releases heat into space. That isnt new. Its just the actual value that one particular guy, Dr. Roy Spencer, thinks is one value, and another partucular guy, Dr. Andrew Dessler is something else.

So really there's nothing earth shatteringly revelationary here.
The argument goes on...



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Climate change and global warming are two very distinct things. The problem is trying to tie the two together and saying this causes that since there isn't enough evidence yet to make verifiable claims.

The Co2 issue is not known in great detail either. Data shows that Co2 levels seem to mirror the temperature fluctuations but what causes the majority of Co2 is still being studied so it's not conclusive yet.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   
Alfa,
Your correct. Only 100 years of records too.

Who funds these scientists too?

Are they funded by carbon tax research grant money?

Just asking.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Well you can't argue that the temperature is going up on average higher than it has in the past during these inter-glacial periods as that's just a matter of going outside and taking temperatures and comparing them to core samples.

So if earth is releasing more heat maybe it's because there is alot more heat to be released. I really can't debate NASA's data but they also can't debate the fact that the earth is warming outside of normal ranges since about 1920 either.


And just what exactly is the normal range? Where have temperatures been outside of this?
The highest temperature ever recorded was 136 degrees F in 1922 in Lybia.
The coldest temperature ever was -128 degrees F in 1983 in Antartica.
So where have we deviated outside of that?



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by kro32
Data shows that Co2 levels seem to mirror the temperature fluctuations...


Mirrors it somewhat...


To me, its clear that the temperature rise is caused to some degree by the CO2 levels, but not 100 percent.
There's clearly other factors at work also.
20 percent? 50 percent? 80 percent?
Dont know, and quite frankly at this point dont care.

What is clear to me is that neither politicians nor the general public are actually even remotely interested in cutting back their carbon emissions to any levels that would make any practical difference. Which would be to get back to emission levels of the early 1900's.
Nobody wants to do that.
Politicians have done nothing but go to conferences, make speeches, announce useless 'targets' and think of ways to make new taxes. The public have just bought more plasma TV's, phones, cars, and air conditioners.

I've moved on to thinking about how the ACTUAL climate change which WILL happen will affect the planet.
Nobody's going to stop it.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by amaster

Originally posted by kro32
Well you can't argue that the temperature is going up on average higher than it has in the past during these inter-glacial periods as that's just a matter of going outside and taking temperatures and comparing them to core samples.

So if earth is releasing more heat maybe it's because there is alot more heat to be released. I really can't debate NASA's data but they also can't debate the fact that the earth is warming outside of normal ranges since about 1920 either.


And just what exactly is the normal range? Where have temperatures been outside of this?
The highest temperature ever recorded was 136 degrees F in 1922 in Lybia.
The coldest temperature ever was -128 degrees F in 1983 in Antartica.
So where have we deviated outside of that?


Normal ranges are gathered by looking at the past history of records and averaging the data for whatever period your in. This gives you your basis on which to compare. Temperatures started rising significantly starting around 1920 and have risen at a far steeper pace than what geological records have shown to be the normal rate of rise.

Now there are many theories on what the cause of this is and is argued over quite frequently but that is simply the data so make of it what you will.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Yes that's what I meant by mirroring and thanks for pulling up the chart. Lost all mine when I had to replace my hard drive. The correlation is not precise but you can certainly see a pattern of similarity but you are correct that many other factors are at work also.

This is why people like Al Gore who try to simplify it down are not accurate in their claims.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kro32
 

Here is a site that you may get some information disproving the whole global warming thing... The Earth has ALWAYS gone through changes, and it is going through a big one now.
I haven't posted a lot here, so hope it works!


www.iceagenow.com...



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by kro32
Data shows that Co2 levels seem to mirror the temperature fluctuations...


Mirrors it somewhat...


To me, its clear that the temperature rise is caused to some degree by the CO2 levels, but not 100 percent.
There's clearly other factors at work also.
20 percent? 50 percent? 80 percent?
Dont know, and quite frankly at this point dont care.

What is clear to me is that neither politicians nor the general public are actually even remotely interested in cutting back their carbon emissions to any levels that would make any practical difference. Which would be to get back to emission levels of the early 1900's.
Nobody wants to do that.
Politicians have done nothing but go to conferences, make speeches, announce useless 'targets' and think of ways to make new taxes. The public have just bought more plasma TV's, phones, cars, and air conditioners.

I've moved on to thinking about how the ACTUAL climate change which WILL happen will affect the planet.
Nobody's going to stop it.


just playing devils advocate here but whats to say that graph doesnt show rise in CO2 BECAUSE of rise in temperature?? all that graph proves is there might be a correlation. thats like saying electricty causes electro magnetism......electro magnetism also creates electricity. which is the cause and which is the effect???

if a rise in temp is causing the CO2 then we need to address the rise in temp not the CO2.

IF that is the case.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:38 AM
link   
This type of article, and this type of OP, make me crazy ...


