Guest commentary by Robert Hart, Kerry Emanuel, & Lance Bosart
The National Weather Service (NWS) and its parent agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), delivers remarkable value to the taxpayers. This efficiency can be demonstrated by its enormous return on investment. For example, the NWS costs only several dollars per citizen to operate each year, yet results in an estimated 10-100 times larger financial return that includes: improved citizen preparedness, improved transportation efficiency and safety, increased private sector profits, improved disaster prevention and mitigation, and impressive scientific research innovation that is significantly also contributed to by other related federal agencies, the private sector, and the academic research community.
Recent NWS initiatives have even more directly connected weather and ocean observations and forecasts to emergency preparation and public impact. To quote a 2019 study referenced below, “Partnership with the NWS has revolutionized this Emergency Management community from on that reacts to events to one that proactively prepares and stays ahead of the extreme events.” The societal benefits of reasonably predicting the future cannot be understated, and such prediction and resulting benefits were unimaginable only 75 years ago.
Critical taxpayer-funded investments over the past decades have led to greatly improved weather forecast models, observations from the ocean, ground, aircraft, and space, and theoretical understanding through scientific research. These all have had an enormous impact on lives and property. The forecasts and associated critical watches and warnings we see every day on television, the internet, or phone apps could not be possible without NOAA and the NWS. It is estimated that the tax revenue generated from the private sector using NOAA data and services easily pays for the entire cost of the NWS.
Those who remember weather forecasts from the 1970s through 1980s can appreciate these dramatic evolutionary improvements given how inferior those forecasts were compared to today. Going further back, landfalling hurricanes in the first half of that century often came with no warning. If you read newspaper front pages from the mornings of September 7, 1900, or September 21, 1938, you will find there is no mention of the historic and catastrophic events about to unfold only hours later. This would be unthinkable today given the scientific investments we have paid for.
These massive improvements extend beyond hurricane (and also snowstorm) forecasting and preparedness. Tornado warning lead time has also improved markedly during the same time period. Casualty rates from tornadoes have not increased despite a very rapid increase in population. At minimum, hundreds of thousands of people are alive today who would not be without our investments in NOAA and NWS.
The advent of skillful weather forecasting, along with the increased preparedness it allows, remains a landmark achievement of not only this country but of the human race. There are few other fields in the sciences where skillful prediction not only has had immense impact on our society, but is even possible. We should be extraordinarily proud of this achievement.
The current expulsion of primarily younger NOAA employees without cause and with disturbingly short notice is cruel to them personally and professionally. The youngest employees are the future of any organization, government or otherwise, and bring with them unique energy, skills, and ideas. Every government organization should strive to become more efficient, and must be subjected to careful oversight, since taxpayer funding is precious and entrusted to the government by the people. However, the instrument of wise oversight is the scalpel, not the chainsaw. The recent seemingly arbitrary and capricious reductions, notably made without Congressional oversight, are seriously jeopardizing the future of the country and more generally the property and lives of hundreds of millions of tax-paying families who have invested in these truly remarkable achievements over many decades.
References:
“Evolving the National Weather Service to Build a Weather-Ready Nation: Connecting
Observations, Forecasts, and Warnings to Decision-Makers through Impact-Based Decision
Support Services”, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, October 2019.
“Using the National Weather Service’s impact-based decision support services to prepare for
extreme winter storms“, Journal of Emergency Management, November/December 2019.
“Impact-Based Decision Support Services (IDSS) and Socioeconomic Impacts of Winter Storms”,
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, May 2020.
“Communicating Forecast Uncertainty (CoFU) 2: Replication and Extension of a Survey of the US
Public’s Sources, Perceptions, Uses, and Values for Weather Information.” American
Meteorological Society Policy Program Study, September 2024.
“The Social Value of Hurricane Forecasts”, SSRN Journal, December 2024.
Here’s the statement from Gretchen Goldman, president of UCS:
“When the rule of law is compromised and science is sidelined by an unelected billionaire donor, people get hurt. DOGE’s actions have interfered with life-saving research and scientific collaboration on cancer, vaccines, extreme weather and more. They have pulled funding for job-boosting clean technology initiatives and fired civil servants who enforce laws that protect us from air, water and climate pollution. They have compromised websites and other communications channels, obstructing access to data that the U.S. public has paid for and depends on.”
