Guest essay by Eric Worrall
US and Overseas scientists have accused the Trump Administration of criminal obstruction of climate research, because the US government has not immediately stepped in to foot the bill for a replacement satellite.
Donald Trump accused of obstructing satellite research into climate change
Republican-controlled Congress ordered destruction of vital sea-ice probe
Robin McKie, Observer science editor
Sunday 5 November 2017 19.00 AEDT
President Trump has been accused of deliberately obstructing research on global warming after it emerged that a critically important technique for investigating sea-ice cover at the poles faces being blocked.
The row has erupted after a key polar satellite broke down a few days ago, leaving the US with only three ageing ones, each operating long past their shelf lives, to measure the Arctic’s dwindling ice cap. Scientists say there is no chance a new one can now be launched until 2023 or later. None of the current satellites will still be in operation then.
The crisis has been worsened because the US Congress this year insisted that a backup sea-ice probe had to be dismantled because it did not want to provide funds to keep it in storage. Congress is currently under the control of Republicans, who are antagonistic to climate science and the study of global warming.
“This is like throwing away the medical records of a sick patient,” said David Gallaher of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado. “Our world is ailing and we have apparently decided to undermine, quite deliberately, the effectiveness of the records on which its recovery might be based. It is criminal.”
…
Such losses have serious consequences, say researchers. “Sea-ice data provided by satellites is essential for initiating climate models and validating them,” said Andrew Fleming of the British Antarctic Survey. “We will be very much the poorer without that information.”
US taxpayers have been footing the bill for the Defence Meteorological Satellite Programme since 1973. A thank you would have been nice.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Funding climate satellites is so important that no country wants to replace the US ones.
Funny you are. It is Trump’s fault,
Trump is a criminal, says Fuller.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/15/huffpo-scrubs-jason-fullers-ultimate-punishment-tr/
Obama did it….not Trump………typical guardian BS
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/05/as-arctic-sea-ice-shows-record-decline-scientists-prepare-to-go-blind/
Latitude November 5, 2017 at 7:13 am
Obama did it….not Trump………typical guardian BS
No it was the Republican led Congress that did it, notably Mike Rogers and his House Armed Services Strategic Forces subcommittee.
all under Obama….’splain this
“”But last year, things began to go awry. The DoD, NASA and National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) were relying on F-17, when it began breaking down. Scientists immediately turned to F-19 for data, the latest in the series, but F-19 went caput shortly thereafter, leading to a coverage gap spanning several months last spring.””
Where was that “coverage gap” spanning several months?………
Trump??? Congress maybe. Remember the present fiscal year budget was Obama’s budget, not Trumps.
“…No it was the Republican led Congress that did it, notably Mike Rogers and his House Armed Services Strategic Forces subcommittee…”
The big and bad Republican-led Congress, which let Obama and the Democrats run roughshod over them for everything else over his 8 years in office, set its sights on ending this program – and there’s nothing Obama and the Democrats could do about it?
Obama got his way, even with a Republican Congress. For example, when the Senate was about to pass a bill defunding Planned Parenthood, all Obama had to do was threaten to shut down the government. McConnell promptly withdrew the defunding provision from the bill, and Planned Parenthood is still getting tax-payer funding today. Obama could have done the same thing to get the climate satellites funded if he wanted them as badly as he wanted public funding for Planned Parenthood.
Maybe they could have wasted somewhat less money on eighteen bajillion redundant and ridiculous studies, “proving” anything and everything that some jackass so-called climate science dude or dudette can dream up to blame on “carbon pollution”, over and over again.
Oh, dear…. Our world is aging. Yes, Earth is now officially middle-aged for a planet of its size and physiology/geology/biology/whateverology. (I made that up!)
And dear old, homey, comfortable Mother Earth will continue to age, change with age, and age some more, regardless of our feeble attempts to “manage” things – whatever that means.
Has anyone checked to see if Earth’s retirement pension plan is up to date?
