NASA report verifies CO2 actually cools atmosphere

[revelarts]

Another stake in the heart of the CO2 fear mongering crowd. the vampire still doesn't know it's dead though.


Global warming debunked: NASA report verifies carbon dioxide actually cools atmosphere


You can read more details of the new NASA SABER study by visiting:
Solar Storm Dumps Gigawatts into Earth's Upper Atmosphere - NASA Science
Global warming debunked: NASA report verifies carbon dioxide actually cools atmosphere

(NaturalNews) Practically everything you have been told by the mainstream scientific community and the media about the alleged detriments of greenhouse gases, and particularly carbon dioxide, appears to be false, according to new data compiled by NASA's Langley Research Center. As it turns out, all those atmospheric greenhouse gases that Al Gore and all the other global warming hoaxers have long claimed are overheating and destroying our planet are actually cooling it, based on the latest evidence.

As reported by Principia Scientific International (PSI), Martin Mlynczak and his colleagues over at NASA tracked infrared emissions from the earth's upper atmosphere during and following a recent solar storm that took place between March 8-10. What they found was that the vast majority of energy released from the sun during this immense coronal mass ejection (CME) was reflected back up into space rather than deposited into earth's lower atmosphere.

The result was an overall cooling effect that completely contradicts claims made by NASA's own climatology division that greenhouse gases are a cause of global warming. As illustrated by data collected using Sounding of the Atmosphere using Broadband Emission Radiometry (SABER), both carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), which are abundant in the earth's upper atmosphere, greenhouse gases reflect heating energy rather than absorb it.

"Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats," says James Russell from Hampton University, who was one of the lead investigators for the groundbreaking SABER study. "When the upper atmosphere (or 'thermosphere') heats up, these molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space."

Almost all 'heating' radiation generated by sun is blocked from entering lower atmosphere by CO2
According to the data, up to 95 percent of solar radiation is literally bounced back into space by both CO2 and NO in the upper atmosphere. Without these necessary elements, in other words, the earth would be capable of absorbing potentially devastating amounts of solar energy that would truly melt the polar ice caps and destroy the planet.

"The shock revelation starkly contradicts the core proposition of the so-called greenhouse gas theory which claims that more CO2 means more warming for our planet," write H. Schreuder and J. O'Sullivan for PSI. "[T]his compelling new NASA data disproves that notion and is a huge embarrassment for NASA's chief climatologist, Dr. James Hansen and his team over at NASA's GISS."

Dr. Hansen, of course, is an outspoken global warming activist who helped spark man-made climate change hysteria in the U.S. back in 1988. Just after the release of the new SABER study, however, Dr. Hansen conveniently retired from his career as a climatologist at NASA, and reportedly now plans to spend his time "on science," and on "drawing attention to [its] implications for young people."

You can read more details of the new NASA SABER study by visiting:
Solar Storm Dumps Gigawatts into Earth's Upper Atmosphere - NASA Science

You can also check out a informative, four-minute video report on the solar storm here:


Learn more: Global warming debunked: NASA report verifies carbon dioxide actually cools atmosphere

[Marcus Aurelius]

gore.JPG

[Thunderknuckles]

I don't see how they are making the conclusions that they are. The NASA study merely shows CO2 and NO reflecting heat from the sun. How does that translate to what happens beneath the Thermosphere? Using their logic, if increased CO2 is reflecting heat from the sun back out into space, isn't the heat generated beneath the Thermosphere being reflected back towards earth thus heating it?
What am I missing besides not being a climatologist

[Marcus Aurelius]

I don't see how they are making the conclusions that they are. The NASA study merely shows CO2 and NO reflecting heat from the sun. How does that translate to what happens beneath the Thermosphere? Using their logic, if increased CO2 is reflecting heat from the sun back out into space, isn't the heat generated beneath the Thermosphere being reflected back towards earth thus heating it?
What am I missing besides not being a climatologist

I wouldn't worry much about not completely understanding climatology. The climatologists don't understand it much either.

I think the point they are trying to make is that CO2 in the atmoshphere is a good thing, without it, no reflection of the heat energy from the sun...we'd fry.

[aboutime]

I wouldn't worry much about not completely understanding climatology. The climatologists don't understand it much either.

