Catastrophic Gap In Weather Satellite Data

[elektra]

They can make all the claims they want today, but the fact is the current satellites are degraded, sensors are failing, and it is a huge cover-up. The problem is radiation, which is so high in space that it literally burns the sensors up, degrading their ability to provide us data within their design specifications.

Panel Warns of ‘Catastrophic’ Gap in Weather Satellite Data

• Published: November 14th, 2013 , Last Updated: November 14th, 2013

Unless it acts quickly, the U.S. faces the likelihood of a "catastrophic" reduction in weather and climate data starting in 2016, resulting in less reliable weather and climate forecasts, a federally-commissioned review panel said on Thursday. The review team, which was comprised of veterans of the weather, space, and aerospace industries, found that the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has made progress fixing major problems in its satellite programs since the last outside review was completed in 2012, but that the agency has not done enough to mitigate the impacts of a satellite data gap.

NOAA has warned that, starting in about 2016, there will be at least a year-long gap between the newest polar orbiting satellite’s design lifetime and the scheduled launch date of its replacement.

 

[elektra]

And once again, I prove that you can not question my posts.

RXTE Cook Book: Dealing With Data Gaps: New RXTE Data Categories

Dealing With Data Gaps: New RXTE Data Categories

As a consequence of a transponder failure, the GO data for RXTE observations performed since Sept 1st 1999 may include obsID directory names marked with a G, C, or D. A G-designation indicates on-source data that may suffer a gap in science, housekeeping or attitude information of more than 10% of the total predicted good time. C- and D-designations indicate a slew to or from a source during which attitude information is not available, and thus the exact limits of the slew are undefined. Note that only a very small fraction of the data taken with RXTE currently suffers from such problems.

 

[Old Rocks]

My, my, doesn't this make you anti-science assholes happy?

But then, we will put up more satellites that will provide us with more data.

 

[waltky]

But then, we will put up more satellites that will provide us with more data.

And when their orbits degrade...

... we'll have more satellites fallin' from the sky.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I agree that we need more satellites and surface observations!

More in the arctic and more buoys covering the ocean. What a worth while goal for our country!!!

 

[Old Rocks]

As for a gap during the period before we launch new satellites, the ESA, Russians, and Japanese all have satellites that record the data we need. I am sure that they would sell us that data.

 

[elektra]

My, my, doesn't this make you anti-science assholes happy?

But then, we will put up more satellites that will provide us with more data.

Yet, it is the Clinton's who shutdown a particle accelerator, the largest in the World it would of been and we have the Obama administration destroying NASA and NOAA by not funding them properly.

Yep, Obama's re-assigning NASA's duties to peace keeping in the Middle East, Obama shutting down the Kennedy Space Center in Houston, the lack of funding resulting in no new Satellites being built and launched in a timely fashion certainly shows the World who is anti-science, the Democrats. Hence they project, who they are onto others. Democrats are the anti-science party and this beyond a doubt proves it.

I bet NASA and NOAA scientists are scared stiff, after they saw The Kennedy Space Center shutdown, they could lose their pensions so I suppose they absolutely, obey Obama's Climate Change Dictates.

Those who scream look what the others are doing, are doing it themselves. Democrats are first and foremost, liars.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Do not start threads with titles in ALL CAPS.

It's annoying, and against the rules.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

My, my, doesn't this make you anti-science assholes happy?

But then, we will put up more satellites that will provide us with more data.

Speaking of science, water and soil samples show unsafe levels of strontium, barium and aluminum nano-particulates in areas that are being heavily geo-engineered....aka "chemtrails". They use it in conjunction with ionospheric heaters to affect weather patterns. There's your weird weather anomalies. Pretty easy to tell when they are spraying but most leftards would say that it's contrails because "da gubermint" would never do it without asking them first.....but alas, water and soil samples do not lie.

Interesting fact regarding chemtrails and warming.
Texas has no warming ....and no chemtrails.