A hoax is a deliberately fabricated falsehood made to masquerade as truth. It is distinguishable from errors in observation or judgment, or rumors, urban legends, pseudosciences or April Fools' Day events that are passed along in good faith by believers or as jokes.


To make the claim, by placing it in a headline, that Climate Change could be a hoax is outrageous. You hear it all the time, "The Climate Change hoax," and then they go on to describe the minority bickering over what they consider to be discrepancies in the data ... My goodness. A stronger case, much stronger, could be made that the Climate Change Deniers are the ones perpetrating a hoax.

On to the article ...
---------------------------------------------
(1) You think, because NASA and the CLIMATE CHANGE are links that the statements being made are somehow substantiated by the data on the other end of the link. Dead end ... those links go to some generic detail page on the same website.

(2) The findings, which were apparently enough to put hoax in the title, are largely considered to be incorrect by the scientific community.

(3) It is perfectly fine to run experiments, question the norm, and admit you're wrong when a model proves it is either incorrect or no longer useful. It is not perfectly fine to twist unremarkable findings into a hype-style article so another round of "see, bra, hoax, bra, told ya umad" can circulate the forums and the twitters.


Climate Change? Maybe. Humans? Naaaahhhh ... can't be. Right?
Someone above was talking about how there is no doubt that a series of things related to climate change are happening, and lists off some examples, but then said there is doubt whether or not Humans are having an affect, or how much that affect is ... No.

That is classic misdirection, or genuine ignorance. It is actually pretty well known how much CO2 we're expelling on a daily basis. It is also pretty well known how much CO2 is expelled due to natural occurrences, like Volcanoes. I think it has been over 30 years since the world's scientists have claimed that "you can no longer ignore the affects Humans have on global climate."

This argument reminds me of the classic, "science discovers we're doing something bad. Everyone likes said bad thing and denies the science is true. We eventually yield ..."

"Where should we dump all this garbage, these volatile weapons, and warheads?"

"Well, the ocean is really big ..."

"Isn't that bad?"

"Are you kidding? You think us lowly humans could have an affect on something as massive and graduer as the ocean?!"

"Ahh, yes. True ..."

We need to take responsibility for our actions instead of trying to find elaborate ways to convince ourselves that we are not responsible. We're acting like children when we do this.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   
reply to post by TimeSpiral
 


What about the claim that other planets in our solar system are also getting hotter? Just asking the question.

Dont get me wrong. im not saying i know whats going on. I'm just asking the question. I thought it would be an interesting point to discuss given the recent data or should i say its "interpretation".



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
reply to post by TimeSpiral
 


What about the claim that other planets in our solar system are also getting hotter? Just asking the question.

Dont get me wrong. im not saying i know whats going on. I'm just asking the question. I thought it would be an interesting point to discuss given the recent data or should i say its "interpretation".


I'll gladly take a look at the data you're referring to.

But, if you're referring to that article series written by David Wilcock and Rich C. Hoagland all you really have to do is look at the "by" line to figure out whether or not the data is credible.

Even if we were able to determine that the other planets in our solar system were getting hotter, that does not alleviate us from our responsibility here on Earth, nor does it somehow disprove the facts we've gathered here.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TimeSpiral
 


Ok let me just state that i believe humans are wasteful and negligent as a whole not individuals but thats another topic. We clearly need to stop treating the planet like its a tip. BUT 2 wrongs dont make a right. And as much as i agree we need to change our attitude when it comes to sustainability i believe we should address the actual cause be it man made or solar output. Again im no expert im just asking questions and thank you for your input.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiM3LoRd
reply to post by TimeSpiral
 


Ok let me just state that i believe humans are wasteful and negligent as a whole not individuals but thats another topic. We clearly need to stop treating the planet like its a tip. BUT 2 wrongs dont make a right. And as much as i agree we need to change our attitude when it comes to sustainability i believe we should address the actual cause be it man made or solar output. Again im no expert im just asking questions and thank you for your input.



I think it is great that you and others are asking questions.

I'm not accusing you of this, but what sometimes happens is the people asking questions refuse to hear the answers or integrate their implications.

There are many things that are contributing to Climate Change. The Scientists who study the issue are well aware of them, and measure them, and account for them when they work. Just to name a few of the issues factored into this work, you have solar activity, eccentricity, precession, geologic activity (like volcanoes), atmospheric CO2 concentration, ice cap solar reflection, deforestation, ocean floor CO2 emissions, human activity, and I mean, the list goes on ... The point of that list is to remind you that these are all fields where scientists have dedicated their lives to researching. They do not come to their conclusions haphazardly, flippantly, or lightly.

• We are well aware of what the sun is doing. We're in a period of minimal solar activity.

• We know the EXACT angles of eccentricity and global precession.

• We can measure the ice caps, deforestation, and ocean floor CO2 emissions.

• We can measure volcanic activity, and we do.

