Ugly: President Trump Accused of Obstructing Climate Research

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.”

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/nov/05/donald-trump-accused-blocking-satellite-climate-change-research

US taxpayers have been footing the bill for the Defence Meteorological Satellite Programme since 1973. A thank you would have been nice.

Advertisements

232 thoughts on “Ugly: President Trump Accused of Obstructing Climate Research

      • 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?………

      • “…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.

    • Funding climate satellites is so important that no country wants to replace the US ones.

      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

  1. 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.)

      • 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 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:

        https://rclutz.files.wordpress.com/2017/11/russian-arctic-satellites.png?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.

  2. “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.

    • 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.

  3. 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!

      • 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.

    • 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.?

      • 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,…

      • 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.

  4. ” “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?

  5. 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.

      • 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.

  6. 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.

      • 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.

    • 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 . .

  7. 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 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…

  8. 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.

      • 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?

  9. 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. !

  10. 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

  11. “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

  12. Another liberal succumbs to TDS.
    Gallaher should check himself in to a mental health crisis center for observation and treatment.

  13. “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.

    • The US government is a bit more than the politicized opinion of one agency.

      Did you happen to notice this in the report?

      …the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the peak period for extreme heat in the United States (Very high confidence)”

      • 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?

      • 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.

      • “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.

    • 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.

        …the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s remains the peak period for extreme heat in the United States (Very high confidence)”

    • 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?

      • 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.

  14. US and Overseas scientists have accused the Trump Administration of criminal obstruction of climate research, …

    There’s no such crime per se. There are laws against obstructing public officials.

    2921.31 Obstructing official business.

    (A) No person, without privilege to do so and with purpose to prevent, obstruct, or delay the performance by a public official of any authorized act within the public official’s official capacity, shall do any act that hampers or impedes a public official in the performance of the public official’s lawful duties.

    (B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of obstructing official business. Except as otherwise provided in this division, obstructing official business is a misdemeanor of the second degree. If a violation of this section creates a risk of physical harm to any person, obstructing official business is a felony of the fifth degree.

    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?

    Scientists say there is no chance a new one can now be launched until 2023 or later.

    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.

  15. But…..the “science is settled”. We know everything there is to know about global warming and its effects.

    Why do we need any climate research at all?

  16. I thought all we really need is the GOES satellites, which provide weather info for weather forecasts. Those are practical and useful.

    I guess these “science guys” will just have to traipse up there to the Arctic and do the measuring in loco, instead of sitting comfortably at a desk. They may be out of work soon. Too bad. So sad.

    Am I being mean, cruel, spiteful and petty when I say that I have become more and more fed up with the constant ripoffs of tax money by these people? Am I? Tough bananas!!

    • The Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) is the longest running production satellite program ever. In 50 years of service, DMSP satellites have saved billions of dollars and countless human lives as a result of timely weather forecasts.
      History
      Initially, the DMSP program was highly classified and run by the National Reconnaissance Program (NRP), in support of the CORONA program, and its first reconnaissance satellites. The CORONA satellites took pictures on 70 mm film, and while each satellite carried up to 32,000 feet of film, it eventually would run out and the mission would end when the last film-return capsule re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere over the Pacific. Thus, it was essential to the success of the CORONA mission that timely and accurate DMSP forecasts be made over areas of interest so that cloud-free photography would be possible, taking maximum advantage of film limitations.
      About
      Today, DMSP is still providing strategic and tactical weather prediction to aid the U.S. military in planning operations at sea, on land and in the air. The satellites, equipped with a sophisticated sensor suite, can:
      Image visible and infrared cloud cover
      Measure precipitation, surface temperature, and soil moisture
      Collect specialized global meteorological, oceanographic, and solar-geophysical information in all weather conditions
      The constellation comprises two spacecraft in near-polar orbits, C3 (command, control and communications), user terminals and weather centers. The latest launch occurred on April 3, 2014 when DMSP 19 roared into orbit aboard a United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket.

  17. I don’t understand the problem. Instrumentation to measure surface temperatures hasn’t existed in most of the world, so they simply make up data. Maybe they’re just mad because that takes more work than simply manipulating/ignoring real data.

    • Its a US Military weather satellite.

      the Military is good enough to share its data

      but the PRIMARY PURPOSE of this satellite is MILITARY, not ice

      • Maybe it WAS, but apparently it is NOT Now. Besides, the US MILITARY has in Recent Years had a HABIT of cozying up to the WARMIST Establishment, but it has been SELF-SERVING.
        See how that works?