Sara……even funnier that almost everyone is missing something about this
F20 was the last…and most advanced….of that satellite series (emphasis on most advanced)
…and even the Air Force has said it’s outdated technology that they no longer have any use for
Not only are the warmists (pay attention Mosh) clamoring for outdated tech…..they are admitting they have been using subpar outdated tech all along
A bunch of sound and fury, signifying nothing major. JPSS-1 is due to launch in days, and JPSS-2 is fully funded. What’s going on is just negotiations over the following ones in the series.
We are but one country not in the Paris Accord – I’m confident that all the remaining countries will step up and get this lack of data thing fixed – besides POTUS has real important planetary issues to sort out aka North Korea
Why can’t they just make up data like they do for all the rest of climate science?
Satellite data is only useful if it fits the narrative. Sea ice satellite data since 1973 but charts all start in 1979 because it ice was maxed out and sells the narrative well. Satellite data is preferred for sea level over tide gauges because it fits the narrative but not for temperature because it doesn’t. Personally, I prefer more data not less. Perhaps congress should insist that all the satellite data be used, not just the portion that fits the narrative.
Also they didn’t bother with the old Nimbus satellite pictures that went back to the 1960’s. I recall a WUWT post showing a Nimbus picture from September, 1969 which showed a very large area of open water in the Central Arctic Basin north of Alaska. It made one question the premise that the sea-ice was solid in the past, and only recently has become broken up.
I liked the Naval Research Lab interpretations of satellite data, but was well aware they had shortcomings because they didn’t always match up with what pictures from drifting buoys showed. Buoys would show a lot of ice (locally) in waters the satellite called ice-free, and freezing where the satellite suggested thawing, and so on and so forth. That problem was solved by failing to fund any more cameras to double check the satellites.
In October the Naval Research Lab discontinued an “old product” and switched to a “new product”, and the switch made the sea-ice abruptly three feet thinner.
https://sunriseswansong.wordpress.com/2017/10/23/arctic-sea-ice-quiet-changes/
Oh well, what’s three feet between friends?
As a person who liked to view sea-ice in hot weather, I think I’ll miss the camera-buoys more, but I also liked the satellites. But I’ll likely get more work done without the splendid distractions. (If taxes went down it might also be nice, but I am not so foolish as to expect that.)
Here is the WUWT post with the Nimbus picture of “enormous holes” on September 9, 1969.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/04/1960s-satellite-imagery-of-polar-ice-discovers-enormous-holes-in-the-sea-ice/
The NEMS and SCAMS instruments (Nimbus E and F) would extend the temperature, etc. record back to ~1973. While NEMS was nadir only and SCAMS was an early version of the AMSU, real science would demand that their product be included in any study. But then again it has never been about science, has it?
ShrNfr,
Science can’t accept “the end justifies the means”, and that is why politics poisons science. False data poisons any end result. The sad thing is some good scientists are now getting painted with a broad brush.
Thanks for that Caleb. As you point out, there is much more sea ice research than satellites, and it goes back in time to give a larger picture. Recently I animated the recovery of old age ice (proxy for thickness) from the AARI ice charts.
?w=1000
https://rclutz.wordpress.com/2017/11/03/old-arctic-ice-recovers/
Thanks Caleb for the link in your 5:11 post. The comments by Robert Brown, rgb@duke are priceless. Folks like you and he enrich this great site.
Postscript: My comment was imprecise. Of course, the AARI charts are produced from satellite imagery, showing that there is more to sea ice research than microwave sensors. For example, here are the data sources that go into National Ice Center MASIE ice charts:
Platform(s) AQUA, DMSP, DMSP 5D-3/F17, GOES-10, GOES-11, GOES-13, GOES-9, METEOSAT, MSG, MTSAT-1R, MTSAT-2, NOAA-14, NOAA-15, NOAA-16, NOAA-17, NOAA-18, NOAA-N, RADARSAT-2, SUOMI-NPP, TERRA
Sensor(s): AMSU-A, ATMS, AVHRR, GOES I-M IMAGER, MODIS, MTSAT 1R Imager, MTSAT 2 Imager, MVIRI, SAR, SEVIRI, SSM/I, SSMIS, VIIRS
Thanks for the information, Ron. You do good work. I like your site.