I just hope you guys are stashing that data so it can’t be deleted. Hopefully it will have a home again after the current insanity runs its course.
Tim
Dear Robert, Kerry and Lance,
Thanks for your excellent and timely post. It is important not only for those most affected by this arbitrary reduction in NOAA, staff, regardless of the issues of prevention and societal transformation that they can help sheding light on, but also for all scientists and citizens around the world, who are concerned about the attacks on knowledge and democracy in one of the countries that has contributed the most to them until now.
Best regards,
Hervé
Some perspective from 1943-1945 —
“Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed – in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for when dealing with a stupid person than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.”
― Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison
“Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.”
― Frederich Schiller
Personally, I think that, to the extent that stupidity is willfulI, the line between evil and stupidity can be a little blurry , especially where it’s celebrated with malice.
Anyone who can remember just a little of Trump’s, Musk’s, Thiel’s, Charles Koch’s, Putin’s, the saudi royals’ etc. etc. talk and behaviour, immidiatly understands that any kind of reality- and scientific-based serious argumentation is completely and utterly wasted upon them all.
They understand only what they want to understand, and for them that’s the only reality they see: their enormous egoes and their profits, which they’ll always think are way too small. Outside of that they only react to immidiate and clear threats to their power. That’s why they are now more than ever, relentlessly working to destroy any kind of remaining science, democracy, agency etc. which is not immidiatly giving them more profits, more power etc. They are oligarchs and their “thinking” is totalitarian and a kind of techno-fascism, marked by Musk’s sieg-heiling and egomaniac utterings, barbarian and puerile roaring and his open contempt for any living being who get’s in his way. As is Trump’s etc.
Musk now tweeting to the polish defense secretary: “be quiet, little man” makes that crystal clear to any grown up and somewhat educated person, who is not a complete idiot, hopeless opportunist etc. or simply too afraid to think straight. The only answer he and his ilk should get, was given by Leon Trotsky to Stalin in 1928, at the last meeting where any critics of Stalin were allowed to speak. Through the enormous cacaphony of ivectives roared against him and any other non-stalinist, and when books were thrown also at him, he catched one heavy book, held it up and said: “Your books have become unreadable, but they can still be used to throw!”
What we can do now as remaining democratic citizens is only to fight the oligarchy with all we’ve got. Don’t talk to them. Talk only to people, in any meaningful way, who are able, capable and willing to engage in take part in the struggle against this oligarchic totalitarianism. Be it even very small. And that is anyone in the vast majority, the 99 pct. living around the world now. Just not the oligarchs and their Gauleiters.
Of course that may be what you are trying to do here, but I can assure you from my own and millions of other people’s experiences throughout the history of struggles against tyranny, that this kind of academic low-voice argumentation won’t suffice. No chance at all.
I would agree that weather forecasts are very good today. The 10 day outlook showing what time it will start raining several days ahead is often spot-on. That’s very impressive!
However, our country MUST cut spending. Unfortunately, it is probably hard to cut employees who have been on the job for a while and are no longer probationary. THAT is most likely why new employees are being cut – they’re the only ones that can easily be cut.
I have total confidence that if the NWS/NOAA were to cut a significant number of employees, the weather forecasts would still be adequate. They will adapt exactly as private sector employees do.
Private sector employees are routinely cut with no notice, no severance (other than collecting unemployment and maybe COBRA insurance), and for any reason the employer deems necessary. Private sector employees who do not get cut don’t get a defined pension plan to live on in their old age, and they don’t get all the holidays that government employees get, and their health insurance and other benefits are typically not as good either. Government employees have no right to be treated better than taxpayers who pay their wages – and yes, I know Govt employees also pay taxes, and yes, I have worked for the Government and for Government contractors. I’ve seen all sides.
$37,000,000,000,000 in debt, with interest payments of ~$900 BILLION PER YEAR, has to be addressed or else there isn’t going to be a NWS/NOAA to be talking about. Spending is out of control. Trump/DOGE are the only ones who have tried in a long time to do anything about it. You like government? You’d better be praying HARD that they get the spending under control because if they don’t THERE ISN’T GOING TO BE ANY GOVERNMENT. I think we’ll correct our course before we get there, but this is where we are headed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN3iITo7gNA
Think of it like climate change. Those who know, are telling us we need to make changes or else we’ll be in big trouble. Same thing with Government spending. Trump and DOGE are on your side.