 

[elektra]

There is a conspiracy board for crap like that. And your post has nothing to do with the subject of the thread, which is a possible gap in satellite data.

Actually, technically, it is possible satellites will not see through silver oxide that they may use in chem-trails. Everything man does has an effect you tell us Old Crock, so quit being so anti-science.

 

[elektra]

And once again, I prove that you can not question my posts.

And once again, you PROVE that you're surprisingly stupid.

yet you can not prove it in regards to this particular topic, your post is another win for me, attacks on the user, ignoring the OP, is a point, thanks.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

My, my, doesn't this make you anti-science assholes happy?

But then, we will put up more satellites that will provide us with more data.

Speaking of science, water and soil samples show unsafe levels of strontium, barium and aluminum nano-particulates in areas that are being heavily geo-engineered....aka "chemtrails". They use it in conjunction with ionospheric heaters to affect weather patterns. There's your weird weather anomalies. Pretty easy to tell when they are spraying but most leftards would say that it's contrails because "da gubermint" would never do it without asking them first.....but alas, water and soil samples do not lie.

Interesting fact regarding chemtrails and warming.
Texas has no warming ....and no chemtrails.

Dallas does get sprayed but not near as much as when I was in Michigan. We haven't been sprayed in over a month and I am grateful for that.

I'm a big free speech advocate but, personally, were I running a private board, the first mention of chemtrails would be a users ticket to the emergency exit.

We should use the same criteria with glowbull warming...

 

[Crick]

The two are certainly on the same level of scientific validity

 

[elektra]

It is rather simple, the sensors on the satellites degrade as soon as they enter space, they have a lifespan that is a mere 3 years, that they work longer, is irrelevant, they work longer in a degraded state.

As soon as a satellite enters orbit it is exposed to extreme levels of radiation, some things in space or more susceptible to this radiation than others, has not anybody questioned why, NASA must adjust the data? They are compensating for the degradation of the sensors due to solar radiation.

Anybody with even a little knowledge of radiation knows that Airline pilots are exposed to a lot of radiation, being higher in the atmosphere reduces the protection the atmosphere provides.

Here on Earth we are exposed to much less radiation than those who work at 30,000 feet, on Airlines (which certainly must be ignored by those who state co2 causes global warming).

Our atmosphere shields us from Solar Radiation, Satellites in space do not have this protection. The sensors are degraded by radiation the moment they are exposed.

That is science, Democrats will make a claim otherwise. Democrats do not understand science.

 

[Crick]

It is rather simple, the sensors on the satellites degrade as soon as they enter space, they have a lifespan that is a mere 3 years, that they work longer, is irrelevant, they work longer in a degraded state.

As soon as a satellite enters orbit it is exposed to extreme levels of radiation, some things in space or more susceptible to this radiation than others, has not anybody questioned why, NASA must adjust the data? They are compensating for the degradation of the sensors due to solar radiation.

Anybody with even a little knowledge of radiation knows that Airline pilots are exposed to a lot of radiation, being higher in the atmosphere reduces the protection the atmosphere provides.

Here on Earth we are exposed to much less radiation than those who work at 30,000 feet, on Airlines (which certainly must be ignored by those who state co2 causes global warming).

Our atmosphere shields us from Solar Radiation, Satellites in space do not have this protection. The sensors are degraded by radiation the moment they are exposed.

That is science, Democrats will make a claim otherwise. Democrats do not understand science.

Instruments may be shielded,depending on the design required by their function and exposure is highly dependent on orbital radius. Calibration is required for a number of things other than radiation. Orbital fluctuations for one. You can make no hard fast rule ("3 years") as to when an instrument will become uncorrectable nor when it will fail outright. GOES-3, I notice, lasted eleven years. Neither have you demonstrated that NASA has no replacements in the works. The EOS program has dozens of observations systems in the works. And I find it a little difficult to believe that at this particular juncture, NASA could not obtain funds to keep critical weather observations systems aloft. And, as has been pointed out, we're not the only nation lofting satellites. ESA, RosCosMos and JSA all have products available.