I will really miss the cameras. I wonder if people would have been as quick to see the problem the microwave imagery had differentiating melt-water pools from open water, if it were not for our ability to double-check using our lying lies.
Great question Caleb. Here is some intriguing information
I found a 2009 presentation in English which answers most of this. Russian Space Infrastructure applied in the Arctic: sea ice application within Roshydromet Vasily Smolyanitsky Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI). Excerpts and image below. Read the full report to appreciate the scale of their efforts.
Data acquisition
Coastal weather polar stations of Roshydromet make daily visual and instrumental ice observations on sea ice concentration and stages of ice development, ice thickness, forms of ice, ice drift and other phenomena. Icebreakers and icebreaking vessels on the NSR routes routinely (commonly once a day) report the main ice parameters describing ice navigation. Before 1994 aircraft ice reconnaissance flights were conducted in the Arctic usually on a monthly basis from November to April and on a 10-day internal during the summer navigation period.
Since 1995 aircraft (mostly helicopter) ice reconnaissance flights are conducted only occasionally during tailored hydrometeorological support of applied and scientific activities in the Eurasian Arctic. The scope of ice information collected during air ice reconnaissance includes visual observations on a full scope of sea ice parameters essential for navigation and marine safety (egg-code, icebergs, openings, dynamics, surface features). Though being nowadays not the prime sources, the stated information (coastal, aircraft) is continuously used for validation of the sea ice analysis and prognostic products at the ice centers.
The AARI and Planet satellite reception stations provide operational optical imagery for the Arctic Ocean and North Pacific from a series of satellites (NOAA, EOS TERRA, Aqua, Suomi NPP, FY3, Meteor, Ocean). Information for other regions (e.g. Antarctic), from other satellites and ranges (Sentinel-1,2,3, Radarsat-2, TerraSar-X, etc.) is received via Internet from corresponding data portals directly or from commercial satellite data providers. All data are further processed within ice information systems and utilized for regional, pan-Arctic or pan-Antarctic sea-ice analysis. Sample satellite products are available via the AARI and Planet web pages.
Most of the mentioned satellites are accessed by others with the exception of Meteor, operated by Russia. Yes, they have numerous meteorological satellites as shown in this image:
?w=1000&h=750
According to the presentation, their plans called for additional Electro and Meteor platforms, as well as a new satellite type called Arctica. It is not clear to what extent the sensors on these birds replicate the microwave data.
https://earth.esa.int/workshops/spaceandthearctic09/smolyanitsky.pdf
@Caleb, When you let rats into your house, you get plague. These people elected to go with the politics rather than with the science. If nothing else, they had a duty to lobby to make sure real science and not Lysenkoism happened.
Too true, and a very good point. In some cases the scientists who refused to draw the line and pick a fight were cowards. But others, I like to believe, were only attempting to “get along with differing views.” Call them naive if you will, but some cannot comprehend anyone would chose to willingly disfigure beauty as lovely as Truth. Now, I fear, they are coming to their senses with a sense of incredulity. Faced with the utter destruction of science, against a foe that some thought unimaginable, people who thought themselves opposed find themselves on the same side.
There are pictures of submarines surfacing in open water at the North pole as far back as the late 1950s.
Those pictures were published in the New York Times…the same newspaper than declared a few years back that if open water appeared at the pole, it would be the first time in millions of years.
In fact, people studying the ice at the polar regions have been issuing warning after warning for hundreds of years about how fast the ice is melting and how it will soon be gone.
The problem is not melting ice, or lack of study, it is people that only know how to speak in exaggerations and hyperbole.
It has been fascinating to watch, over the past decade, how those dedicated to believing we are in the midst of an Arctic “Death Spiral” scramble to come up with excuses for counter-evidence such as those old submarine photos. It reminds me a little of how I would scramble to come up with excuses for undone Math homework. If I had put a tenth the effort into doing my Math as I did inventing excuses I’d be far better at Math.) (But then, I was born to be a creative writer. Do you think Climate Scientists are actually creative writers who accidentally wound up in the wrong field?)