In just 4 years-time, 2017-2021, the Orange Clown added $8 Trillion to that National Debt that you are complaining so much about and he is now asking in his budget to add $4.5 Trillion to it this go round just to give the super-rich and their rich corporations additional tax breaks and that is besides all the other $ Trillions he’ll spend beyond that just running the gov’t.
You obviously reside in full blown cult-land if you think Trump&Musk w/ their DOGE team of 20-year-old Silicon Valley whiz kids are on your side. Wake up someday.
This is utter twaddle. NONE of the cuts we are seeing are going to cutting the debt. They are all earmarked for tax cuts for billionaires! Indeed the tax cuts the Republicans are proposing far exceed the cuts promised by DOGE even in their most fetid fever dreams.
And if you want to cut spending, the last place you want to cut it is in agencies that provide advanced warning of potential weather disasters. If you want to save money, you invest in more tools to monitor and predict a rapidly changing climate. You do not target data gathering efforts like the long-term monitoring of CO2 at Mauna Loa that cost almost nothing and are scientifically irreplaceable
This is not budgeting. This is anti-science vandalism!.
The problem is that this is not just a small cadre of extremists. The American people knowingly voted to turn their backs on science, truth and decency.
Those who know realize a tax increase on the wealthy only will reduce the national debt. Reducing various federal workers whose non-privately-contracted numbers have not increased for decades in most cases only gives those who hate competent government a reason to badmouth the less effective government of their creation.
If you really want to do something about the national debt, you don’t cut taxes on the rich and gut the IRS. Get real, Mr. Know It All.
KIA: I have total confidence that if the NWS/NOAA were to cut a significant number of employees, the weather forecasts would still be adequate.
BPL: Based on your extensive knowledge of how that data is obtained?
Based on the fact that there have been no cuts in government agencies in recent times – this means that they are bloated – occasionally there needs to be cuts in any organization to ensure that only the best employees remain.
Also, with much of our data coming in from satellites, the NWS/NOAA should be able to give adequate predictions just based on that. Perhaps the satellites should download their data to one man in “an underground bunker located deep below the brick and steel of a non-descript building”, and then have AI make the local forecasts from that data? It’s a comin’.
It is likely that Universities, state governments, and the military, etc are gathering weather data in addition to NWS/NOAA – maybe they should engage in more data sharing to cut costs.
To those using the argument that tax cuts to the rich will increase the debt, Thank You, that is EVEN MORE reason to make cuts in all agencies where possible.
KIA, you’re blessed with living in a fool’s paradise. I have no expectation that you’ll venture from its cozy confines, but I’ll enumerate a few colder facts for anyone on the outside.
The NWS does a lot more than issue routine forecasts. It has offices staffed with experts of international caliber such as the Storm Prediction Center and Hurricane Prediction Center that give advance warning of really dangerous weather. As the weather arrives, local offices issue their own warnings. These places operate 24/7. In nice weather, they may be doing training, or catching up on routine tasks. However, when the bad weather arrives they are BUSY, and staffed with lots of people working overtime. The phones ring off the hook with reports coming in from field observers, requests from emergency managers, news media, etc. If you take people away, the remaining people can do less, and do it with less information. If you have somebody living in a bunker, they won’t be able to give localized advice to an emergency manager from another area. Nor will AI, because it doesn’t deal well with rare, but dangerous, situations.
Overall staffing has already decreased somewhat over the years. There has been a real effort to automate what can be, and continuously improve productivity. Cutting staff further so that “only the best employees remain” is somewhat like expecting your fire department to maintain its response quality if you cut staffing so that “only the best employees remain.” Yes, they spend lots of time training and cleaning equipment, but you want an adequate number of them to respond to a fire. Also, if you don’t take in new employees and train them, they don’t get to eventually become the best.
Anyone who thinks it can all be done with satellite observations has never looked at the weather models carefully enough to see them readjust once the get actual balloon observations. You don’t launch those balloons with AI, but with a human going into an inflation shelter, filling the balloon with hydrogen, attaching an instrument, and releasing.
Putting the weather data all together coming in from various sources and getting it into the weather models is called “assimilation.” It’s been done for many decades, and has been getting steadily better. It won’t keep getting better when you lay off the modelers because they aren’t “essential.”
