I feel kinda bad: Rasmus at RealClimate has gone and done a massive post in response to an idle question I asked on my old blog about whether an Amazonian drought could be definitively linked to climate change. (Answer: Not at this point, if ever...) The post, though, really shows the virtue of RealClimate as the web's leading source of climate science discussion and explanation, so I encourage you to check it out.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Since we're arguing over global warming this week, I thought I'd post a commentary piece that was published in the Morris newspaper this week, by my colleague Pete Wyckoff. Pete is our local tree and climate expert, who works in both the biology and environmental studies discipline, and is very…
Back in 2007 a paper, Amazon Forests Green-Up During 2005 Drought, was published in Science:
Coupled climate-carbon cycle models suggest that Amazon forests are vulnerable to both long- and short-term droughts, but satellite observations showed a large-scale photosynthetic green-up in intact…
In the last few months, as the severe California drought has garnered attention among scientists, policymakers, and media, there has been a growing debate about the links between the drought and climate change. The debate has been marked by considerable controversy, confusion, and opaqueness.
The…
I have to confess that I'm beginning to wonder why I had previously thought Dean Esmay was really interested in a reasoned discussion about ID in public schools. Following his post of a few weeks ago asking for someone who is opposed to ID to explain the negative consequences of teaching about ID…
casino gambling Probaly you should read this. casino gambling Hope this helps. See you next life. Buy casino gambling now! God bless you.
From a NY Times article, "Scorched Earth" on the cancellation of Triana by Robert L. Park (at http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/opinion/15park.html, or http://tinyurl.com/dtaqt, if you don't like registering):
Even in a world wracked by wars, battles are not fought over scientific
disagreements. In science, nature is the sole arbiter. Disputes are
resolved only by better experiments.
The better experiment when it comes to global warming was to be the
climate observatory, situated in space at the neutral-gravity point
between the Sun and Earth. Called Lagrange 1, or L1, this point is
about one million miles from Earth. At L1, with a view of the full disk
of the Sun in one direction, and a full sunlit Earth in the opposite,
the observatory could continuously monitor Earth's energy balance. It
was given a poetic name, Triana, after Rodrigo de Triana, the sailor
aboard Christopher Columbus's ship who first sighted the New World.
Development began in November 1998 and it was ready for launching three
years later. The cost was only about $100 million. For comparison, that
is only one-thousandth the cost of the International Space Station,
which serves no useful purpose.
Before Triana could be launched, however, there was a presidential
election. Many of the industries favored by the new Bush White House
were not anxious to have the cause of global warming pinned down. The
launching was put on hold..
Before Triana could be launched, however, there was a presidential
election. Many of the industries favored by the new Bush White House
were not anxious to have the cause of global warming pinned down. The
launching was put on hold..
The disdain of the Bush White House for Triana goes much deeper than
just a desire to avoid the truth about global warming. Triana began
life in early 1998 as a brainchild of Al Gore, who was then the vice
president. Mr. Gore, the story goes, woke up one morning wondering if
it would be possible to beam a continuous image of the full Earth back
from space to inspire people with the need to care for our planet. The
1972 portrait of the full Earth, taken from the Moon, had inspired
millions with the fragile beauty of our blue planet. Why not beam the
image live into classrooms, allowing students to view weather systems
marching around the globe?.
Scientists had dreamed of such an observatory for years. They hoped Mr.
Gore's influence would make it happen. Mr. Gore's support would end up
destroying it. Those who hated him, hated Triana. His dream of
inspiring environmentalists and schoolchildren served only to
trivialize the project. It was ridiculed as "Gore's screen saver.".
Triana is terminated, but global warming is not. Someday, there will
have to be an observatory at L1. Perhaps the most important lesson from
our exploration of the solar system is that the most terrible place on
Earth is a Garden of Eden compared to the best place anywhere else. We
must find out how to keep it that way.
.
.
Surprising silence from most quarters on this.
Maybe this is why: http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/archives/space_policy/0006…
also covered here: http://scienceblogs.com/nosenada/2006/01/bob_park_on_triana.php with a different take
Well, I noticed the X-prize people asking for public comments on their next competition.
LLComment@xprize.org
So I emailed them a tangential suggestion -- they ought to offer a prize to put the Triana satellite at L1.
Below more of the info on Triana, confirming it was built and is now sitting in the warehouse. As noted at Prometheus, it's the only instrument that could -- if it were in place at L1 -- answer the question whether the Earth's albedo (brightness, reflection of sunlight) is changing. That wasn't thought to be very important five years ago. Now it's the key to understanding what's happening with aerosols and clouds -- and the danged satellite is sitting on the ground.
Source of that info is down in this thread, I'll quote a bit of it:
QUOTE
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=253
Re: #35
I work at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (not Goddard Institute for Space Studies) where Triana was built, but was not directly involved in the mission. In my opinion (and I'm speaking here as a private individual, not as a representative of NASA), the mission cancellation is neither surprising, or that much of a loss. Triana evolved out of Al Gore's idea to replicate the famous Apollo 17 Blue Marble photograph, more for outreach than for science. The scientific community at Goddard (and likely NASA as a whole) was then asked to come up with instruments that would benefit for the satellite's position at L1.
Since it was Al Gore's idea, it's been understood since November of 2000 that the mission was dead, even though the satellite was complete and sitting in storage.....
Comment by Robert Simmon â 14 Feb 2006 @ 2:16 pm
END QUOTE
I think the X-Prize people should take this on. I think a lot of people would subscribe, to get a Whole Earth video live feed. It might just be the right thing to do.