Around 1816-1817 the Arctic Ocean dumped a huge amount of ice south into the Atlantic, and there was a lot of open water up towards the Pole. If you find time study that history, (which Alarmists scramble to explain away). The British had high hopes the ice was gone for good and their Navy, (unemployed after the defeat of Napoleon), might be put to work finding a useful trade route through the Northwest Passage, leading to some amazing voyages and adventures and tragedies. Of course, the ice grew back, as it always seems to do.
perhaps the President read
Dan Brown’s Deception Point ?
“Our world is ailing”. That’s because vast resources are being wasted on climate change “research” instead of providing people with clean water, energy and health provisions.
The usual emotional, unscientific, quasi-religious BS that makes great headlines in obscure publications that about 3 people will read.
Agreed Phillip, that waste of resources on climate change ‘research’ is killing people.
We can’t have that, so funding Obamacare takes priority. Right?
Throwing away the medical records of sick patients happens when doctors die or retire. Sometimes you have the option of getting records, sometimes not. If you do get records, it’s up to YOU to make sure your new doctor has them. If you change doctors, it’s 100% YOUR problem to transfer records and pay any cost involved. It’s a lousy analogy to use for persuading people the satellite situation is somehow evil or wrong.
Already convinced Sheri. Based on what I’ve seen so far, socialist utopia aims to employ a personal nanny for everybody and name-calling anyone daring to disagree with their political preferences. It cannot be argued with logic and reason like you tried, but ridicule usually works. But, them demanding additional military funding, emphasis on military à la Mosher over here? That’s so terrible, it’s dropping down by its own weight.
The U.S. Global Change Research Program has squandered $52 Billion since 1989 on Global Warming/Climate Change research.
Earth to David Gallaher of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado. Paying or not paying is what Congress is all about. Ha, so now David and his buddy Mark won’t have any data to do more “hind casting” BS and would have to look for real jobs? Share your pain with a coal miner on the West Slope of Colorado, oh, come to think of it, they might have openings. I am sure the mines will make a special effort to find something for you to do. Oh the crying and gnashing of teeth!
And just how much is being spent on this year climate get-together?
Maybe Elon can fund it ?
What he has is mostly government money anyway !!
Make sure he uses a good battery, though. !
Well the latest plan was to launch F20 on SpaceX I understand. The Air Force wanted to launch it to provide the US military with Middle-east area weather coverage for which it currently relies on an aging European satellite. The primary mission is global weather coverage for the US military not sea ice coverage which is a side benefit of the on-board sensors. The author seems to imply that the government is doing everyone a favor by its previous funding of the military meteorological satellites, is not clear who he thinks should be providing this.
A block purchase of the satellites was made to cut costs and to launch them in sequence to provide continuous coverage now the congress decided that they had spent too much money storing the last one and ordered it to be scrapped rather than launch it.
With the salaries of those laid off from Tesla, right?
Perhaps NASA should have spent less on GISS and on muslim outreach. !
AndyG55 November 5, 2017 at 3:14 am
Perhaps NASA should have spent less on GISS and on muslim outreach. !
As I pointed out to you before the DMSP has nothing to do with NASA, hint the D stands for Defense.
YEs, I know its a “Defence” satellite.
Where is the “designed for task” satellite that they would have if it was deemed that important.?
Why is a new CACA satellite needed? After all, CACA science has been settled.
CACA is an appropriate name in Spanish it means “S**t”
Thanks andrewmharding. Because misanthropes have failed to name their scares sustainably over three decades, I’m taking the liberty from now on.
My personal favourite is CACA, means the same also in many non-latin languages. It stands for Catastrophic Anthropogenic C Apocalypse. No need to explore C meaning e.g. Carbon, CFC, Chemical, Combustion, Conservatism, Capitalism, Christianity, Consumer, Climate,…
Its a DEFENSE WEATHER SATELLITE.
So if we don’t need it for DEFENSE, let it DIE.
We have several military polar orbiting satellites that have more than sufficient sensing capabilities for this research. The reason we are not allowed to use them is their missions are top secret in nature and national defense related. Priorities…
At some point, as we replace these in the next few years, in their mid life spans, they will be repurposed. If your looking for someone to blame, blame Obama and his cuts to defense spending along with wasting NASA monies on the climate fraud an Muslim out reach.