      • So where are those spending all the money on the AGW farce.

        Its almost as if the DON’T WANT a new satellite for Arctic sea ice.

        There are plenty of other types of commercial satellite.

        Could that be because they KNOW the AMO is starting to turn and want to HIDE the increase in Arctic sea ice over the next decade or more?

        From used cars, to used satellites.

        What is next for you, Mosh.

      • DMSP’s primary mission is real time weather photography, particularly for the Navy. DMSP spacecraft are derivatives of TIROS-N spacecraft. Nice comparison from 2000: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a165118.pdf
        It also has a number of secondary sensors, such as ELT receivers for downed aircraft. Some others are classified.
        As is normal with the military, old programs are often terminated for new ones. Sometimes old systems are extended until the new tech is deployed. A lot of hardware up there, no doubt there are other spacecraft with competing sensors.

    • Gary Pearse. November 5, 2017 at 6:01 am
      So only the US can do this? Why didn’t Cambridge U buy the back up, have UK foot the bill to send it up and put their Arctic specialist Dr. Wacky Wadhams in charge..

      The UK is a member of EUMETSAT which has satellites of their own, in fact due to the failure of F19 it is that satellite that the Air Force has to rely on for coverage of Middle East weather data.

  18. Throwing away the medical records of a sick patient?
    NO
    More like refusing to buy any more liquor for an alcoholic or a lush.

  19. Where are our lawyer friends?

    I ask because:

    erately, the effectiveness of the records on which its recovery might be based. It is criminal

    How is Mr Trump being ‘criminal’?
    He is simply choosing how, where and when to spend money. Like everyone does every day of the week.
    Its called prudence. What the Pilgrim Fathers were very keen upon – they planned their expedition from where I am right now, Worksop in Notts.

    Use of the word ‘Criminal’ is exaggeration.
    And as any lawyer will tell you as you give evidence or compose a statement:
    “Don’t exaggerate – it destroys your credibility”

    Are you gonna tell them or should I…..

  20. It’s becoming more than a little obvious that the reason they want ever more money to “study” climate in these remote locations is solely for the purpose of looking for “bad” things going on in places where there aren’t any people around who might dispute the exact nature and magnitude of the word “bad”. Of course they have to report something “bad” or there won’t be anymore funding to justify looking for more “bad” things in the future. After all, how much money would Congress earmark to study how much “better” things are getting?

    The biggest valid reason to study arctic sea ice that I can think of is for the US Navy for the purpose of national security which has been going on since the 50’s. Beyond that there are activities like commercial shipping, fishing and oil exploration to name a few but I’m coming up short to explain why tax payers should have to foot the bill for them beyond the weather forecasting they already have?

    • The “bad” thing will be the increase in Arctic sea ice as the AMO starts to turn downwards.

      The demise of these satellite is very timely, wouldn’t you say.

      Its like the climate science community putting their hands over their eyes and going la-la-la……

  21. Using the WUWT seaice reference page as a starting point it appears that there are other nations observing arctic sea ice by satellite . For example the Japanese Shizuki satellite as in this news release of a few months ago :

    “Feb. 21, 2017 Updated
    GCOM-W: Sea Ice Hits Record Low

    Global sea ice extent hit record low, according to observations from Shizuku on Global Change Observation Mission on January 14, 2017. It is all time low in the history of satellite operation that started in 1978, JAXA continues operation of Shizuku and GCOM-C and monitoring arctic sea ice extent, off the coast of Greenland Sea and the rest of the arctic circle.
    Related information is also available at the following links:

    JASMES:JAXA Satellite Monitoring for Environmental Studies
    Data archives of the arctic circle”

    And from what source does the Danish Meteorological Institute derives its data – again displayed on the WUWT reference pages.
    Given the obsession with global warming by billionaires like Soros and Gore and numerous Hollywood “stars” why do they not form a not for profit consortium to launch new satellites. They would get tax breaks no doubt for this public service.:

  22. It did seem a bit of a silly thing to destroy an allegedly working, backup satellite even if the technology is out of date. Really, how much did it cost to store? Now there’s a very expensive pickle. I’m sure the satellite was more useful than just measuring the ice at the poles.
    Maybe the rest of the world could have found a closet to store it in. (sigh)

    • It was not designed or launched to study ice. it is a military weather satellite. the program has been in place since 1962

      • It’s 1990’s technology…..has cost around $1/2 billion to keep it in storage….when the Ari Force wanted more money for new satellites even the Air Force said it’s out dated technology that they no longer want or need…if they had spent that $1/2 billion on new technology…you would have the new toys you want already

        I’m 100% behind the Trump administration on this…..you would keep a 1990’s computer would you?

