It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Official: Satellite Failure Means Decade of Global Warming Data Doubtful

page: 2
46
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:48 AM
link   
A website like this posts this news and everyone cheers,
" Ya see everyone,.. no worries" and back to business burning and polluting?

Thats fine, but until this this ridiculous weather mellows out from the huge dumping of rain, mass flooding and all the other "anomalies" subside,
I am not quite ready to jump off the GW wagon..




posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Al satellites will be damaged to some degree in the coming year.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Piers Corbyn did a free forcast for the storms in the US over the Christmas season in 09
He was right on.
He and his company appear to be the only company that actual gets paid because they are accurate.
So he must actually know what he is talking about.
the Met office in Britian has flopped on their forcasts so badly its amazing they don't have to get part time jobs in grocery stores to get by...
ah well , govermint jobs eh?

Everything was about carbon credits...What scares me is what will be their next scam to get the laws passed?



Livingston, now 77, has a master's degree in cloud physics from the Naval Weapons Center and Navy Post Graduate School in California, a degree he later used in the battlefields.

Their charge was to employ the most brilliant scientists around the world, and meteorologists and physicists, to work out a concept for reducing damages from hurricanes. What brought that on was that we had three tremendous hurricanes in 1953 and '54 that affected the twelve northeastern states... Basically The National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was formed to take that responsibility." He went on to say




Of course, during the Vietnam war the goal for Livingston and his colleagues was to actually strengthen adverse weather, to inflate and exacerbate the monsoon season in order that the Vietnamese get bogged down. So not only is prevention possible, but also creation of harsh weather conditions.

Dr Livingston was assigned in 1966 from the Naval weapons research Laboratory to a marine fighter squadron in Vietnam. Instead of guns, the aircraft under Livingston's control were fitted with cloud seeding equipment.

www.prisonplanet.com...

Oh well the thread is worth the read.
ps
If anyone thinks the Pak floods and the Russian droughts are accidents...
Thats several billion dollars worth of food kaput right there.
We already know the speculators control the government that controls the weather...

What was it the Zionist Kissinger said?
"oil controls countries, food controls people." (I think.)

not to mention the whole carbon credit scheme was designed by Ken Ley
oh well, there is a sucker born every minute.








[edit on 16-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Unsurprisingly for an article that cites Tim Ball as an "expert", this appears to be complete BS. Here is a list of NOAA satellites; NOAA 16 is listed as PM Secondary with NOAA 19 being PM Primary. This suggests they do not use NOAA-16 to get their best data.
www.oso.noaa.gov...

This page shows the subsystem status
www.oso.noaa.gov...

Like the authors of the article in wcitizens link, I am not a climate scientist, (unlike them, I freely admit to it and would encourage people to only get their climate change info from experts), however my guess for the possible offending subsystem would be the High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder which is in yellow.

One wavelength out of 18 is shown to be in yellow
www.oso.noaa.gov...

The bottom of the above page debunks the articles claim that it took Mr. Anonymous Citizen to point out problems with the satellite when there is already a complete log of deficiencies.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Tim Ball

"viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry, rather than as a practicing scientist."

www.desmogblog.com...



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanats
Tim Ball

"viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry, rather than as a practicing scientist."

www.desmogblog.com...


the oil and gas companies have been funding the global warming scam
second line



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by stanats
Tim Ball

"viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry, rather than as a practicing scientist."

www.desmogblog.com...


the oil and gas companies have been funding the global warming scam
second line


Yes I can see how a nefarious conspiracy by the oil and gas industy to secretly fund a plot to massively decrease their future revenues makes sense, at least in the fairyland world of global warming denial.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
There was some speculation that the claimatefraud website that brought this daft nonsense to widespread attention might be a spoof site, but it seems the owner of the website genuinely believes that this data is actually used to calculated temperature



Some people will believe anything, no?

