Global Warming Validated

[EricMM 0]

Data From Space, Oceans Validate Global Warming Timeline

Associated Press

Friday, April 29, 2005; Page A13

 

NEW YORK, April 28 -- Climate scientists armed with new data from the ocean depths and from space satellites have found that Earth is absorbing much more heat than it is giving off, which they say validates computer projections of global warming.

 

Lead scientist James E. Hansen, a prominent NASA climatologist, described the findings on the out-of-balance energy exchange as a "smoking gun" that should dispel doubts about forecasts of climate change.

 

Hansen's team, reporting Thursday in the journal Science, said they also determined that global temperatures will rise 1 degree Fahrenheit this century even if greenhouse gases are capped tomorrow.

 

If carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping emissions instead continue to grow, as expected, things could spin "out of our control," especially as ocean levels rise from melting Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, the researchers said. International experts predict a 10-degree leap in such a worst-case scenario.

 

The NASA-led researchers were able to measure Earth's energy imbalance because of more precise ocean readings collected by 1,800 technology-packed floats deployed in seas worldwide beginning in 2000, in an international monitoring effort called Argo. Their measurements are supplemented by better satellite gauging of ocean levels, which rise both from meltwater and as the sea warms and expands.

 

With this data, the scientists calculated the oceans' heat content and the global energy imbalance. They found that for every square meter of surface area, the planet is absorbing almost one watt more of the sun's energy than it is radiating back to space as heat -- a historically large imbalance. Such absorbed energy will steadily warm the atmosphere.

 

The 0.85-watt figure corresponds well with the energy imbalance predicted by the researchers' supercomputer simulations of climate change, the report said.

 

Those computer models factor in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, methane and other gases -- produced by automobiles and more esoteric sources, such as pig farms. Those gases keep heat from escaping into space. Significantly, greenhouse emissions have increased at a rate consistent with the detected energy imbalance, the researchers said.

 

"There can no longer be genuine doubt that human-made gases are the dominant cause of observed warming," said Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University's Earth Institute. "This energy imbalance is the 'smoking gun' that we have been looking for."

 

Fourteen other specialists from NASA, Columbia and the Energy Department co-authored the study.

 

Klaus Hasselmann, a leading German climatologist, praised the Hansen report for its innovative work. "This is valuable additional supporting evidence" of man-made climate change, he said.

 

Is this trash too? Because I'd love to see any sort of non-partisan news source show once and for all that Global Warming is false/impossible. You know, like this non-partisan, at least for all intents and purposes, newspaper reporting science PROVING that Earth is retaining too much energy from the sun.

[NoCalMike 0]

Is this trash too? Because I'd love to see any sort of non-partisan news source show once and for all that Global Warming is false/impossible. You know, like this non-partisan, at least for all intents and purposes, newspaper reporting science PROVING that Earth is retaining too much energy from the sun.

*awaits "that report is umitigated bullshit" response by MikeSC*

[edotherocket 0]

Isn't this flame baiting?

[Styles 0]

Isn't this flame baiting?

You can always tell the CE regulars from the visitors...

[CanadianChris 0]

Not to cast aspersions at this particular story, but I would just like to point out that newspapers report bad science as indisputable fact ALL THE TIME.

[MrRant 0]

Link?

[CanadianChris 0]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/0...bal.warming.ap/

[Gary Floyd 0]

I'm staying out of this one. Once again, I don't feel like arguing with anyone (Mike SC especially) tonight...or any night.

[Guest MikeSC]

Data From Space, Oceans Validate Global Warming Timeline

Associated Press

Friday, April 29, 2005; Page A13

 

NEW YORK, April 28 -- Climate scientists armed with new data from the ocean depths and from space satellites have found that Earth is absorbing much more heat than it is giving off, which they say validates computer projections of global warming.

 

Lead scientist James E. Hansen, a prominent NASA climatologist, described the findings on the out-of-balance energy exchange as a "smoking gun" that should dispel doubts about forecasts of climate change.

 

Hansen's team, reporting Thursday in the journal Science, said they also determined that global temperatures will rise 1 degree Fahrenheit this century even if greenhouse gases are capped tomorrow.

 

If carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping emissions instead continue to grow, as expected, things could spin "out of our control," especially as ocean levels rise from melting Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, the researchers said. International experts predict a 10-degree leap in such a worst-case scenario.