I think the point they are trying to make is that CO2 in the atmoshphere is a good thing, without it, no reflection of the heat energy from the sun...we'd fry.

Marcus. Don't spoil all of their fun with actual facts. Ya know, like telling them how Tree's and plants thrive on CO2 in order to convert it into Oxygen. That might be too drastic for them to understand, as in Photosynthesis and other such things they can't even spell.

[Noir]

I don't think anyones saying CO2 in the atmosphere is a bad thing, just that too much of it, and other gasses, is.

As for the OP, two things of interest

1 - The whole point with greenhouse gasses is they trap energy. Its like when you lock your front door at night and someone asks 'are you locking yourself in, or are you locking others out'. You're doing both. Likewise these gases are both reflect energy out to space, and inwards to earth. I'm sure venus would be the most reflective world in our solar system. But what heat does get in is gonna have a very hard time getting out again.

2 - If this is all part of a big conspiracy. Why would a key government organisation be releasing this information.

[Voted4Reagan]

I don't think anyones saying CO2 in the atmosphere is a bad thing, just that too much of it, and other gasses, is.

As for the OP, two things of interest

1 - The whole point with greenhouse gasses is they trap energy. Its like when you lock your front door at night and someone asks 'are you locking yourself in, or are you locking others out'. You're doing both. Likewise these gases are both reflect energy out to space, and inwards to earth. I'm sure venus would be the most reflective world in our solar system. But what heat does get in is gonna have a very hard time getting out again.

2 - If this is all part of a big conspiracy. Why would a key government organisation be releasing this information.

you cant compare Venus with Earth.

Earth doesn't have clouds of Opaque Sulfuric acid that holds in greenhouse gases over 100% of it's surface.

you're comparing apples to Oranges.

[Noir]

you cant compare Venus with Earth.

Earth doesn't have clouds of Opaque Sulfuric acid that holds in greenhouse gases over 100% of it's surface.

you're comparing apples to Oranges.

Sulphuric acid makes up much less than 1% of Venus's atmosphere.
Over 95% is Carbon Dioxide, and almost all of the remaining % is Nitrogen.

This image more or less sums up the OP.

[revelarts]

2 - If this is all part of a big conspiracy. Why would a key government organization be releasing this information.

"...Dr. Hansen, of course, is an outspoken global warming activist who helped spark man-made climate change hysteria in the U.S. back in 1988. Just after the release of the new SABER study, however, Dr. Hansen conveniently retired...."

in general about "conspiracies" the straw man that is set up is that EVERYONE has to be in on it. since they are not then there was NO collusion at all.. ever.

But it only takes a few well place people to move an idea forward then inertia can care others along with the program until new evidence pops up to make make people challenge the shame. science hoaxes are not new.

But there are people at NASA and nearly many other institution where Global warming has been promoted that have pointed out info that is against the idea. even tech portions of the full blown IPCC report don't make the alarmist predictions and pronouncements that appear in the summaries, in print media or promoted by certain scientist and politicians.

[Little-Acorn]

I don't see how they are making the conclusions that they are. The NASA study merely shows CO2 and NO reflecting heat from the sun. How does that translate to what happens beneath the Thermosphere? Using their logic, if increased CO2 is reflecting heat from the sun back out into space, isn't the heat generated beneath the Thermosphere being reflected back towards earth thus heating it?
What am I missing besides not being a climatologist

The vast majority of energy (heat) in the air, comes from the sun, not from the earth.

That's why Venus' atmosphere is hotter than Earth's, while Jupiter's and Saturn's are much colder.

[aboutime]

I don't think anyones saying CO2 in the atmosphere is a bad thing, just that too much of it, and other gasses, is.

As for the OP, two things of interest

1 - The whole point with greenhouse gasses is they trap energy. Its like when you lock your front door at night and someone asks 'are you locking yourself in, or are you locking others out'. You're doing both. Likewise these gases are both reflect energy out to space, and inwards to earth. I'm sure venus would be the most reflective world in our solar system. But what heat does get in is gonna have a very hard time getting out again.

2 - If this is all part of a big conspiracy. Why would a key government organisation be releasing this information.

Noir. Let's just answer your number 2 -...for starters. And it will suffice for every other answer you may be hoping to find.

2 - MONEY.

