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.

 

NASA: Climategate 2.0

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Back in July of this year NASA released new data saying that current climate projections were wrong, and a gaping hole was blown into Global warming alarmism, do you guys remember, if you don't here is the article and a brief quote, and a ATS thread about it below the quote.

Source

NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.


New NASA Data Blow Gaoing Hole in Global warming alarmism


Then I just read this article highlighting the United Nations finally reaching an agreement on Global warming..here's a snippet.

Source

Delegates from 194 counties to a U.N. climate conference meeting in South Africa have agreed to an accord that would force countries to take action to slow the pace of climate change.

Under the agreement, industrial countries will have to adhere to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol another five years after it expires in 2012. The Protocol legally binds those countries to meeting greenhouse gas-emission targets.


And this is why I posted this question, because I just read that NASA is now declaring, the exact opposite of what there previous stance was on the issue...Here check it out..

Source

"For the first time, we've been able to map this change in detail, and it's because of the spatial resolution and length-of-record that you can get with Landsat," says Jeff Masek, the program's project scientist. He's based at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.

"Unlike the decline of sea ice, which is a dramatic effect that we're seeing as a result of global warming, the changes in vegetation have been subtle," Masek says.


So what's the story...First it's complete bull, then it's happening..I believe nothing what these guys say about the issue..Sure we are warming up, that's a given..but it's happened before and it will happen again, just not by man.







edit on 11-12-2011 by Daedal because: Done




posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedal
just not by man.



There is no proof of this in your post.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   
hmm, do these people simply work there? or are they speaking for the organization.

regardless its just a means of manipulating people one way or another, for whatever purpose.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet

Originally posted by Daedal
just not by man.



There is no proof of this in your post.


The latter part is opinion..



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   
When I first saw 'The Inconvenient Truth' I, like an idiot, immediately procured a signed first edition of this in print. I started to look into this phenomenon and slowly started to see cracks. The more I dug in, the more I became confused and doubtful. I then came across Michael Crichton's views on global warming and that was the final straw. It is all bunk; devised to put cap and trade in effect, Solyndra and others in positions to make money for stupidity. Don't get me wrong, I am all for alternative energy but not at the cost of government intervention.

Here is a link to Michael Crichton's views"

www.michaelcrichton.net...



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Maybe they are not lying, but are just as confused as the rest of us. After all its not like this has happened before.

Scientist can and have been wrong. The scientist who are studying this issue are going off the best information they have, which is not complete by any means. Do we as humans not make mistakes, I know I do when the information I receive is incomplete.

We will only know the true result after the events have taken place, until then it is all a "Best Guess' situation.
edit on 11-12-2011 by mileysubet because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by notmyrealname
 


To me this just shows how science follows the Agenda...they can make people believe anything is true, it's only been 5 months since the last data was released..
edit on 11-12-2011 by Daedal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 


Ah, I like how you think you're qualified to criticize trained scientist.

"I know its not real" you say after closing the conservative blog you were reading."I have no need for training, experimentation or knowledge of chemistry to be smarter than all the scientist." You pat yourself on the back.

"Why cant they see it though?" Because all scientist are in the pocket of Al-Gore, you reason. That must be it! Fox news says so!



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Daedal
 


Ah, I like how you think you're qualified to criticize trained scientist.

"I know its not real" you say after closing the conservative blog you were reading."I have no need for training, experimentation or knowledge of chemistry to be smarter than all the scientist." You pat yourself on the back.

"Why cant they see it though?" Because all scientist are in the pocket of Al-Gore, you reason. That must be it! Fox news says so!


Nope definitely not smarter than a trained scientist...but there are many scientists plural, one is not the problem, it is the many. And they follow the money. Only obvious everything is coming apart, just have a look back at all the mega bank collapses and the war it created. The money is being drained from these programs. and the Elite in charge are being made transparent by leaks of information, hence the title of this OP.

I am not criticizing the scientist who worked and learned how to use this science, it is not the science but the money which funds these projects is where the scandal lies. I am all for the science but not there solution, meaning the Agenda.

So if I have offended you my apologies...




edit on 11-12-2011 by Daedal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 02:54 AM
link   
Thanks for the post op,I came across an article myself just a bit ago and I think it correlates with the articles you have posted.


New research into the Earth's paleoclimate history by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies director James E. Hansen suggests the potential for rapid climate changes this century, including multiple meters of sea level rise, if global warming is not abated.

By looking at how the Earth's climate responded to past natural changes, Hansen sought insight into a fundamental question raised by ongoing human-caused climate change: "What is the dangerous level of global warming?" Some international leaders have suggested a goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial times in order to avert catastrophic change.

But Hansen said at a press briefing at a meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco on Tues, Dec. 6, that warming of 2 degrees Celsius would lead to drastic changes, such as significant ice sheet loss in Greenland and Antarctica.