BTW the military relies on civilian data, models, and forecasts to inform their own operations.
This is like cutting off toes to lose weight. It only looks good if you want the patient to be hobbled.
John Pollack: “ Cutting [NWS] staff further so that “only the best employees remain” is somewhat like expecting your fire department to maintain its response quality if you cut staffing so that “only the best employees remain.”
Actually, it’s worse – in your analogy – the arsonist-in-charge makes a fire-skeptic, who has called fires “myths” and campaigned for the shutdown of fire departments, the head of the fire department. The new head fires all the previous leadership of the fire station, forces the best firefighters into retirement, into private firefighting, or to move abroad.
What is left are the mediocre and the incompetent, who resented not progressing up the ladder because of their lack of fire-fighting skills and leadership, but now in the system that rewards not merit, but loyalty and the lack of the backbone – loudly embrace the arsonist propaganda, and welcome the new overlords.
So not only there won’t be enough people to fight fires, but the few who will remain won’t be the best, quite the opposite. And with public fire departments without money for new equipment, grossly unstaffed, and run by the political-loyalty hires – the fires will spread, thus justifying the calls for getting rid of the ineffective fire-departments altogether, and replacing them with private, for-profit, fire-fighting corporations, owned by the corporate supporters of the arsonists-in-charge. And since maximizing profits and the pay of the CEOs is the ONE AND ONLY goal of any for-profit corporation, they would accomplish it by increasing the price for their services for the taxpayer, and by cutting corners on the costs – subpar equipment and the race to the bottom in the quality of the new hires -the inexperienced and the incompetent are in no position to demand a higher pay.
What a bold-face lie that is. I speak from first-hand knowledge. The NWS is short-staffed at many locations. Fact. Of course you do not care about facts at all, just lies.
And satellites are just a small portion of the data used for forecasts and warnings.
And the military already share their data. But guess what? They use the NWS’ data for their operations. Every day, around the world.
Your blatant lies and lack of critical thinking skills are vile, You could not be more anti-science and anti-America is you tried. Let’s all hope you do not have kids because you would just pass along ignorance. Quite seriously.
KIA: there have been no cuts in government agencies in recent times – this means that they are bloated
BPL: Thank you for that perfect example of a non sequitur.
To BPL and others trying to talk to the obviously and consciously hyper-infamous mr. KIA and the likes: what you do is a waste of time and energy. It has absolutely no chance in hell succeeding, you’d have greater success talking to a fencepost. You are just satisfying his narcissistic, sadistic (or whatever) ego. So why on earth are you doing it?
I would be far wiser to spread the news fx. that the rare earth resources in Ukraine, Trump(Musk) is trying to blackmail from Zelinskyy, don’t exist https://www.mining.com/op-ed-unpacking-ukraines-trillion-dollar-rare-earths-myth/ according to the USGS and other geologists. Good question: why are almost all the media suppressing this crucial information? Why are they blowing up Trump and Musk instead of taking them down with simple facts? Answer: their owners love Trumps tax-reductions, his fossil-fuel madness etc., as do Chuck Schumer and his ilk, behind their smokescreens.
KVJ, you argue that its a waste of time responding to narcissistic fools like KIA with facts, but also argue its important we respond to narcissistic fools like Trump with facts. You can’t argue both these things at the same time.
KIA is unlikely to be persuaded by facts and logic, but we can’t be 100% sure, and other people reading the discussion with KIA might be more open to persuasion. I think its important to debunk nonsense with facts and good arguments, and I enjoy it. Of course I limit my time on debunkings, and I concentrate most of my efforts on people who ARE reasonably open to persuasion.
I think the worst thing is silence. If lies aren’t challenged they will certainly gain traction. Progress in this world has never been made by remining silent in the face of ignorant statements. Try remaining silent in court and you will loose. But whatever. Theres plenty of debunking going on, and not everyone has to do it.
Your argument appears to be that people in the media or politics don’t challenge Trump on facts on Ukraines mineral reserves, because they secretly like his tax cuts and drilling for fossil fuels. I don’t think you’re right about thus. The Washington Post and others fact check Trump almost DAILY on numerous issues. I’ve seen our media mention the uncertainty about Ukraines rare earth reserves. However there could ‘possibly’ be reasonable reserves down there and that’s what Trump would say. So challenging him on it won’t achieve much and this is probably why the media haven’t spend a whole lot of time on the issue..