Steven Mosher,
I am confused, so perhaps you can clear up the math on this for me: If it would take until 2023 (i.e. 5-6 years from now) to get another into orbit and the remaining satellites are old and failing, etc., how then does this fall in the lap of the current administration (for whom I did NOT vote and am no real fan)? It seems a pretty foolish argument and sadly, not unlike so many other arguments made on/around the climate topic, wherein a claim is made that is easily disputed or even disproven all together. It’s for this reason that many independents – like myself- are being lost to the Dem party (and it ain’t ’cause I like the Repubs! Both are chalk-full-o’ filthy shitbirds). There’s only so many discernibly untrue claims that a rational, earnest person can stomach. So again, please explain the math of this to me. Thanks.
” “Sea-ice data provided by satellites is essential for initiating climate models and validating them,” said Andrew Fleming “- It hasn’t been done in the past; why start now?
So without it there will be fewer climate models? What’s not to like?
so the dud sat is the newer one i gather? bummer funded a cheap one from whom???
and the old ones are working regardless of age
how the hell could trump in any way be blamed.. by anyone sane at least…beats me
what really narked me is the mention of using the sat data for “modelling”
wtf? why not just USE the real data as is??
ozspeaksup November 5, 2017 at 3:50 am
so the dud sat is the newer one i gather? bummer funded a cheap one from whom???
and the old ones are working regardless of age
They were all purchased at the same time (in the 1990s) so you can hardly blame it on President Obama.
Sure we can. Obama blamed everything on Bush. We’re just following his lead.
Who’s job was it to keep the president apprised?? I mean, it’s not like the last administration didn’t spend an awful lot of money AND time talking about how important it was to spend all that money that was (and still is?) allocated for the broad and nebulous field known as “Climate Science.” So… who is it that fell asleep at the switch and failed to report on the pending failure of this all-important tool in their ice-measuring tool box?! How was this not reported to the Obama administration 5 years or so ago? Shouldn’t this ultimately be put at the feet of his official Science Advisor, or some such person? Where doe the buck stop here? As I wrote above, I’m not a Trump voter and I don’t really like him (never have), but this kind of crap actually makes me feel sympathetic towards him. Given how wrapped in politics all of this “hard science” is, it actually amazes me how politically stupid the CAGW proponents are. Amazing. Disturbing. Stupid.
Why do we need all this bloody data.
When we get REAL DATA, we then alter it to suit incorrectly based models.
So what’s the fuss.
its a DEFENSE weather satellite.
the program has been operating since 1962.
Again, if DEFENSE doesn’t want it or need, who cares what happens to it? AGW has been piggybacking on a satellite that was not meant for that purpose and they are crying “unfair” because their free ride is over.
Ah, Moshpup is telling us there is satellite data back to 1962.
But the sea ice satellite data only ever starts in 1979.
You never seem to think before you type, Mosh..
So… It has already out-lived the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II series. DOD hasn’t seen a need to rejuvenate the F-4 Phantom either. Although, personally, I wish they would bring back the A-6 Intruder… The Navy actually needs a dedicated long-range strike aircraft… but apparently, they don’t need NSIDC satellites.
AndyG55 November 5, 2017 at 12:04 pm
Ah, Moshpup is telling us there is satellite data back to 1962.
But the sea ice satellite data only ever starts in 1979.
Indeed there is however the early satellites didn’t carry the same instrumentation that the current ones do (hardly surprising). The early ones took film images of cloud cover and dropped reels of exposed film back to earth for analysis. As Steve and I have pointed out these are primarily military weather monitoring satellites, conveniently the passive microwave sensors enable imaging through clouds and so a side effect is the ability to monitor seaice among other things such as soil moisture etc. Similarly UAH developed the atmospheric temperature monitoring exploiting the microwave sounding units carried on NOAA satellites.
‘..Arctic’s dwindling ice cap.’
Says all you need to know about the Observer’s ‘science editor’.
