Well, I'm too busy putting my hydrocarbon burner together to keep argueing this thread anymore. (It does appear to have developed a life of it's own however.)
Quote from NASA.
Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward. The largest fluctuations in the satellite temperature data are not from any man-made activity, but from natural phenomena such as large volcanic eruptions from Mt. Pinatubo, and from El Niño. So the programs which model global warming in a computer say the temperature of the Earth's lower atmosphere should be going up markedly, but actual measurements of the temperature of the lower atmosphere reveal no such pronounced activity.
Here is the link.
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
It is funny how NASA in 2006 says that 2005 is warmest on reccord, except for possibly 1998 or whatever, and uses surface temp data (Which is skewed by the urban heat island effect, yet they don't admit to that in their writeup.)
Here is a quote from Joel's prior link. (This part is before the conclusion of a obvious LEE working at NASA. Interesting...)
The GISS team measured temperatures using records from land-based weather stations, and ship and satellite measurements of sea-surface temperature. This image shows temperature anomalies relative to the 1951-1980 mean. Areas of white indicate no deviation from the mean. Colors ranging from yellow to red indicate warmer-than-average anomalies, and colors ranging from green to purple indicate cooler-than-average anomalies. Most of the map shows warm colors, and temperatures are particularly warm in the Arctic and in south-central Africa. The high-resolution image shows both the temperature map and a line graph of global temperatures from 1880 to 2005.
All measurements have a range of uncertainty, including estimates of global temperature. The “real” average global temperature may be a little above or below the reported value. The range of uncertainty for 2005 temperatures overlaps with that of 1998, which means the two years are vying closely for the position of “warmest year on record.” Other research groups observing climate change place 1998 at the top of the temperature record, and the GISS team describes 2005 as “practically in a dead heat with 1998.”
OOPS! Wait, they forgot to add in the data of the atmosphere.. (They have this data, why did they not compute it with the land, sea and other sources of data? One has to ask this question since clearly if the "greenhouse" gasses were causing the warming trend, especially C02, it would surely show up as a increase in atmosphere temps right? WRONG!. The fact that they ignored the flat to down trending actual temp of the atmosphere we live in shows they are trying to grasp at anything to find a way to blame weather change on man made causes.)
This was true in the 70's when everyone was sure that another ice age was upon us. (Time magazine's opinion, not mine.) And now it's true today when normally very intellegent people can't realize that our solar system will do as it pleases, and we are just along for the ride. The Sun controls the weather. The natural events like volcanos, earth quakes and other stuff we have no control over effect our climate in ways that no human activity comes close to.
Quote from NASA.
Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward. The largest fluctuations in the satellite temperature data are not from any man-made activity, but from natural phenomena such as large volcanic eruptions from Mt. Pinatubo, and from El Niño. So the programs which model global warming in a computer say the temperature of the Earth's lower atmosphere should be going up markedly, but actual measurements of the temperature of the lower atmosphere reveal no such pronounced activity.
Here is the link.
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm
It is funny how NASA in 2006 says that 2005 is warmest on reccord, except for possibly 1998 or whatever, and uses surface temp data (Which is skewed by the urban heat island effect, yet they don't admit to that in their writeup.)
Here is a quote from Joel's prior link. (This part is before the conclusion of a obvious LEE working at NASA. Interesting...)
The GISS team measured temperatures using records from land-based weather stations, and ship and satellite measurements of sea-surface temperature. This image shows temperature anomalies relative to the 1951-1980 mean. Areas of white indicate no deviation from the mean. Colors ranging from yellow to red indicate warmer-than-average anomalies, and colors ranging from green to purple indicate cooler-than-average anomalies. Most of the map shows warm colors, and temperatures are particularly warm in the Arctic and in south-central Africa. The high-resolution image shows both the temperature map and a line graph of global temperatures from 1880 to 2005.
All measurements have a range of uncertainty, including estimates of global temperature. The “real” average global temperature may be a little above or below the reported value. The range of uncertainty for 2005 temperatures overlaps with that of 1998, which means the two years are vying closely for the position of “warmest year on record.” Other research groups observing climate change place 1998 at the top of the temperature record, and the GISS team describes 2005 as “practically in a dead heat with 1998.”
OOPS! Wait, they forgot to add in the data of the atmosphere.. (They have this data, why did they not compute it with the land, sea and other sources of data? One has to ask this question since clearly if the "greenhouse" gasses were causing the warming trend, especially C02, it would surely show up as a increase in atmosphere temps right? WRONG!. The fact that they ignored the flat to down trending actual temp of the atmosphere we live in shows they are trying to grasp at anything to find a way to blame weather change on man made causes.)
This was true in the 70's when everyone was sure that another ice age was upon us. (Time magazine's opinion, not mine.) And now it's true today when normally very intellegent people can't realize that our solar system will do as it pleases, and we are just along for the ride. The Sun controls the weather. The natural events like volcanos, earth quakes and other stuff we have no control over effect our climate in ways that no human activity comes close to.
It's been updated with some source material you should like. (I even used your own 2006 data post.. problem is they left out the air temp data and are looking at surface temps, not the atmosphere where global warming would show up... )