 

The NASA-led researchers were able to measure Earth's energy imbalance because of more precise ocean readings collected by 1,800 technology-packed floats deployed in seas worldwide beginning in 2000, in an international monitoring effort called Argo. Their measurements are supplemented by better satellite gauging of ocean levels, which rise both from meltwater and as the sea warms and expands.

 

With this data, the scientists calculated the oceans' heat content and the global energy imbalance. They found that for every square meter of surface area, the planet is absorbing almost one watt more of the sun's energy than it is radiating back to space as heat -- a historically large imbalance. Such absorbed energy will steadily warm the atmosphere.

 

The 0.85-watt figure corresponds well with the energy imbalance predicted by the researchers' supercomputer simulations of climate change, the report said.

 

Those computer models factor in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, methane and other gases -- produced by automobiles and more esoteric sources, such as pig farms. Those gases keep heat from escaping into space. Significantly, greenhouse emissions have increased at a rate consistent with the detected energy imbalance, the researchers said.

 

"There can no longer be genuine doubt that human-made gases are the dominant cause of observed warming," said Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies at Columbia University's Earth Institute. "This energy imbalance is the 'smoking gun' that we have been looking for."

 

Fourteen other specialists from NASA, Columbia and the Energy Department co-authored the study.

 

Klaus Hasselmann, a leading German climatologist, praised the Hansen report for its innovative work. "This is valuable additional supporting evidence" of man-made climate change, he said.

 

Is this trash too? Because I'd love to see any sort of non-partisan news source show once and for all that Global Warming is false/impossible. You know, like this non-partisan, at least for all intents and purposes, newspaper reporting science PROVING that Earth is retaining too much energy from the sun.

Seeing as how YOU are claiming it's fact, you might want ACTUAL proof.

 

This is about as believable as the whole "Obesity is the #2 killer in America" crap.

 

A "historically large imbalance" of how much heat is reflected back from the Earth?

 

Considering we couldn't measure that UNTIL RECENTLY --- it reeks of being "a massive fucking guess about history".

 

I'll wait for 3 months when this --- as always happens --- is proven to be unmistakable bullshit. If I was industrious, I'd save this thread and throw it back in your face, Eric.

 

But seeing your religion proven wrong time and time again should be punishment enough.

-=Mike

...THIS IS THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE IN RECORDED HISTORY!! sure, recorded history is only about 10 years. BUT STILL! IT'S FUCKING HUGE!!!

[EricMM 0]

I got mine from the Washington Post, actually.

 

Thanks MrRant for the vote of confidence, I wouldn't fucking post something if it was of some scrubbish blog.

 

Mike, it's fucking simple. Energy in minus energy out equals energy retained. The more energy retained, the hotter earth is. This isn't religion, this is M-A-T-H. This is S-C-I-E-N-C-E! Your arguments are merely disbelief, doubt, or God knows what else. Where you learned your doubt, I'll never know. Why you still believe it, ditto. You can scream false at empiral proof for the rest of your life, I just hope you and people like you aren't allowed to decide anything important, ever.

[Guest MikeSC]

I got mine from the Washington Post, actually.

 

Thanks MrRant for the vote of confidence, I wouldn't fucking post something if it was of some scrubbish blog.

 

Mike, it's fucking simple. Energy in minus energy out equals energy retained. The more energy retained, the hotter earth is. This isn't religion, this is M-A-T-H. This is S-C-I-E-N-C-E! Your arguments are merely disbelief, doubt, or God knows what else. Where you learned your doubt, I'll never know. Why you still believe it, ditto. You can scream false at empiral proof for the rest of your life, I just hope you and people like you aren't allowed to decide anything important, ever.

And when scientists don't have the FIRST fucking clue about historical trends due to a FUCKING lack of ANY fucking evidence or statistics from the past, lecturing on a "historically large problem" is a joke and is a rather blatant attempt to procure some more research money to chase their pipe dream that will --- as always --- be proven to be little more than smoke and mirrors.

 

Environmentalism is a C-U-L-T. It is Islam with less killing. Is it the People's Temple with a little less Kool-Aid. It's the Branch Davidians with fewer guns. It's an article of faith that, no matter how often it is disproven, just won't be let go by its adherents who find the meaningless gibberish of environmentalism easier than an ACTUAL religion because ACTUAL religions have expectations for behavior. Environmentalism simply rewards you for believing without demanding anything more than blind support of a repeatedly disproven theory.