Climate Barbie goes ballistic on conservative reporter.
http://amp.dailycaller.com/2017/11/04/trudeau-minister-scolds-reporter-over-climate-barbie-label/
If women don’t want to be referred to as Climate Barbie, don’t dress and act like Barbie. Dress like you actually have a clue about science and climate. LEARN something about the subject. If you look and act like Barbie, you have the title coming.
“…actually have a clue about science and climate. LEARN something about the subject.”
Sadly that doesn’t always work either. Heidi Cullen and Catherine Hayhoe are climate activists who are both well educated about the subject They claim to be climate scientists but scientists follow the scientific method. To my knowledge, these two do not.
Learning something may not make them skeptics, but it ups the chances of not being called a Climate Barbie. Considering the number of male believers out there, there will be females who believe also. The scientific method is often bent to whatever ends a person finds justified, no matter who they are. My point is if you don’t sound clueless, the title of “Barbie” is less apt to be applied.
“Wilson asked again if McKenna was going to answer his question about hydroelectricity but the minister sidestepped the issued again by referring to how upset she remained over the “climate Barbie” remark.”
That’s what I’d have advised her to do if she wanted the label to stick . .
Seems like an accurate description to me:
From an article last year, it turns out that the next satellite (F20) was the last in the series from a block purchase in the 1990s: http://spacenews.com/rogers-u-s-air-force-wasted-518-million-on-weather-satellite/
Is there any chance we can let objective researchers manage the satellite and data. I mean most of the satellites are not producing valuable information because of the gate-keeping climate scientists.
Half of the data is never released and the other half is adjusted to meet global warming expectations. Why spend a $Billion on a satellite when that is all we get and it only lasts 2 years.
Let’s get more basic unadjusted information and make these satellites more resilient. Let some other agencies manage them.
its an AIRFORCE SATELLITE.
So the AIR FORCE CAN LET IT DIE.
“Its a DEFENSE WEATHER SATELLITE”
“its an AIRFORCE SATELLITE.”
What’s your point?
Please try to be clear and coherent.
Bill’s argument was that
“Is there any chance we can let objective researchers manage the satellite and data. I mean most of the satellites are not producing valuable information because of the gate-keeping climate scientists.”
Well ist NOT a climate science satellite.
they dont perfom gate keeping on the data
the air force uses the data.
the data is valuable
I trust the airforce to be objective.
The data the RAW FRICKING DATA is made available to anybody who wants to use it.
Like solar reseachers, or night lights researchers, or guys who figured out how to use it for
ice.
Poor Mosh, are you saying that with all the HUGE money spent on the AGW farce, nobody thought to put up new satellites, expecting someone else to do it for them
Not important enough, hey. And then to have Obama cut the funding to Defence, and having the temerity to blame Trump.
Pretty pathetic really.
Timing seems perfect though, as the coverage stops just as the AMO starts to turn downwards.
The US military and the NRO and the CIA put up a satellite every month and only the very rarest one is made available to other sciences. 90% of them are completely secret. There is no way the US military and the NRO and the CIA let scammy-type climate scientist near their real satellites.
Mosher you are such a nut.
It’s an Air Force satellite? Well, that makes this easy
The Air Force is pretty good at deciding what to keep and what to let go…
“General, do we keep B-52’s flying for 100 years or keep NSIDC satellites flying until the sea ice is gone?”
The general responded…
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/762/095/77c.jpg
Considering the importance to the US Navy’s submarine deterrence of having accurate sea ice data, I find it highly doubtful that there is not the capacity to keep it under surveillance.
Steven Mosher: However, the data massage is still done by climate researchers. No one uses raw data, so the data collected by these satellites is not in the responsibility of the Department of Defense, but in the responsibility the researchers who are sampling the data.
The Russians almost certainly have several Ice Satellites.
Where is the problem. 😉
Andy, does that mean the Russian Models 4 and 5 climate models were initialized with better Russian satellites? The same Russian climate models’ actually tracking observations, models that wipe the floor with the other bozo models, Gavin Schmidt’s included?
Sounds like potential collusion with Russia… someone call Robert Mueller… STAT!
Dave, The Russians deal with REALITY, not ideology based non-science.
Replacing it would cost, what, a billion dollars?