      • Again, Mosh. If its SO IMPORTANT, why haven’t the “climate worriers” got together and done something about it.

        Heck Mosh, even you could have some used car parts floating about you could contribute. !

      • SM,
        The refrain about it being a military satellite is getting tiresome. Sheri has summed it up appropriately. It is the military’s call what to do with the program, even if it doesn’t make people studying polar ice happy. End of story!

    • It’s not a ‘closet’. It is a carefully climate-controlled, particle-controlled, high-security facility. You don’t want dust on the sensors.
      In addition, there is maintaining a cadre of engineering SMEs for the satellite. These are NOT just launch and forget – any engineer can do it. Re-training a new set of engineers would be cost prohibitive, and still not get you the all the background information from the people who actually oversaw its design and production.
      Storage includes cost of monitoring/replacing batteries. Yes, even when they’re not being used, batteries age out of performance requirements. Replacements can be expensive, especially if the technology is out of date, and the factory has to be rebuilt.

  23. “At present three ageing satellites – DMSP F16, F17 and F18 – remain in operation, though they are all beginning to drift out of their orbits over the poles. The latest satellite in the series, F19, began to suffer sensor malfunctions last year and finally broke down a few weeks ago. It should have been replaced with the F20 probe, which had already been built and was being kept in storage by the US Air Force. However it had to be destroyed, on the orders of the US Congress, on the grounds that its storage was too costly.”

    This is really dumb

    these satellites have been operating since the 1962 Its One of the sources that I use to look at urbanization because they are the source of nightlights data. More importantly the satellites serve a military purpose.

    • No you loot at data, even though you don’t need to because you are not a scientist.

      You have no link to the satellite whatsoever, you are here being pretentious and posing as a scientist lol

      • Mosher being pretentious? My world view of Mosher saving the earth through krigging has been shattered. It may take a few seconds to digest that. OK. I’m better. LOL

    • The satellites do not belong to climate researchers. Tough that the defense people don’t want the satellite anymore. Have climate believers pay for a new satellite and stop going for a free ride on other’s equipment.

    • “these satellites have been operating since the 1962 ”

      Where is that Satellite sea ice data , Mosh. !!

      INCONVENIENT ???????

      And yes, we all know how badly done that urbanization farce of yours was..

      FAILED LOGIC from the start.

  24. David Gallaher of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder sez: “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.”

    My word. With such fact-free ideology-based emotionalism, Gallaher has shown himself to be not only incompetent, but unworthy to be called a scientist. He should be fired forthwith.

  25. Oh dear, Trump wants us all to die – apparently. And it’s not just the belief of the CAGW Green Blob. Check out this recent AP article complaining about Trump dropping a vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) mandate for new cars. Ignore the rather cartoonish headline “APNewsBreak: Gov’t won’t pursue talking car mandate” and read on:

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TALKING_CARS

    “The Trump administration has quietly set aside plans to require new cars to be able to wirelessly talk to each other, auto industry officials said, jeopardizing one of the most promising technologies for preventing traffic deaths.”

    The article essentially says V2V will prevent car crashes and save thousands of lives. Maybe, maybe not. Given the growing list of hacked Internet of Things (IoT) devices, it seems to me that V2V would be “Disneyland on Wheels” for the hacker community, thus rendering V2V useless at best, dangerous at worse. But it’s all Trump’s fault, of course. ;-)

    • You had almost the same number of deaths to guns as vehicles for 2016 around 32,000 to 33,000.
      However one is you right and that is okay, but not dealing with the other and they are trying to kill you :-)

      • Anyone who has worked with computers and is honest will tell you computers running virtually everything is a bad idea. The cars with “auto braking”? What happens the first time a driver gets in a car without that? Odds are good he’s accustomed to the car “saving” him and he doesn’t automatically go for the brakes. Computers tend to make people careless and unobservant. It will not end well.

      • “Computers tend to make people careless and unobservant.”