 

Man, people call creationists nuts who ignore science? They have NOTHING on environmentalists.

 

I'm sure your rock solid grasp of the concept of NO FUCKING EVIDENCE --- the central tenet in the faith of environmentalism --- will keep your faith grounded in the murky depths of gibberish.

 

If I want a faith, I'll go to church.

 

If I want science, I'll simply avoid environmentalism. Environmentalism is as much a science as political science is.

-=Mike

[EricMM 0]

Mike, 1 + 1 will always equal 2. Even if we just work this out today, one plus one always equal two.

 

This is why this is a smoking gun, because they've proven that the earth is absorbing more heat than it's giving off.

 

Where in the FUCK do you think it's going?

[CanadianChris 0]

I got mine from the Washington Post, actually.

 

Thanks MrRant for the vote of confidence, I wouldn't fucking post something if it was of some scrubbish blog.

Again, why do you base your argument's credibility on the fact that the Associated Press ran with this? It's not like the mainstream media has any way to discern fact from fallacy where science and statistics are concerned.

[Guest MikeSC]

Mike, 1 + 1 will always equal 2.  Even if we just work this out today, one plus one always equal two.

If we're going to say "It's a historically large problem" when our knowledge of history is virtually non-existant, it's a horrible mis-characterization at best.

This is why this is a smoking gun, because they've proven that the earth is absorbing more heat than it's giving off.

We don't know SHIT about what this means historically. We don't have the slightest fucking clue.

 

The earth is absorbing more heat than it's giving off? Well, NO FUCKING SHIT, SHERLOCK.

 

That's WHY WE'RE NOT A FUCKING BALL OF ICE IN THE FUCKING COSMOS.

Where in the FUCK do you think it's going?

Write me when you have vineyards thriving in England.

-=Mike

...Oh wait, that already happened. ALMOST A THOUSAND FUCKING YEARS AGO...

[Guest MikeSC]

I got mine from the Washington Post, actually.

 

Thanks MrRant for the vote of confidence, I wouldn't fucking post something if it was of some scrubbish blog.

Again, why do you base your argument's credibility on the fact that the Associated Press ran with this? It's not like the mainstream media has any way to discern fact from fallacy where science and statistics are concerned.

Because he doesn't have any factual basis on his side and he thinks mentioning that it came from the mainstream press might cover up for the lack of proof.

-=Mike

[teke184 0]

Mike, 1 + 1 will always equal 2. Even if we just work this out today, one plus one always equal two.

 

This is why this is a smoking gun, because they've proven that the earth is absorbing more heat than it's giving off.

 

Where in the FUCK do you think it's going?

I think we're looking at too small a timescale to make definitive judgements.

 

Hell, Lord Kelvin, a very famous physicist, had used the scientific knowledge of his time (circa late 1800s) to determine that the Earth was only 100,000 years old based on the theory that the Earth was slowly "cooling" over time. He'd used regression analysis, assuming that the rate of cooling was constant over time, to come up with the 100,000 year timespan.

 

 

The problem, which he even acknowledged in his writings, was that some form of energy unknown at that time could invalidate his findings. That energy ended up being nuclear, which provides immense amounts of energy at relatively little cost to raw materials.

 

 

 

In short, just because they think they've proven it now doesn't mean it's 100% right.

[EricMM 0]

Look Mike, obviously we've always been taking in more than we've been giving off. But they can figure out how much energy is retained and how much that will influence the earth's warmth.

 

But doubt it. Go ahead.

 

But where's your proof. Where's your anything. Don't give me anymore doubts. I admit I don't have the scientists papers to post on the net. But where's your maths that prove or even show that the Earth cannot be warmed, that the sea levels cannot rise.

[teke184 0]

[Guest Cerebus]

That was funny the last...

 

Wait. It was never funny.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

It can't be M-A-T-H if you don't have the the whole E-Q-U-A-T-I-O-N.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Fuck global warming. It's almost May and it's like 53 outside. Global warming is really slacking off.

[teke184 0]

That was funny the last...

 

Wait. It was never funny.