But don’t misunderstand me. I agree with many of your views on things.
Read and *learn* about just what NWS and NOAA meteorologists do (yeah I know, fat chance you will):
https://wilderweather.substack.com/p/what-do-meteorologists-do?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
KIA – “Based on the fact that there have been no cuts in government agencies in recent times – this means that they are bloated”
Given that there have been no cuts to a thin man’s caloric intake in recent times – this means that he is bloated and fat.
That is a fine example of Republican stupidity. Thanks Know it all.
Trump is on Trump’s side. DOGE is a reckless and incompetent exercise in executive overreach.
No they are not on our side. They are cutting all of the wrong things to make even smidgen of a difference in the debt. Fact.
This post is nothing but a litany of blatant, malicious lies.
It is beyond me why the moderators of this site allow it to be exploited as a platform for crude, clumsy, clownish MAGA propaganda.
Trump and DOGE have no concept of ‘sides’. There is a fever-dream ‘what if?!’ with no thought of consequence. Sure, the ‘National Debt’ looks scary; but there is no sheriff to tack a ‘foreclosed’ sign on the door. Our sovereign currency is a wing and a prayer already! ‘Full faith and credit’…you won’t haul that off in a wheelbarrow. You could stand a look at MMT; sovereign finance is very different than kitchen-table budgets. The debt is a sign of our economic health.
KIA: our country MUST cut spending.
BPL: No, our country must rescind the Trump tax cuts, bring back the estate tax, lift the cap on Social Security taxes, and balance the budget. Any excess raised can either be rebated to the people or used to pay off the national debt. The idea that federal spending, in and of itself, is a bad thing, is nonsense.
Spending needs to be much higher, accompanied by a huge decrease in military spending & a vast increase in taxes on the rich. The US & the world have many dire, urgent problems which can only be solved by strong government action accompanied by reducing the power & wealth of corporations & mbillionaires. Climate catastrophe, industrial toxicity, mass extinction, & other crises are all driven by inequality & the psychological conditions afflicting the rich.
Once again Mr Know it All demonstrates that he knows absolutely nothing.
I agree with and support every statement in this article, but I have to correct you on one thing. You refer to ‘The recent seemingly arbitrary and capricious reductions, notably made without Congressional oversight…’. These cuts are neither arbitrary nor capricious. They are part of a very consistent, well thought out and thorough program to remove any support for climate science, in order to safeguard the interests of the fossil fuel industry.
I know this from simply reading the main Project 2025 document, Mandate for Leadership (ninth edition), published by the Heritage Foundation in advance of the Trump presidency. Trump and more importantly the team behind him, is following this blueprint to the letter. Hostility to the notion of climate change is a red thread running through this document.
But did you know the GOP can manipulate time itself to achieve Trump’s objectives? Given their evident powers at such a fundamental level, a trivial task like solving climate change should be child’s play (which is fitting given the immature mental capacity of their leadership).
The GOP would rather do this ‘time thing’ than be seen voting to endorse Trump’s declaration of an economic emergency. The Hill reports:-
Rory Allen: These cuts are neither arbitrary nor capricious. They are part of a very consistent, well thought out and thorough program to remove any support for climate science, in order to safeguard the interests of the fossil fuel industry.
It’s tempting to conclude that, but Hanlon’s Razor still applies. Someone’s malicious (i.e. self-seeking) purpose is presumably served by Musk’s chainsaw, and Big Carbon can readily hire mercenary experts to craft well thought out programs in its interest. But as Glen Koehler alluded earlier, there’s good reason to fear stupidity even more than malice. Plenty of Trump flunkies eager to “make America great again” are acting capriciously, because Trump must go to war with the army he has. Hell, we can only hope conspicuous stupidity costs him enough votes to bring MAGA down in the next election! Which leads me to:
Mr. KIA: Think of it like climate change. Those who know, are telling us we need to make changes or else we’ll be in big trouble. Same thing with Government spending. Trump and DOGE are on your side.
Heh. Some who know, are telling us otherwise (paulkrugman.substack.com/p/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-982):
“Recently David Sacks, a Silicon Valley investor who is now Donald Trump’s AI and crypto czar (gag me with a blockchain), raised an interesting question about federal debt.