George, Tom, and Bill certainly have the money to build it, and Elon has the rocket. Let them replace it.
Alternatively, take 0.085% of the 2017 welfare budget.
I agree. If Tom and Bill (probably not George) are so concerned about climate, let them pay for a satellite. No more parasitic use of DEFENSE SATELLITES (as they are referred to above). Build a satellite or shut up about climate change and the need for research, Bill and Tom.
Could get pommie assistance from Branson… He’s into the AGW game..
Who’s that other guys funds everything anti-… Soros?
Come on guys, get your ACT together. !
Satellite missions takes many years to a decade for developing from beginning (plan) to end (launch). If US missions are aging and failing while there are no successors planned, then past administrations and space agencies are to blame. The US monitoring of the environment with satellites is currently a bit in shambles, this is known in the field and not a particular secret (see below; e.g. 2014: “the network is fragile and not guaranteed”), but has not led to the necessary investments.
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13405
https://www.strategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/EarthObservationsPriorities2014Report_links.pdf
Now, this lack of a successful future US environmental monitoring program may be because of Republicans having blocked such developments ever since the Bush administration, but it also means that the space agencies and institutes have not been unable to sell the program. Too much environmental alarmism and party politics, too little attention for the notion that either side of the debate needs and benefits from the best possible data.
Europe (ESA) went the other way by planning two decades ahead to ensure continuity. It can be done.
http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Copernicus/Sentinel-3/Sentinel-3A_rides_the_waves
And U.S. agencies can’t use others’ satellite data?
“Scientists say there is no chance a new one can now be launched until 2023 or later. None of the current satellites will still be in operation then.”
…..there is a fair and just God in heaven
Another liberal succumbs to TDS.
Gallaher should check himself in to a mental health crisis center for observation and treatment.
He’s already in one!
“Such losses have serious consequences, say researchers. “Sea-ice data provided by satellites is essential for initiating climate models and validating them,” said Andrew Fleming of the British Antarctic Survey. “We will be very much the poorer without that information.””
Translation:
Oh crap. Now I have to go out into the field where there are nasty weather conditions to gather real data.
Time for the sceptics to alter their tune. The US government has acknowledged man-made climate change so they have lost the scientific argument on this one and can only continue moaning in their own WUWT echo chamber.
READ and LEARN:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/03/climate-change-report-us-government-contradicts-trump
The US government is a bit more than the politicized opinion of one agency.
Did you happen to notice this in the report?
Why do you have to describe this as a ‘politicised opinion when you clearly know that this is the work of non-political scientists. You are only saying it is ‘politicised – a really worn out old chestnut in the sceptic debate – simply because it disagrees with the sceptic outlook. This is really pathetic in my opinion when someone argues in this manner…
so….you’re saying the NSIDC doesn’t depend on satellites for their funding
Does your planet have an atmosphere?
“Why do you have to describe this as a ‘politicised opinion when you clearly know that this is the work of non-political scientists.”
I have to describe it that way because climate scientists have abandoned scientific method (and integrity) and have embraced ad hominem methods central to identity politics. You mentioned with certainty that climate scientists are non-politicized. What evidence do you have for that, or are you simply making an argument by assertion?
easy…..you quote the guardian……that lied again
Funding and dismantling it was stated by Obama….not Trump
https://news.mongabay.com/2017/05/as-arctic-sea-ice-shows-record-decline-scientists-prepare-to-go-blind/
ivankinsman: Why do AGW believers call skeptics paid shills of the oil companies? I would call that more pathetic.
The only non-political scientist that we know of for sure is a dead one. All are human, so far as I know, and subject to political opinions that guid their work in some cases.
This article does absolutely nothing to prove AGW is true or not. It’s a rant about political funding and how unfair it is that a satellite NOT OWNED by the AGW but rather the military, is not being replaced. As noted, then let the billionaires pay for a new one that is owned by the AGW crowd. It’s still political, but it’s privately funded political.
Definition: non-political scientist is one who agrees with me.
“the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the peak period for extreme heat in the United States (Very high confidence)”
I noticed that.