 

[elektra]

It is rather simple, the sensors on the satellites degrade as soon as they enter space, they have a lifespan that is a mere 3 years, that they work longer, is irrelevant, they work longer in a degraded state.

As soon as a satellite enters orbit it is exposed to extreme levels of radiation, some things in space or more susceptible to this radiation than others, has not anybody questioned why, NASA must adjust the data? They are compensating for the degradation of the sensors due to solar radiation.

Anybody with even a little knowledge of radiation knows that Airline pilots are exposed to a lot of radiation, being higher in the atmosphere reduces the protection the atmosphere provides.

Here on Earth we are exposed to much less radiation than those who work at 30,000 feet, on Airlines (which certainly must be ignored by those who state co2 causes global warming).

Our atmosphere shields us from Solar Radiation, Satellites in space do not have this protection. The sensors are degraded by radiation the moment they are exposed.

That is science, Democrats will make a claim otherwise. Democrats do not understand science.

Instruments may be shielded,depending on the design required by their function and exposure is highly dependent on orbital radius. Calibration is required for a number of things other than radiation. Orbital fluctuations for one. You can make no hard fast rule ("3 years") as to when an instrument will become uncorrectable nor when it will fail outright. GOES-3, I notice, lasted eleven years. Neither have you demonstrated that NASA has no replacements in the works. The EOS program has dozens of observations systems in the works. And I find it a little difficult to believe that at this particular juncture, NASA could not obtain funds to keep critical weather observations systems aloft. And, as has been pointed out, we're not the only nation lofting satellites. ESA, RosCosMos and JSA all have products available.

My OP is linked, I have 2 posts that start this thread, your opinion has ignored the facts.

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Message:

I'm splitting out the chemtrail posts into a SEPARATE thread and placing them into this forum.
What I EXPECT is that SOME ONE will make a LEGITIMATE case for environmental damage AND proof of this clandestine operation.

If not -- well it then goes elsewhere..,..

Please don't hijack threads in Zone2. It's EASY to start a new legal thread, Next time warnings.

 

[flacaltenn]

Mod Message ---

No -- on 2nd thought --- the CLub of Rome and personal sparriing goes way too far for
me to work too hard. Thread closed for Moderation...

 

[flacaltenn]

bump

 

[elektra]

It seems there is much in the papers about degraded satellites

Dimmer view of Earth

When Stanford climate scientist Christopher Field looks at visual feeds from a satellite monitoring deforestation in the Amazon basin, he sees images streaked with white lines devoid of data.

The satellite, Landsat 7, is broken. And it's emblematic of the nation's battered satellite environmental monitoring program. The bad news: It's only going to get worse, unless the federal agencies criticized for their poor management of the satellite systems over the past decade stage a fast turnaround. Many, however, view that prospect as a long shot.

"I would say our ability to observe the Earth from space is at grave risk of dying from neglect," said Field, director of the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution for Science at Stanford University.

Inez Fung, a noted climatologist at UC Berkeley, was shocked as she scanned a recent federal report warning of impending gaps in the country's ability to monitor Earth from space.

The federal document, released in May, listed cuts in climate-monitoring sensors from the next generation of Earth-observing satellites. The current satellites beam down many types of indispensable data about the planet, such as ocean currents, ozone levels and snow cover, as well as the pictures we see every day on TV weathercasts.

But key instruments on the new satellites have been eliminated: Gone is a sensor that would relay new data about the atmosphere and environmental conditions in the ocean and along coastal areas, including those in California. The movement of pollutants and greenhouse gases would have been under the instrument's mechanical gaze, as well.

Advertisement
Also absent is a critical sensor that monitors temperature changes over time on Earth.