        Is that a dig at “climate science” ;-)

  26. This Arctic Sea Ice, that MUST be studied, how many people has it killed the last thirty years?

    ‘with only three ageing ones . . . to measure the Arctic’s dwindling ice cap’

    Pretense of science ended. Can we get one that will measure increasing ice cap?

  27. “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.

    Who is an hysterical ninny. Nothing is being thrown away.

    Besides. THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED. There is no reason to spend more money on climate science.

  28. Steven Mosher November 5, 2017 at 7:12 am

    Its a DEFENSE WEATHER SATELLITE.

    So you’re saying that the Guardian claim that this satellite is for “research into climate change” is false, and that the satellite is strictly for defense? Or is your point that the satellite was not built for climate research, but for WEATHER research?

    Or is your point something else entirely?

    Mosh, your haiku posting style does not serve you well. It leaves folks far too free to project anything onto your words, or to simply misunderstand them. Look, you’re a very smart guy … but I could read your minuscule postings for fifty years and never figure that out. You put words on the page as though each one cost you $100 … and your parsimony is assuredly not doing your reputation any good.

    w.

  29. said Andrew Fleming of the British Antarctic Survey. “We will be very much the poorer without that information.”
    ≠≠===========
    so why are the Brits asking the US to pay? if the Brits had to pay they would be “very much the poorer” if they had the information.

  30. “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.”

    More precisely:
    Sea-ice data provided by satellites is essential to justify the funds for climate models that keep the consensus stance afloat with NASA-sanctioned, official numbers. … We will be very much the poorer without that information, because the models that use it will no longer enable us to make our livings as “climate scientists”.

  31. First, I don’t know anything about old satellites (weather or defense), except what I can glean from various articles. Over at nasa.gov and noaa.gov they refer to the pending launch on November 10 from Vandenberg AFB of NASA/NOAA’s Joint Polar Satellite System-1 (JPSS-1). If it has been referenced above, I missed it. Is this satellite designed to do whatever F20 was expected to do in regard to sea ice, but do it more thoroughly?
    http://www.jpss.noaa.gov

    • After roaming around Wikipedia for a bit, it appears the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) discussed above was to have a follow-on program, Defense Weather Satellite System (DWSS). DWSS was cancelled by the US Air Force in 2012. Along with the JPSS, the two programs would comprise the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental System (NPOESS). Just the JPSS is continuing forward.

      Based on the fact the USAF cancelled DWSS during President Obama’s first term, and JPSS-1 is about to launch, it would appear President Obama permitted climate obstruction and President Trump is permitting climate research advancement.

      • Windsong November 5, 2017 at 2:09 pm
        After roaming around Wikipedia for a bit, it appears the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) discussed above was to have a follow-on program, Defense Weather Satellite System (DWSS). DWSS was cancelled by the US Air Force in 2012.

        The cancellation was due to interagency disagreements on the specification of the new system.
        As a result even though the Pentagon requested $444.9 billion for research and development for DWSS in fiscal 2012, lawmakers provided only $43 million and directed the Air Force that it be used for shutting down the contract. The Air Force wasn’t too worried because they felt that with the two already built satellites, F19 and F20, they would have sufficient time to bring up a new system without a gap in the weather data collection system. Of course when F19 failed they were forced into considering launching F20 which they’d hoped not to do, the congressional committee however ordered the Air Force not to launch F20 and dismantle it. The JPSS was NOAA’s response to the cancellation of DWSS whereby they were able to launch the sensors that they’d wanted in DWSS.

  32. If the three aging satellites were past their use by dates, why didn’t Obama fund their replacements. He could have used the $500 million dollars he diverted to the NGO Green Climate Fund.

    • +10 … That
      I am actually a luke warmer and the politics of this is my problem. There seems to be a concerted effort to not deal with anything except some stupid political agenda.

  33. The European Union has competent space technology.
    Russia has competent space technology.
    Japan has competent space technology.
    China has competent space technology.
    India has competent space technology.
    The world has many millionaires and billionaires, many of whom are on the global warming bandwagon.
    Private space launch companies would be happy to put another satellite into orbit.
    Why look to the United States and President Trump for a new satellite?

  34. If it isn’t already in orbit, there is no good reason to waste anymore taxpayer dollar$ on launching 30 year old technology. The US Air Force did the right thing by not spending another dime on this 90’s tech ‘clunker’.
    Think of it as an improvement on Obama’s Cash for Clunkers (ugh!) program….