Unaltered temperature charts from around the world show the same temperature profile as the U.S. chart (the 1930’s being hotter than subsequent years), which means the 1930’s are the hottest years evah!, for the whole world. The 21st Century isn’t even close.
Here’s the unaltered U.S. temperature chart. Charts from around the world resemble this chart, not the bogus, bastardized Hockey Stick charts the Alarmists use to scare people.
ivankinsman,
You forgot your ‘sarc’ tag.
Newsflash; the US government is not a scientific body, nor can it make proclamations regarding scientific questions. The fact that you get your “information” from the Grauniad tells us everything we need to know. The CAGW infection did grow during the Obama regime, and will not and can not end soon enough. Unfortunately, it will take time though. The “scientific” argument which you proclaim over actually is over; unfortunately for you though, your side has lost. CAGW “science” was always just a sham. The fact that you still Believe just shows how much of a moron you are.
What has the Guardian got to do with it? This is just the media vehicle conveying the outcomes of this report which kills the sceptic argument stone dead.
“13 US federal agencies”…that all depend on climate funding
…and yet, you still don’t see the point
Sounds like the authors of the report need to get their act together and produce a conclusion consistent with the data. Peak means highest. If it was warmer then, it is not warmer than then now.
That really is pathetic.
Actually claiming that guardian is merely reporting the news.
What can you say to a person that is so ignorant that they believe that a single panel is judge and jury for a nations policy on climate change?
Ok so what more evidence do you need? Your stance is so blinkered its like the Communists thinking everything was hunky dory whilst their world was collapsing around them, butvthey did not want to acknowledge it.
“Your stance is so blinkered ”
ROFLMAO,,
from you of all trolls, ivan.. a one-eyed tunnel vision AGW apostle.
Hilarious. !
[Enough. Cut it out. Both of you. .mod]
ivankinsman,
You asked, “so what more evidence do you need?” Have you tried reading the CSSR, which underpins the recently released report, with an eye to consistency and plausibility of the claims made?
The guardian ???
Nope a report by 13 US FEDERAL AGENCIES!
Out of how many 10’s of thousands of government agencies.
It is also 13 agencies that will go out of business without the data from those satellites.
I’ll need to see a study of the accuracy of the climate models used to obtain such “certainty.”
The government let that pitiful report out to emphasize how far government “science” has strayed to superstition. Stick around for a dose of reality.
Yep keep up the denial until you are blue in the face. This one you cannot deny … and you know it:)
Watch and learn. Every point in that report will be systematically deconstructed and exposed. Let’s start with #1: “It is extremely unlikely that recent change is natural” (or thereabouts). Zero data to support that claim…
If a politician that I agree with says it. It must be true and anyone who disagrees is a shill for the oil companies.
Do you really think 13 – yes, 13 – Federal Agencies would produce a 475 page report on a bunch of focus pocus?
You guys really crack me up. You are all still saying there is zero man-made climate change, which you must realize now is a completely untenable position.
If I was you, I would admit it is happening but is not as bad as the ‘warmists’ are claiming. At least that would have a bit more credibility.
I can care less how many zealot infested federal agencies can dance on the head of a report. Never said zero human influence. Small human influence.
Data driven around here. No appeals to authority accepted.
Hey-ho, ho-yum.
Many of those 13 agencies are worse AGW ZEALOTS than even you are, ivan.
Seeing your priests de-throned.. must hurt you so much. !
Fascinating how ivanski declares that politicians have the final say on science.
Then again, global warming has always been 100% political.
PS: The guardian, that’s funny.
Not sure you’ve been following that carefully, Ivan.
https://realclimatescience.com/2017/11/very-high-confidence-of-fraud-in-the-national-climate-assessment/
There’s no such crime per se. There are laws against obstructing public officials.
1 – If congress and the President don’t want to fund a new satellite, I guess that they have the privilege of doing so.
2 – What’s this nonsense about a replacement satellite taking five or six years to get into orbit?
Give me the contract. I can probably have the old one replicated and in orbit within a couple of years, faster if the paperwork can be streamlined. link I’m guessing that’s not what they want though. They want something fancier than the old satellite.