161–167 of 167 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There was no reason not to continue providing the data from the satellite. It’s still operational.
Funding was stopped by congress in 2015. The time to complain about this was 10 years ago.
NOAA-20 is better and will still be available. Also from NOAA: “Noaa said they would not affect the quality of forecasting.” Decommissioning old sensors?
The damage to weather prediction and climate research will go far beyond "decommissioning old sensors." We're talking about an abrupt end to nearly all science related to climate and weather in the US. Even if a future administration decides to turn funding back on, it will take a generation to rebuild the research community.
“Researchers say the satellites themselves are operating normally and do not appear to have suffered any errors that would physically prevent the data from continuing to be collected and distributed, so the abrupt data halt might have been an intentional decision.” Wait, the U.S. aren’t even going to try selling the satellites? We’re just scrapping them?
The intent is to disable the capability to ignore the data. If you allow access to someone else, you're not preventing the data capture and dissemination. If the data shows hurricanes are intensifying in strength due to climate change, and you no longer capture the data, you can say with a straight face "No it isn't and you can't prove it." How large systems with exposure to these places (insurance, capital markets)…
NOAA-20 is better and will still be available. Also from NOAA: “Noaa said they would not affect the quality of forecasting.” Decommissioning old sensors?
The Trump administration is proposing to end all NOAA climate research (alongside nearly all other NOAA research). The damage to weather prediction and climate research will go far beyond "decommissioning old sensors." We're talking about an abrupt end to nearly all science related to climate and weather in the US. Even if a future administration decides to turn funding back on, it will take a generation to rebuild t…
There is an embarrassing trend at the US EPA for example, to get interns and volunteers to do some official work, with no real way to transition to full time with job security and health insurance. This is partly due to the unending stream of applicants, despite few positions.
So from this context, rebuilding research means .. what? Both institutional knowledge store and authoritative titled positions. After some advances in data management by Google and some other commercial players, it is not clear what role Federal science had anyway, from this desk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Trump administration is proposing to end all NOAA climate research (alongside nearly all other NOAA research). The damage to weather prediction and climate research will go far beyond "decommissioning old sensors." We're talking about an abrupt end to nearly all science related to climate and weather in the US. Even if a future administration decides to turn funding back on, it will take a generation to rebuild t…
sort-of yes.. for the last decades, there have been a steady stream of college students who want to make change for the environment (in the West, at least). There have been far more trained and qualified young graduates than there are jobs. Now, we see the latest evolution of this story arc -- not only are the graduates left to fend for themselves by the US Federal Govt and others, but the few jobs that did become av…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before you claim there's nothing happening and The Guardian didn't mean it, check social media comments elsewhere to see how many people misinterpret this news item into "DOGE/Elon did it." I would bet you, but that money's too easy. :) Again, this exact conversation is the genius behind 'lying _without lying_ .' You can always claim in high-literacy communities like HN that no, nobody would ever be silly enough misr…
>check social media comments elsewhere to see how many people misinterpret this news item into "DOGE/Elon did it." No, post news sources and researched articles. Your vibes about the Internet are irrelevant
I don't think that's true, and I don't think The Guardian is so naive and/or innocent.
I love how people are simultaneously replying to my comment with "of course The Guardian didn't mean to say X, you're lying" and "of course X is true." Really proves my point, thanks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sort-of yes.. for the last decades, there have been a steady stream of college students who want to make change for the environment (in the West, at least). There have been far more trained and qualified young graduates than there are jobs. Now, we see the latest evolution of this story arc -- not only are the graduates left to fend for themselves by the US Federal Govt and others, but the few jobs that did become av…
Your complaints about there being more graduates than jobs in academia is tangential to the fact that the Trump administration is effectively ending climate science in the US. Without federal funding, research will stop, and academics will leave for industry. The research community will cease to exist, and will have to be rebuilt from scratch if funding is ever turned back on.