Source

I believe the climate changes we are experiencing are cyclic & natural but at the same time I am also a believer that man-made increases of co2 are not helping matters.
edit on 11-12-2011 by PerfectPerception because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
James M. Taylor, Dr. Spencer and The Heartland Institute are one the most prominent conservative think tanks (CTTs) in the world, which is well-known for disputing all evidence for AGW; and for therefore denying that AGW represents a global crisis. It’s clear after reading just a few words that this article is hugely biased. The use of the word "alarmist" and its variants appeared no fewer than 14 times, 16 if you include the picture caption and the headline. The word "alarmist" is pretty clearly slanted against the overwhelming consensus among climate scientists that the Earth is warming up, and that humans are the reason.

Let's have a look at how Spencer’s paper 'which was the source of this nonsense' was recieved by real scientists.

Stephanie Pappas at LiveScience contacted several climate scientists about Spencer’s paper, and their conclusions were quite harsh. They say Spencer’s model is "unrealistic", "flawed", and "incorrect". As ThinkProgress points out, a geochemist has shown that Spencer’s models are irretrievably flawed, "don’t make any physical sense", and that Spencer has a track record in using such flawed analysis to draw any conclusion he wants.


"I cannot believe it got published," said Kevin Trenberth, a senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

That doesn’t sound like it blows a gaping hole in global warming theories to me. And this makes the breathless rhetoric used in the Forbes article appear to be far more about stirring up controversy rather than actually tackling the science of the issue. This article on the realclimate website absolutely shreds spencer's paper and the original forbes article to pieces

TRY READING IT YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY LEARN SOMETHING www.realclimate.org...

Let's have a closer look at Dr. Spencer’s background: He is an author for the über-conservative Heartland Institute (as is James Taylor, the author of the Forbes article), which receives substantial funding from — can you guess? — ExxonMobil. He is also affiliated with two other think tanks funded by ExxonMobil. Seriously, read this link to get quite a bit of background on Dr. Spencer.www.desmogblog.com...
Spencer is a big supporter of Intelligent Design. ID has been shown repeatedly to be wrong, and is really just warmed-over creationism, even a conservative judge ruled it to be so in the now-famous Dover lawsuit. Anyone who dumps all of biological science in favor of provably wrong antiscience should raise alarm bells in your head, and their claims should be examined with an even more skeptical eye.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Daedal

So what's the story...First it's complete bull, then it's happening..I believe nothing what these guys say about the issue..Sure we are warming up, that's a given..but it's happened before and it will happen again, just not by man.


edit on 11-12-2011 by Daedal because: Done

The science is quite easy, the politics are horrendous due to the incredible amount of BS and distraction from oil lobbyists and deniers.

The world is getting warmer:
* Satellite and ground based measurements
* Flora and fauna are migrating to the poles.
* Most glaciers are retreating.

Why? We must be getting heat from somewhere. Well there are many sources of heat but the largest by a massive margin making all others insignificant is the sun. So again why? Is it getting warmer or is the earth trapping more. Well surprise surprise the sun has NOT got warmer. So the earth is trapping more. We know this from the cooling of the stratosphere ! yep that's right cooling. Infra red radiation passes through the atmosphere TWICE once on the way in and once on the way out. However since less is going back out the amount passing through the stratosphere has dropped. Hence its cooling. Whereas the troposphere (the bit we breathe) is getting warmer.

So the earth is trapping more heat but why or rather how?

This is down to chemistry with some chemicals absorbing and re-emitting heat back down to earth rather than letting it radiate out to space. The main chemicals in order of effect: water, methane, carbon dioxide, ozone. Yep water vapour at the top. BUT the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere has not increased. Methane has not increased but carbon dioxide has. We can also tell from ice cores that there is a link between temperature and co2 levels. Yes there is a lag (in the history) because natural global warming has co2 has a feedback mechanism not a trigger. Man in his infinite wisdom has used co2 as a trigger!!!

Ooops missed a bit : how do we know its man made co2. Well its down to a thing called carbon dating !!! Normal co2 is due to natural "breathing" cycles of plants in the atmosphere and interaction of carbon with sun (which is what creates c14 in the upper atmosphere). Fossil carbon from burnt fossil fuels has zero c14 and thus from the measurement of c14 in the co2 we can tell how much is natural and how much is from fossil fuels.

Da da....see easy. Everything else is a distraction which has been thoroughly investigated. Including volcanoes, solar radiation, gamma rays, solar system warming, co2 lagging temperature etc etc etc



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by malcr
 


True believers are the easiest to dupe - and you have been duped big time!