  35. Who needs satellites when we have tree rings?

    OK. I guess we do need military satellites.
    But do we have to make the data spin?

  36. Not sure why they even need them , after all ‘models ‘ can give them all the data they ‘need ‘ and as they already ‘known’ its worse than we thought they already have an idea of what the result will be .

  37. The Guardian article is pure rubbish. Filled with outright falsehoods and blatant inaccuracies, with unsourced undocumented claims asserted as fact.

    The Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) was created in the 1960’s. The current satellites were all built in the early 1990’s including the remaining operating ones and F20, the unused one that was stored for many years.

    These are US Air Force Dept of Defense, not weather satellites. The weather information is simply a byproduct.

    The USAF acknowledged at least as far back as 2012 the DMSP satellites were “outdated” and of nominal use.

    http://spacenews.com/air-force-secretary-calls-dmsp-satellites-out-date/

    It cost $40 million per YEAR to store in its climate controlled clean room environment. It would cost $50 million more to launch. For a technology conceived in the 1960’s and built in the 1990’s.

    A USAF study in 2014 concluded that the major costs of storage, launch and operation did not justify the minimal benefit and end of life status of the program and recommended termination of the program and launch of F20.

    Congress took their recommendation and in December 2015 voted to end the program and decommission the 1990’s built F20 satellite.

    http://spacenews.com/senate-spending-bill-backs-house-recommendation-to-shelve-dmsp-f20/

    The failure of the recently launched F19 in March 2016 caused Air Force officials to postpone decommissioning in order that DoD, Congress etc could review their decision on F20 if they chose.

    http://spacenews.com/with-dmsp-19-sidelined-by-glitch-air-force-orders-stay-of-execution-for-its-twin/

    The Guardian article is error ridden and full of their typical falsehoods.

    F19 did not fail “a few days ago” … it failed in Mar 2016. They lost all access to the satellite but have continued to monitor its telemetry.

    http://spacenews.com/dmsp-19-weather-satellite-dead-after-air-force-ends-recovery-effort/

    F16, F17 and F18 remain in operation, although F17 has one channel that has been problematic.

    It is an outright falsehood that the US Congress “this year” insisted that a backup sea-ice probe had to be dismantled. Congress – both the House and Senate – voted in December 2015 to end the DMSP program and decommission F20. There is no evidence I am aware of that the Trump administration or Congress have in any way acted regarding the DMSP or the F20 satellite decisions.

    There is ZERO evidence to support the claim Trump is “obstructing satellite research into climate change” … the evidence shows the opposite … both Trump and Congress have done the exact opposite. This claim is an outright lie.

    The Trump admin DID propose a funding cut to the Polar Follow-on program (funding for JPSS 3 and 4). This cut was responding to NOAA who stated they want to “re-plan” the program to “take into account other polar orbiting spacecraft, cost-saving measures and potential partnerships.” As a result the Trump admin proposed $180 million for this program compared to $419 million for the Polar Follow-on (PFO) program for FY 2018.

    Congress said no: “In light of the critical role that these satellites play in protecting American lives and property, the Appropriations Committee finds it perplexing that the Department of Commerce and NOAA would propose to cut this program,”

    Congress and the White House/Trump are on the same page regarding other key weather satellite programs, with Senate and House appropriators approving the administration’s budget requests of $775.8 million for the JPSS program and $518.5 million for the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite-R ( GOES-R) program.

    http://www.parabolicarc.com/2017/08/07/noaa/

    That is not the whole story either though …after Congress rejected the NOAA request to reduce Polar Follow-on funding for FY 2018 as included in the Trump admin budget earlier, the Senate Appropriations Committee later approved $419 million for PFO in its markup of the FY2018 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill in August 2017.

    https://spacepolicyonline.com/news/noaas-polar-follow-on-gets-reprieve-from-senate-appropriators/

    On Sept 14 the House passed a bill that fully funded the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite R (GOES-R) and the Joint Polar Satellite System (JPSS) programs, but reduced funding for the Polar Follow-On program of future JPSS satellites. The bill provides only $50 million for that program, compared to the administration’s request of $180 million.

    The House earlier said: “The request proposes a dramatic and incipient re-plan of this program. Yet the request fails to assess the purported new mission design’s impacts on constellation availability, or provide an updated gap analysis, or new annual or lifecycle cost estimates.” Which is why it approved only $50 million.