It wasn't meant to be funny... EricMM is acting like a retard by insisting that Mike has to bow down before him and admit that Global Warming is real.

 

Just because this particular snapshot of time indicates more energy coming in than going out doesn't mean that massive changes in the ecosystems are happening anytime soon. It's still just a THEORY for now, not a law.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Fuck global warming. It's almost May and it's like 53 outside. Global warming is really slacking off.

That's what you get for living way the hell up there.

 

You want to feel global warming? Try being stuck in traffic on hot day with no air conditioning in the middle of fuckin' January.

[genius33 0]

hitler and the nazis invented global warming

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

How could Mike suck on global warming? What exactly would you put in your mouth?...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Stinkin NASA hippie scientists.

 

This is ALREADY being debunked by the Coolidge Institute, the Scaife Consortium, & republiblogusa.com AS WE SPEAK.

[Guest MikeSC]

Look Mike, obviously we've always been taking in more than we've been giving off.  But they can figure out how much energy is retained and how much that will influence the earth's warmth.

 

But doubt it.  Go ahead.

 

But where's your proof.  Where's your anything.  Don't give me anymore doubts.  I admit I don't have the scientists papers to post on the net.  But where's your maths that prove or even show that the Earth cannot be warmed, that the sea levels cannot rise.

I don't NEED to prove it isn't happening. You need to prove it is. And you haven't proved squat. You've posted tiny theories based on an appalling lack of evidence and expect people to take it seriously as science.

 

All I can say is that ALL the evidence indicated an ice age just 30 years ago. Let's not forget that.

 

NOW, ALL of the evidence indicates global warming. A slight change of what the evidence points to, correct?

 

Can YOU explain why all of the evidence required a 180 degree turnaround with no real second thoughts?

 

Come back with actual proof. And the constant proclaiming of every tiny story as "proof" of your theology is just sad.

-=Mike

[EricMM 0]

I guess teke is right. I feel kind of hypocritical for lambasting RJ for getting into stupid fights with Mike in the past and then posting like I did.

 

Here's my point. bigolsmitty is right, this isn't just me saying this. This is a team of scientists studying Earth's climate. My point is, I don't think any proof would be enough for you, Mike. What would it take?

[Guest MikeSC]

I guess teke is right. I feel kind of hypocritical for lambasting RJ for getting into stupid fights with Mike in the past and then posting like I did.

 

Here's my point. bigolsmitty is right, this isn't just me saying this. This is a team of scientists studying Earth's climate. My point is, I don't think any proof would be enough for you, Mike. What would it take?

ACTUAL proof, not "evidence" that is based on an absolute lack of actual evidence.

 

And mentioning those who dispute this theory is silly, since there ISN'T ANY MONEY in disputing environmentalism, but plenty in advocating it.

-=Mike

...Again, what happened to the Ice Age we were supposed to be on the verge of suffering?

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Part 1 of bigolsmitty's "Anti-Global Warming Groups Xposed~!"

 

Junkscience.com

 

Steven J. Milloy is the publisher of JunkScience.com and CSRwatch.com; an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Center for Policy Analysis; and a columnist for FoxNews.com and the New York Sun.

 

Milloy was also a member of the judging panel for the 2004 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Journalism Awards: Online Category.

 

Mr. Milloy is also an adviser to the Free Enterprise Action Fund (www.FreeEnterpriseActionFund.com).

 

Source: junkscience.com

 

Prior to launching the JunkScience.com, Milloy worked for Jim Tozzi's Multinational Business Services, the Philip Morris tobacco company's primary lobbyist in Washington with respect to the issue of secondhand cigarette smoke. He subsequently went to work for The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC), a Philip Morris front group created by the PR firm of APCO Worldwide.

 

Although Milloy frequently represent himself as an expert on scientific matters, he is not a scientist himself. He holds a bachelor's degree in Natural Sciences, a law degree and a master's degree in biostatistics. He has never published original research in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Moreover, he has made scientific claims himself that have no basis in actual research. Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, for example, he claimed that greater use of asbestos insulation in the World Trade Towers would have delayed their collapse "by up to four hours." In reality, there is no scientific basis for claiming that asbestos would have delayed their collapse by even a second, let alone four hours.

 

Source: sourcewatch

 

 

That's some serious SIUNTIFIC CRIDINSHULZ~!