Example. Al Gore has made more than 200 Million American dollars on his PHONY, and repeated claims about Global Everything.
And Al is the ONLY one who laughs at the rest of the gullible people who MADE HIM SO RICH.

[Robert A Whit]

I don't see how they are making the conclusions that they are. The NASA study merely shows CO2 and NO reflecting heat from the sun. How does that translate to what happens beneath the Thermosphere? Using their logic, if increased CO2 is reflecting heat from the sun back out into space, isn't the heat generated beneath the Thermosphere being reflected back towards earth thus heating it?
What am I missing besides not being a climatologist

From Nasa

But first, I believe the term is not reflected, but absorbed.


March 22, 2012: A recent flurry of eruptions on the sun did more than spark pretty auroras around the poles. NASA-funded researchers say the solar storms of March 8th through 10th dumped enough energy in Earth’s upper atmosphere to power every residence in New York City for two years.
“This was the biggest dose of heat we’ve received from a solar storm since 2005,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA Langley Research Center. “It was a big event, and shows how solar activity can directly affect our planet.”


Mlynczak is the associate principal investigator for the SABER instrument onboard NASA’s TIMED satellite. SABER monitors infrared emissions from Earth’s upper atmosphere, in particular from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a key role in the energy balance of air hundreds of km above our planet’s surface.
“Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats,” explains James Russell of Hampton University, SABER’s principal investigator. “When the upper atmosphere (or ‘thermosphere’) heats up, these molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space.”
That’s what happened on March 8th when a coronal mass ejection (CME) propelled in our direction by an X5-class solar flare hit Earth’s magnetic field. (On the “Richter Scale of Solar Flares,” X-class flares are the most powerful kind.) Energetic particles rained down on the upper atmosphere, depositing their energy where they hit. The action produced spectacular auroras around the poles and significant1 upper atmospheric heating all around the globe.
“The thermosphere lit up like a Christmas tree,” says Russell. “It began to glow intensely at infrared wavelengths as the thermostat effect kicked in.”
For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space.
A surge of infrared radiation from nitric oxide molecules on March 8-10, 2012, signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years. Credit: SABER/TIMED. See also the CO2 data.

In human terms, this is a lot of energy. According to the New York City mayor’s office, an average NY household consumes just under 4700 kWh annually. This means the geomagnetic storm dumped enough energy into the atmosphere to power every home in the Big Apple for two years.
“Unfortunately, there’s no practical way to harness this kind of energy,” says Mlynczak. “It’s so diffuse and out of reach high above Earth’s surface. Plus, the majority of it has been sent back into space by the action of CO2 and NO.”
During the heating impulse, the thermosphere puffed up like a marshmallow held over a campfire, temporarily increasing the drag on low-orbiting satellites. This is both good and bad. On the one hand, extra drag helps clear space junk out of Earth orbit. On the other hand, it decreases the lifetime of useful satellites by bringing them closer to the day of re-entry.

The storm is over now, but Russell and Mlynczak expect more to come.
“We’re just emerging from a deep solar minimum,” says Russell. “The solar cycle is gaining strength with a maximum expected in 2013.”
More sunspots flinging more CMEs toward Earth adds up to more opportunities for SABER to study the heating effect of solar storms.
"This is a new frontier in the sun-Earth connection," says Mlynczak, "and the data we’re collecting are unprecedented."
Stay tuned to Science@NASA for updates from the top of the atmosphere.

Author:Dr. Tony Phillips| Production editor: Dr. Tony Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA

[Marcus Aurelius]

From Nasa

But first, I believe the term is not reflected, but absorbed.
Your own post contradicted that statement...

March 22, 2012: A recent flurry of eruptions on the sun did more than spark pretty auroras around the poles. NASA-funded researchers say the solar storms of March 8th through 10th dumped enough energy in Earth’s upper atmosphere to power every residence in New York City for two years.
“This was the biggest dose of heat we’ve received from a solar storm since 2005,” says Martin Mlynczak of NASA Langley Research Center. “It was a big event, and shows how solar activity can directly affect our planet.”


Mlynczak is the associate principal investigator for the SABER instrument onboard NASA’s TIMED satellite. SABER monitors infrared emissions from Earth’s upper atmosphere, in particular from carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitric oxide (NO), two substances that play a key role in the energy balance of air hundreds of km above our planet’s surface.
“Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats,” explains James Russell of Hampton University, SABER’s principal investigator. “When the upper atmosphere (or ‘thermosphere’) heats up, these molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space.”
Shedding heat back into space... is reflecting it back into space, NOT absorbing it.

That’s what happened on March 8th when a coronal mass ejection (CME) propelled in our direction by an X5-class solar flare hit Earth’s magnetic field. (On the “Richter Scale of Solar Flares,” X-class flares are the most powerful kind.) Energetic particles rained down on the upper atmosphere, depositing their energy where they hit. The action produced spectacular auroras around the poles and significant1 upper atmospheric heating all around the globe.
“The thermosphere lit up like a Christmas tree,” says Russell. “It began to glow intensely at infrared wavelengths as the thermostat effect kicked in.”
For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space.
A surge of infrared radiation from nitric oxide molecules on March 8-10, 2012, signals the biggest upper-atmospheric heating event in seven years. Credit: SABER/TIMED. See also the CO2 data.

In human terms, this is a lot of energy. According to the New York City mayor’s office, an average NY household consumes just under 4700 kWh annually. This means the geomagnetic storm dumped enough energy into the atmosphere to power every home in the Big Apple for two years.
“Unfortunately, there’s no practical way to harness this kind of energy,” says Mlynczak. “It’s so diffuse and out of reach high above Earth’s surface. Plus, the majority of it has been sent back into space by the action of CO2 and NO.”
Again, reflected out into space, not absorbed.
During the heating impulse, the thermosphere puffed up like a marshmallow held over a campfire, temporarily increasing the drag on low-orbiting satellites. This is both good and bad. On the one hand, extra drag helps clear space junk out of Earth orbit. On the other hand, it decreases the lifetime of useful satellites by bringing them closer to the day of re-entry.

The storm is over now, but Russell and Mlynczak expect more to come.
“We’re just emerging from a deep solar minimum,” says Russell. “The solar cycle is gaining strength with a maximum expected in 2013.”
More sunspots flinging more CMEs toward Earth adds up to more opportunities for SABER to study the heating effect of solar storms.
"This is a new frontier in the sun-Earth connection," says Mlynczak, "and the data we’re collecting are unprecedented."
Stay tuned to Science@NASA for updates from the top of the atmosphere.

Author:Dr. Tony Phillips| Production editor: Dr. Tony Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA

Please see red and blue above. Next time, read your own post, dumb ass.

[Robert A Whit]

I would like to add more context to post 12.

Cold is not a thing; heat is.

The way heat works is that heat will be siphoned off to the less heated place.

Ergo heat is part of the planet earth. It has so much heat, that we can still observe heat venting, ala volcanos. Wile we can observe volcanoes, we can't observe easily today the hot spots that are not volcanos. Satellites do pick up surface heat areas but 3/4 of earth is covered by deep oceans and not easy to pick up deep heat sources.

While heat is absorbed by CO2 from space, it also is absorbed from earth sources. Physics works one way.

Carbon dioxide is as good a coolant for heat from Earth as it is for heat coming from Space.

Yet democrats want to blame a great coolant.

Imminent scientists obeying the law of physics debunked carbon dioxide as a source of heat long ago yet are not listened to by people like Obama.

[aboutime]

I would like to add more context to post 12.

Cold is not a thing; heat is.

The way heat works is that heat will be siphoned off to the less heated place.

Ergo heat is part of the planet earth. It has so much heat, that we can still observe heat venting, ala volcanos. Wile we can observe volcanoes, we can't observe easily today the hot spots that are not volcanos. Satellites do pick up surface heat areas but 3/4 of earth is covered by deep oceans and not easy to pick up deep heat sources.

While heat is absorbed by CO2 from space, it also is absorbed from earth sources. Physics works one way.

Carbon dioxide is as good a coolant for heat from Earth as it is for heat coming from Space.

Yet democrats want to blame a great coolant.

Imminent scientists obeying the law of physics debunked carbon dioxide as a source of heat long ago yet are not listened to by people like Obama.

GOT IT. Now we all know why ICE CUBES never work if they are WARM when dropped in the Iced Tea. (THINK ABOUT IT BEFORE CALLING IT DUMB)