    NOAA and Congress are determined to avoid gaps in either polar or geostationary weather satellite data. The House indicated they might reconsider its decision if NOAA was more forthcoming in how they plan to address those concerns.

    Bottom line the claim the Trump is “obstructing satellite research into climate change” is directly refuted by the clear evidence

    The Trump admin DID request and Congress approved … fully funding for the most important major satellite programs … including the JPSS 1 and 2 and the GOES-R satellite programs.

    The reduction in funding was for the Polar Follow-on program – for the future JPSS 3 and 4 satellites. As noted above the JPSS 1 polar satellite is scheduled to launch in days – Nov 10, 2017. JPSS 2 is currently targeted for 2021 and is funded.

    JPSS 3 is not targeted to launch until 2026 (and presumably JPSS 4 until around 2031). The Trump admin and Congress delaying funding for these satellites to get better information from NOAA is in no way threatening or obstructing satellite research on climate change.

    It makes perfect sense that funding for missions that far out require more detailed information from NOAA. There is NO threat to or obstruction of satellite research into climate change as a result of requiring NOAA provide more detailed plans on how that money will be used.

    [Sobering corrections. Thank you. Sources? .mod]

    • No just means you can have more models that can’t be tested. Once the satellites down you can claim the Sea Ice is at any level you like and even say it is all gone, and you can have models to that effect. As pointed out this has been known was going to happen for a long time and could have been dealt with by Obama. He had a spare $1B which he managed to push into the green fund but couldn’t find the money to fund a new satellite.

  38. Satellites are calibrated and certified before they are launched.
    Climate models should be calibrated and certified before they are ‘launched’ as well.

    If you have to create ‘ensembles’ of individual climate model runs, you are overtly acknowledging that the climate model produces highly variable, unreliable results and is not valid for any predictive usage. By logical conclusion, neither is the ‘ensemble’.

  39. What do these researchers have in mind when they talk about global warming? Who is the one who can warm our planet to global warming? Is it the sun? The sun is the most powerful heat source in our solar system and how much we know the history, the sun has never been the norm of such a disturbance. What then could be the cause of this GH? Is something that does not produce heat, can heat any part of matter? These “specialists” convince us that CO2 warms the Earth, but that CO2, it seems, raises the “credit” of the sun with high interest rates and we are returning it as consumers who must listen to the gentleman and ruler CO2. STUPIDITY.
    From the current nebulous stories and the claims of such “researchers”, it seems that they do not know the processes that take place between the planets and the sun. If science were to know the structure of the universe, many riddles would have been much easier to solve. Thus, science has asked for “help” from its “smart products” such as various instruments, models, mathematics and think that these helpers can be smarter than scientists, even though they have been made by scientists.
    What do scientists think: is their head, moving around the Earth, receives various signals, that it is so incapable of deciphering these signals, and that these instruments are much more capable to do it, because they have “raced” above us in the atmosphere and see more than we do? When this is explained to me, I think it will find other, but true causes of climate change, because CO2 is only falsely accused of causing global warming. It is, perhaps, a new type of ISIL, which has the intention of destroying both itself and everything around it.

  40. Oh, intercourse the satellites – just make up the data from scratch, they’ll be adjusted and tortured anyway….

  41. Here’s a link to the status of all the NOAA and MetOp (our European partner) weather satellites.

    http://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Operations/POES/status.html

    NOAA-18 and NOAA-19 are the operational PM satellites and MetOp-A and MetOp-B are the operational AM satellites.

    NPP is the bridge between the older generation of satellites and the new JPSS series. JPSS-1 is scheduled to launch in 4 days.

    There is no lack of low orbiting weather satellites.

    DMSP was ended because the satellites were an old design and didn’t do much that the NOAA satellites didn’t do. It was basically a duplicate program. No point paying for a duplicate program. No point in launching old generation satellites when we have a new generation. As long as any of the old ones work, data will be collected.

    Calling the Guardian article “fake news” would be putting a positive spin on it. /sarc

  42. Funny how these greenie-types always go for criminal charges.
    Just imagine the squealing if what comes around finally ends up going around.

  43. I may have missed someone else pointing this out but I think Roy Spencer has a few interesting comments on this topic at his web site. It is his latest article titled ‘Trump wrongly blamed for destroying sea ice satelite’.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s