New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Of course it's going to be a sceptic who will produce this kind of work.
The alarmists simply do not WANT to know, so they are not going to do this kind of work.
However, Spencer is a well qualified climate scientist. And like any good scientist, he is prepared to look again and again at anything that needs correcting, as in 2005.
There's not much sign of that on the AGW side.
I see that all the criticism of this work is ad hominem in nature, and coming from activist bloggers, rather than scientific organisations.
He is pointing to discrepancies between the IPCC models, and the NASA Ceres figures.
It's not just him.
Before this, there was a widely accepted problem that nobody could find the extra heat that the Earth was supposed to have trapped.
The missing heat is the biggest ACKNOWLEDGED problem with AGW. It's accepted by activists and critics alike.
This explains that problem perfectly. It's not missing, It didn't stay. It was radiated and never trappped.
The IPCC models rely on speculative feedback mechanisms between CO2 and H2O vapour that clearly are not happening.
It's about time they admit that they overstated their case, and start again.
The alarmists simply do not WANT to know, so they are not going to do this kind of work.
However, Spencer is a well qualified climate scientist. And like any good scientist, he is prepared to look again and again at anything that needs correcting, as in 2005.
There's not much sign of that on the AGW side.
I see that all the criticism of this work is ad hominem in nature, and coming from activist bloggers, rather than scientific organisations.
He is pointing to discrepancies between the IPCC models, and the NASA Ceres figures.
It's not just him.
Before this, there was a widely accepted problem that nobody could find the extra heat that the Earth was supposed to have trapped.
The missing heat is the biggest ACKNOWLEDGED problem with AGW. It's accepted by activists and critics alike.
This explains that problem perfectly. It's not missing, It didn't stay. It was radiated and never trappped.
The IPCC models rely on speculative feedback mechanisms between CO2 and H2O vapour that clearly are not happening.
It's about time they admit that they overstated their case, and start again.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
- Mysturji
- Clint Eastwood
- Posts: 5005
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 4:08 pm
- About me: Downloading an app to my necktop
- Location: http://tinyurl.com/c9o35ny
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis

Yeah, I saw that too.I was also surprised to find Spencer is a big supporter of Intelligent Design.
If Yahoo! News didn't tip me off, "Alabama" should have. [/ad-hom]
Sir Figg Newton wrote:If I have seen further than others, it is only because I am surrounded by midgets.
IDMD2Cormac wrote:Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.
I am a twit.
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Except I also quoted a link from a scientific source too. So you still lose.mistermack wrote:I see that all the criticism of this work is ad hominem in nature, and coming from activist bloggers, rather than scientific organisations.
Here it is again http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -feedback/
As I've said. Come back to me when you have something.To help interpret the results, Spencer uses a simple model. But the simple model used by Spencer is too simple (Einstein says that things should be made as simple as possible but not simpler): well this has gone way beyond being too simple (see for instance this post by Barry Bickmore). The model has no realistic ocean, no El Niño, and no hydrological cycle, and it was tuned to give the result it gave. Most of what goes on in the real world of significance that causes the relationship in the paper is ENSO. We have already rebutted Lindzen’s work on exactly this point. The clouds respond to ENSO, not the other way round [see: Trenberth, K. E., J. T. Fasullo, C. O'Dell, and T. Wong, 2010: Relationships between tropical sea surface temperatures and top-of-atmosphere radiation. Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L03702, doi:10.1029/2009GL042314.] During ENSO there is a major uptake of heat by the ocean during the La Niña phase and the heat is moved around and stored in the ocean in the tropical western Pacific, setting the stage for the next El Niño, as which point it is redistributed across the tropical Pacific. The ocean cools as the atmosphere responds with characteristic El Niño weather patterns forced from the region that influence weather patterns world wide. Ocean dynamics play a major role in moving heat around, and atmosphere-ocean interaction is a key to the ENSO cycle. None of those processes are included in the Spencer model.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- Eriku
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:19 am
- About me: Mostly harmless...
- Location: Ørsta, Norway
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis

Keep at it, Mr. Mackey.
- Eriku
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:19 am
- About me: Mostly harmless...
- Location: Ørsta, Norway
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Yeah, I'll hitch my wagon to this man's keen sense of scientific reasoning.In the book The Evolution Crisis[20] Spencer is quoted as saying:
"I finally became convinced that the theory of creation actually had a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution, for the creation model was actually better able to explain the physical and biological complexity in the world..."
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
I'm surprised when anybody supports that stuff. But intelligent design isn't any more or less ridiculous that the usual Christian creation rubbish. And if you only accepted science from atheists, you would be missing an awful lot.I was also surprised to find Spencer is a big supporter of Intelligent Design.
The pro AGW side would lose a lot more supporters than the anti side, if you ignored all non-atheist opinion.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Actually I only accept science from scientists. Not just from atheists. I also accept when a scientist's thesis has been absolutely excoriated instead of persisting in claiming it's right because my ideology dictates it.mistermack wrote:I'm surprised when anybody supports that stuff. But intelligent design isn't any more or less ridiculous that the usual Christian creation rubbish. And if you only accepted science from atheists, you would be missing an awful lot.I was also surprised to find Spencer is a big supporter of Intelligent Design.
The pro AGW side would lose a lot more supporters than the anti side, if you ignored all non-atheist opinion.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- Santa_Claus
- Your Imaginary Friend
- Posts: 1985
- Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:06 pm
- About me: Ho! Ho! Ho!
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Yeah, I prefer the term "Climate Creationist"Animavore wrote:The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.

Heat rising? who could have imagined that one?

I am Leader of all The Atheists in the world - FACT.
Come look inside Santa's Hole
You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!
Come look inside Santa's Hole

You want to hear the truth about Santa Claus???.....you couldn't handle the truth about Santa Claus!!!
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
It's a valid response to the term "denier" and long overdue.Animavore wrote:The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.
And that realclimate site is just a notorious activist blog, loser !!
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
mistermack wrote:It's a valid response to the term "denier" and long overdue.Animavore wrote:The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.
And that realclimate site is just a notorious activist blog, loser !!

Bye-bye.
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
- Eriku
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:19 am
- About me: Mostly harmless...
- Location: Ørsta, Norway
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
I thought you weren't a big fan of ad homs?mistermack wrote:It's a valid response to the term "denier" and long overdue.Animavore wrote:The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.
And that realclimate site is just a notorious activist blog, loser !!
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Well, actually, I judge the argument, not who is making it.Animavore wrote: Actually I only accept science from scientists.
You can obediently take what you're fed, if you like.
I question all of it.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
- mistermack
- Posts: 15093
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
- About me: Never rong.
- Contact:
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
I simply repeated the accusation "you lose".Eriku wrote:I thought you weren't a big fan of ad homs?mistermack wrote:It's a valid response to the term "denier" and long overdue.Animavore wrote:The alarm should've been raised for anyone with a bit of integrity when the provocative words "Global Warming Alarmist" were used multiple times.
And that realclimate site is just a notorious activist blog, loser !!
If you lose, you are a loser.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.
Re: New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmis
Complete and utter bullshit. I didn't just judge who made it I also gave you a link which stated.mistermack wrote:Well, actually, I judge the argument, not who is making it.Animavore wrote: Actually I only accept science from scientists.
You can obediently take what you're fed, if you like.
I question all of it.
1. The results can not be replicated.
2. The model didn't account for oceans, El Nino, and clouds.The basic material in the paper has very basic shortcomings because no statistical significance of results, error bars or uncertainties are given either in the figures or discussed in the text. Moreover the description of methods of what was done is not sufficient to be able to replicate results. As a first step, some quick checks have been made to see whether results can be replicated and we find some points of contention.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/ar ... -feedback/To help interpret the results, Spencer uses a simple model. But the simple model used by Spencer is too simple (Einstein says that things should be made as simple as possible but not simpler): well this has gone way beyond being too simple (see for instance this post by Barry Bickmore). The model has no realistic ocean, no El Niño, and no hydrological cycle, and it was tuned to give the result it gave. Most of what goes on in the real world of significance that causes the relationship in the paper is ENSO. We have already rebutted Lindzen’s work on exactly this point. The clouds respond to ENSO, not the other way round [see: Trenberth, K. E., J. T. Fasullo, C. O'Dell, and T. Wong, 2010: Relationships between tropical sea surface temperatures and top-of-atmosphere radiation. Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L03702, doi:10.1029/2009GL042314.] During ENSO there is a major uptake of heat by the ocean during the La Niña phase and the heat is moved around and stored in the ocean in the tropical western Pacific, setting the stage for the next El Niño, as which point it is redistributed across the tropical Pacific. The ocean cools as the atmosphere responds with characteristic El Niño weather patterns forced from the region that influence weather patterns world wide. Ocean dynamics play a major role in moving heat around, and atmosphere-ocean interaction is a key to the ENSO cycle. None of those processes are included in the Spencer model.
Also, the ad hominem is valid in this case because it shows that he is incapable of making sound judgement on scientific issues (being an ID proponent) and that he has admitting doing something like this before in 2005 (see my third link on previous page).
Libertarianism: The belief that out of all the terrible things governments can do, helping people is the absolute worst.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests