Can anyone comment of NASA's aqua sattelite that shows reduced water vapour?

The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're... show more The satellite was only launched in 2002 and it enabled the collection of data, not just on temperature but also on cloud formation and water vapour. What all the climate models suggest is that, when you've got warming from additional carbon dioxide, this will result in increased water vapour, so you're going to get a positive feedback. That's what the models have been indicating. What this great data from the NASA Aqua satellite ... (is) actually showing is just the opposite, that with a little bit of warming, weather processes are compensating, so they're actually limiting the greenhouse effect and you're getting a negative rather than a positive feedback."
Update: These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to... show more These findings actually aren't being disputed by the meteorological community. They're having trouble digesting the findings, they're acknowledging the findings, they're acknowledging that the data from NASA's Aqua satellite is not how the models predict, and I think they're about to recognise that the models really do need to be overhauled and that when they are overhauled they will probably show greatly reduced future warming projected as a consequence of carbon dioxide."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sto...
Update 2: Hypomix: Doesn't your link state what the article says? Isn't the whole global warming argument that we must cut back on co2 emissions because of predicted catastrophic warming. Less water vapour means less warming less the projections. So why should we cut back on costly emissions?
Update 3: Thanks Gengi for proving my point. Less water vapour means less warming. Less than what the models are saying.
Update 4: Ken: All I am trying to do is get a confirmation yes or no.
16 answers 16