Anthropogenic (Human) Climate Change (aka, AGW)
These things that the Climate Deniers list off as reasons for "doubt" are actually well known staples used to support Anthropogenic Climate Change. See, Anthropogenic Climate Change does not say, "Humans are the only thing causing climate change", it says "Humans are contributing to Climate Change in a way that can longer be ignored, and is significant enough to warrant serious concern."

Let's look at this article, as just one of many examples ...
Humans Spew More Carbon Dioxide than All of Earth's Volcanoes

I just don't see how anyone could argue against AGW when such evidence like this exists. We know, for a fact, that Super Volcanoes can have quick, and dramatic affects on Global Climate. In fact, 70,000 years ago a super volcano nearly wiped out Human life on Earth because of Climate Change.


Gerlach crunched the carbon dioxide numbers from earlier studies of volcanic output, finding a range of 0.13 to 0.44 billion metric tons, or gigatons, of CO2 per year. In comparison, the estimated rate of human carbon dioxide emissions for 2010 alone is 35 billion metric tons.


You can do the math. We are literally dwarfing global Volcanic activity ...

I'm glad you are asking questions because your answers are out there, and they are detailed, and informed.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TimeSpiral
 


First of all, It's good to see a familiar face here from TA. You still doing the band thing?

Secondly, while I don't really care to debate the legitimacy of the science nor do I deny our responsibility to take care of the planet and our environment, I have to lean on the skeptical side of this issue. Not so much that we play or do not play a significant role in contributing CO2 to the atmosphere, but the overall reality of global warming itself. I mean, science itself has been going back and fourth on this for nearly 100 years now.

"It's getting hotter. No, It's getting colder!, No, It's getting hotter! No, It's getting colder."
"The ice caps are melting. The ice caps are growing"

Hell, 50 years ago they said half the US would be under water by now from all the melting ice. I'm still here. Living on the Gulf Coast. Back in the 70's we were out of Oil. No more oil, Everyone was scared, and rushed out to the nearest gas stations to stock up . . . "Wait, never mind. we found some. It was hiding under that rock"

After Katrina, all you heard was, "Global Warming caused it! Expect more storms like this!!" Anybody seen a hurricane like that one since then? Not yet, but I'm sure we will, because they come in cycles. Just like everything else.

I'm tired of the run around. I'm tried of them crying wolf.

Pick any spot on the globe right now. Take the current temperature and compare it the average temperature for this time of year and you will see that it's perfectly within normal ranges. Sure, some places may break a record or two, but keep in mind, we've only been keeping records for the past 150 years or so. That’s hardly a panoramic view.

Don't piss on my foot and tell me it's raining just to charge me a bad weather tax.

edit on 8/9/2011 by amaster because: Spelling



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by amaster
 


Amaster from TA!

Wow.

That place has been dead for so long ... That's too bad


I can appreciate your stance. This argument is not one many want to fight. Your overall stance is good: we need to be responsible. But, if I may kindly suggest, your supposition that there is this constant back and forth within the climate science community is probably somewhat tainted by the mainstream media. They agree, and have for some time, and if anything over the last 100+ years their understanding of the issue has only become more sophisticated.

Winning an argument on a forum doesn't actually accomplish much, in all reality, but it is a nice exercise and for the open-minded, some might actually learn something or grow from the community interaction.

The band?
The band has disbanded, for several reasons, but music will always be a part of my life. My brother and I, in addition to writing our own personal music, are working on scores for films, documentaries, games, etc ... We love it.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 01:47 PM
link   
It took millions of years to store the suns energy on Earth via natural gas/oil.

We have released that millions of years of sun energy in 100 years. You better believe we are releasing more heat from Earth than we are receiving.



posted on Aug, 9 2011 @ 02:00 PM
link   
The same! It's a shame what happened to that place. I suppose there's no hope now for a new site. the next best thing is fourtheye.net but it's not the same. Oh well.

I try not to argue over the internet. It always seems a bit pointless. Especially on topics such as this, where there is such a divide. However I will say that a healthy amount of skepticism can go a long way in this debate when you consider who's funding the research and what their position is. Many on both sides of the table are politically backed through special interest groups so a lot information can be speculated on.

On top of that you have countries like China and India who laugh at AGW and continue to prosper under industrial nations with no intentions of stopping. Both on whom are economically whipping our butts right now.

I guess my point in all of this is, while our actions many have adverse effects on the planet, and it is our responsibility to control what we put into it, as it is the only thing we can control, we need to be weary of political infighting and money grabbing schemes through carbon taxes and emissions offsets, by focusing our energy and efforts into producing real, reliable, renewable, fuel sources for our future. We will never be independent of oil. It will always be a part of an industrial nation, but we can reduce our need for it in society.

As you said before, there are SO MANY factors at play which effect our climate. Placing the blame on one individual aspect and expecting it to make a difference seems not only arrogant, but ignorant.

___

That a shame about the band, but good you guys have kept that passion. I still listen to that demo you sent me from time to time. Good stuff.



new topics




 
3

log in

join