An interesting insight into the psychology of denial and wishful-thinking.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:48 AM
link   
When will you deniers learn that temperature data will not prove or disprove man-made global warming? Man-made global warming wasn't discovered by looking at temperature data.

"Man-made global warming" should actually be called "man-altered atmosphere", because that is what the big deal is about.

What happens to Earth when man alters it's atmosphere? Well it could either get really cold, or really hot. To be more accurate, you can just say the climate will change.

If you understand the science behind our atmosphere and how it works, it's actually very plausible that Earth will warm up in the long run.

Really people, even my 11 year old nephew understands this stuff.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Unst0ppable0ne]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by wiredamerican
 


Yes, not to mention the pretext for enforcing all sorts of restrictions on the people.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   
The article in the OP is blatantly lying.

For example:


NOAA’s Program Coordinator, Chuck Pistis


Chuck Pistis is the state coordinator of the Michigan Sea Grant Extension Program.

www.miseagrant.umich.edu...

He has no affiliation with the NOAA at all, besides the co-op on the coastwatch program.

He isn't a spokesperson for the NOAA as the article implies.

The rest is explained in the link provided by Essan.



[edit on 16/8/10 by Chadwickus]

[edit on 16/8/10 by Chadwickus]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 



Yes, the Met Office in UK has been doing so badly they've stopped doing long term forecasts - it has crossed my mind that it might be impossible to do accurate weather forecasting if there is weather manipulation going on, and they are not kept informed, which they most probably wouldn't be.

The chemtrails alone cause cloud where there would otherwise be none.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   
This site gives a list of 'The Ten Myths About Climate Change'', and provide the information on which they base their statements.

www.friendsofscience.org...



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
Piers Corbyn did a free forcast for the storms in the US over the Christmas season in 09
He was right on.
He and his company appear to be the only company that actual gets paid because they are accurate.


The only reason Piers is right is because he considers forecasting a storm to hit SW England as being correct if 3 days later there's a storm in the Baltic Sea - or that saying there will be floods somewhere in the country on 19 different days in a given month means he got it spot on if indeed there is flooding somewhere that month, albeit on one of the few days he said it'd be dry and sunny


To say he's considered a joke amongst amateur meteorologists in Britain is an understatement.


Originally posted by wcitizen
Yes, the Met Office in UK has been doing so badly they've stopped doing long term forecasts


Actually they haven't. They've just stopped releasing their experimental (and not always very accurate!) seasonal forecasts to the general public.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Essan]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by the2ofusr1
So would this make a site like (NOAA). a bit dubious as a source ...HMMMM.


Well, consider some of the stuff they've said about 75% of the Gulf oil having disappeared, and it does make you wonder...or is it a flat confirmation about an org most of us took for granted?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:33 AM
link   
Something's just fishy with this whole story. Ten years worth and no one noticed? Also 10-15 degrees? That's ridiculous. Aren't most global warming arguments in fractions of degrees rises in water and air temps?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Well that's just it - they did notice and knew about it all along and the data was only ever used by fishermen and the like anyway.

And most fishermen were intelligent enough to realise that the water wasn't really 125f even if that's what today's water temp chart was showing. So there was never previously any need to put a disclaimer to that effect on the website.

(Similar thing happens in the UK - and I'm sure elsewhere - where an automatic weather station may send in an obviously anomalous reading. This is usually not filtered out at the time as it's all computerised, so may show up various websites and charts. But everyone knows it wasn't really -200f at Heathrow Airport on Sunday afternoon and 9460mm of rain did not fall in one hour in Edinburgh.)



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I'm no beliver of global warming anyway. You cannot take 100 years of data and say there is a global warming when the earth is Billions of years old. It's just a normal cycle.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaynos
 


agreed

but that doesnt mean we shouldnt do something to avoid damage to nature

I support changes but not those they want to implement



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by wcitizen
 


wait until temps start rising and falling at the same time in similar areas of the earth..

Then all that data will be bogus...

just saying it could happen..



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join