The Antarctic sea ice extent has been at or near record extent in the past few summers and the ice is expanding, the Arctic has rebounded in recent years since the low point in 2007, polar bears are thriving, sea level is not showing acceleration and is actually dropping, Cholera and Malaria are failing to follow global warming predictions, Mount Kilimanjaro melt fears are being made a mockery by gains in snow cover, global temperatures have been holding steady for a decade or more and many scientists are predicting global cooling is ahead, deaths due to extreme weather are radically declining, global tropical cyclone activity is near historic lows, the frequency of major U.S. hurricanes has declined, the oceans are missing their predicted heat content, big tornados have dramatically declined since the 1970s, droughts are not historically unusual nor caused by mankind, there is no evidence we are currently having unusual weather, scandals continue to rock the climate fear movement, the UN IPCC has been exposed as being a hotbed of environmental activists, former Vice President Al Gore is now under siege by his fellow global warming activists for attempting to link every bad weather event to man-made global warming and scientists from around the world continue to dissent from man-made climate fears at a rapid pace.


wattsupwiththat.com...-52657



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 
Your ignorance and stupidity are endless. You just pop up in these threads linking the same old tired/rehashed arguments that have been shown to be total nonsense a million times over. When will you actually attempt to understand the real science of climate change, and stop posting right wing propaganda funded by big oil? The only ones being duped are you and anyone who listens to the drivel you mindlessly dish out.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Daedal
 



So what's the story...First it's complete bull, then it's happening..I believe nothing what these guys say about the issue..


NASA never changed their story. That "Gaping Hole" article had nothing to do with NASA. It was just some biased, ignorant hit-piece written in Forbes magazine by James Taylor, a well-known shill for the fossil fuel lobby.

The "new satellite data" didn't do anything to challenge the consensus on global warming. It was merely used as a prop for promoting some piss-poor climate model developed by Roy Spencer, yet another notorious ideological stooge in the fake global warming debate.

Spencer's work was soon completely eviscerated in the scientific community, as is detailed in Atzil321's response a few posts above.

I also started a thread about it here:
Editor-In-Chief Resigns, Blows Gaping Hole In Climate Denier Alarmism


The BS sensationalism generated by this one "Gaping Hole" headline though really spoke volumes about how much the so-called "debate" is bastardized and exploited through mainstream as well as alternative media. The only real gaping hole here is the disconnect that exists between what the science says and what the public are being manipulated into thinking it says.



It's a total propaganda war, being waged by disingenous sources posing as skeptics when they are really nothing but fundamentalist shills for neocons and fossil-fuel interests. It's scary to see how much impact they are having even though their motives are quite transparent when you take a deeper look.


At the time here's what I wrote about it in my thread:


Originally posted by mc_squared

This is the thing - these false stories always get waaaaaaay more attention than they deserve. BS, sensationalist headlines get everyone all riled up, and then when the actual truth comes out later it gets barely noticed. The same thing happened with the climategate so-called scandal:

Newspapers Retract 'Climategate' Claims, but Damage Still Done

Likewise on ATS - the initial over-hyped headline gets all the flags, while the full story gets buried away on page 12.



So I think that's rather poignant considering how your thread implies you were still under the impression this latest kerfuffle was all based on NASA, and you also managed to conflate the whole thing with that other manufactured non-story known as climategate. Just sayin...



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by JohhnyBGood
 
Your ignorance and stupidity are endless. You just pop up in these threads linking the same old tired/rehashed arguments that have been shown to be total nonsense a million times over. When will you actually attempt to understand the real science of climate change, and stop posting right wing propaganda funded by big oil? The only ones being duped are you and anyone who listens to the drivel you mindlessly dish out.



I most assuredly do understand the uncertainties of what CO2 actually does in the atmosphere - and how completely vague concepts such as 'global temperatures' are - or what the ill understood feedback mechanisms might be that cause a slight heating or cooling effect. I understand how easy it is to manufacture a consensus via selective funding, control of a media with a massive leftist bias, cherrypick, torture and distort the data bases and statistical treatments of them - to arrive at whatever conclusions your biases lean towards.

I am fully aware that there is a complete lack of solid evidence to support any runaway 'greenhouse' effect.
Nor that the trillions it will take to prevent a possible temp increase would be remotely cost effective.
I am aware that a slight temp increase and a richer Co2 environment has many many benefits.
I am aware that all of the 'remedies' to this so called problem just happen to be what the Club of Rome was calling for all along.



You on the other hand appear to be completely politically naive - for instance you seem to imagine that because an oil company supports some AGW sceptical research, that means it can be discounted out of hand.

How is it that you don't realise that oil companies finance pro AGW research by 100:1 in favour of the warmists - not to mention the stupendous amounts coming from leftist leaning governments, foundations, the UN etc - you naively believe that these have no agenda and that they would not mislead you!


You are a babe in the political woods - a true believer in the purity of 'science' - which is course why they have co-opted and politicised it so they can push through their otherwise unacceptable agenda.



posted on Dec, 11 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Anyone who has an inkling of understanding of how academia works knows that the flow is toward any grant money available and findings on those research grants tilt towards the desired of those that fund those grants. Academia are the whores of the scientific fields and it will always be that way!

Reducing Co2 will do only one thing in this world. It will make growing the food needed on this planet a problem of enormous consequence!
The situation that the UN is trying to force on us as sovereign nations is to eliminate them and gain world wide control of the populace! Climate Change is the rouse being used to do this!


Zindo



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join