Little info here,


New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism

James Taylor ,   CONTRIBUTOR

I am president of the Spark of Freedom Foundation. Opinions expressed  by
Forbes Contributors are their own.

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.

Study co-author Dr. Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the
University of Alabama in Huntsville and U.S. Science Team Leader for the
Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA's Aqua satellite, reports
that real-world data from NASA's Terra satellite contradict multiple
assumptions  fed into alarmist computer models.

"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
July 26 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 to finding that far less heat is being trapped than  alarmist
computer models have predicted, the NASA satellite data show the  atmosphere
begins shedding heat into space long before United Nations computer  models
predicted.

The new findings are extremely important and should dramatically alter  the
global warming debate.

Scientists on all sides of the global warming debate are in general
agreement about how much heat is being directly trapped by human emissions of
carbon dioxide (the answer is "not much"). However, the single most important
issue in the global warming debate is whether carbon dioxide emissions will
indirectly trap far more heat by causing large increases in atmospheric
humidity  and cirrus clouds.

Alarmist computer models assume human carbon dioxide emissions indirectly
cause substantial increases in atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds (each
of  which are very effective at trapping heat), but real-world data have
long shown  that carbon dioxide emissions are not causing as much atmospheric
humidity and  cirrus clouds as the alarmist computer models have predicted.

The new NASA Terra satellite data are consistent with long-term NOAA  and
NASA data indicating atmospheric humidity and cirrus clouds are not
increasing in the manner predicted by alarmist computer models. The Terra  satellite
data also support data collected by NASA's ERBS satellite showing far  more
longwave radiation (and thus, heat) escaped into space between 1985 and
1999 than alarmist computer models had predicted. Together, the NASA ERBS and
Terra satellite data show that for 25 years and counting, carbon dioxide
emissions have directly and indirectly trapped far less heat than alarmist
computer models have predicted.

In short, the central premise of alarmist global warming theory is that
carbon dioxide emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain
amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping
into  space. Real-world measurements, however, show far less heat is being
trapped in  the earth's atmosphere than the alarmist computer models predict,
and far more  heat is escaping into space than the alarmist computer models
predict.

When objective NASA satellite data, reported in a peer-reviewed  scientific
journal, show a "huge discrepancy" between alarmist climate models  and
real-world facts, climate scientists, the media and our elected officials
would be wise to take notice.

Whether or not they do so will tell us a great deal about how honest the
purveyors of global warming alarmism truly are.

James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The  Heartland
Instituteand managing editor of Environment & Climate News.

Wanted to make sure you didn't miss this:

Remember the Younger Dryas Period? I didn't think so. So much anthropogenic warming in such a little time period, due to the Allerod Oscillation, which was preceded by the Older Dryas, which in turn was preceded by the Bolling Oscillation, or Oldest Dryas. And etc., etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas

You can't make this stuff up. And man wasn't even burning oil and gas, nor coal. Hmmmm....how could that happen?
LiberalLou