True, he did so in the course of saying something really stupid. Are tech bros even more arrogant and ignorant when they make pronouncements about the federal budget than they are on other topics, or does it just seem that way to me because I know something about the subject?”
Having been educated in Economics as well as Earth Sciences, I submit that the physics of climate change is way better understood than the economics of public debt. Sadly, economics, which investigates human behavior, offers abundant opportunity to fool ourselves about ourselves. WRT physics, KIA has long since exposed his tragic affliction with the DK effect. “Trump and DOGE are on your side”? Whatever. Keep on making America hate again, my bloggy frenemy!
The value of these services is now the responsibility of the private sector. One, for=profit companies and two, philanthropies. NOAA became politicized on climate issues, something that has led to its demise.
Do check the debt clock to understand why federal government is unsustainable:
usdebtclock.org
RLB: NOAA became politicized on climate issues
BPL: Stuff and nonsense. It’s not “politicized” to do accurate science. You just didn’t like the answers they were giving.
https://www.desmog.com/robert-l-bradley-jr/
Ph.D., political economy, International College, Los Angeles.1
M.A., economics, the University of Houston.2
B.A., economics, Rollins College.3
Robert Bradley Jr. is the founder and CEO of Institute for Energy Research (IER). Bradley spent nearly 20 years in the business world including 16 years at Enron where he served as corporate director of public policy analysis and as a speech writer for Kenneth L. Lay.
Robert Bradley has been associated with a range of conservative and free-market think tanks; he was an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute and Competitive Enterprise Institute CEI), an Energy and Climate Change Fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) in London, and an honorary senior research fellow at the Center for Energy Economics. He has been a member of the Academic Review Committee for the Institute for Humane Studies at George Mason University.
Was looking for something more recent since DeSmog, while superb, has fewer new entries. Here’s one. It’s a good list of organizations with deceptive names who fight against knowledge and understanding: Bradley’s IER: “IER has received funding from both ExxonMobil [54] and the Koch brothers [55].”
https://www.ucs.org/resources/global-warming-skeptic-organizations
Sadly, these dragon’s teeth recur in the service of destroying our collective futures. Now they’ve got dishonest bullies in charge of our government. This is not good.
Robert Lee Bradley:
The value of these services is now the responsibility of the private sector. One, for=profit companies and two, philanthropies. NOAA became politicized on climate issues, something that has led to its demise.
Do check the debt clock to understand why federal government is unsustainable:
Sigh – it’s as if you and your fellow “free market energy” zealots don’t recognize the “free” market’s ancient propensity to privatize benefits while socializing costs, or the very concept of a public good! Of course, “free” in this context specifically means “free of collective intervention to mitigate market failure” (econlib.org/library/Topics/College/marketfailures.html). As the link embedded in your ‘nym unequivocally attests, you’re in denial (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism). The salient question is (h/t Glen Koehler), how much of your denialism is due to malice, and how much to stupidity?
All NOAA did was collect data, do peer-reviewed research, publish their intersubjectively-verifiable findings, and inform the country: you know, science, a public good. Do you think our Sharpie-wielding Kakistocrat-in-Chief meets the requirement? It is your for-profit backers who have relentlessly politicized anthropogenic climate change, intent on thwarting collective intervention in the revenue streams of fossil fuel producers and investors. Good luck convincing us otherwise, because their decades-long investment in mass deception and political extortion is abundantly documented in the public record (e.g. newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/kochland-examines-how-the-koch-brothers-made-their-fortune-and-the-influence-it-bought). Cynical self-interest may not equal malice as commonly defined, but I’m willing to call it evil in this context.
As for the “debt clock”: Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman, for example, doesn’t think we should obsess over government debt (nytimes.com/2024/06/06/opinion/national-debt-us-taxes.html). In any case, actual science has learned that the profit-driven transfer of fossil carbon to the atmosphere by the gigatonne is unsustainable! US public debt is tangential to the mounting socialized cost of climate change due to global market failure, although the aggregate cost of adapting to ever-increasing global heat content (zebra’s EEI) can only drive up our total debt, public and private. As long as selling fossil carbon is profitable in the US, simply balancing the federal budget won’t slow the inexorable rise of global mean surface temperature, or moderate ever-worsening weather extremes. Your only counter-argument is (h/t Ray Ladbury): “Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders.” Sorry, but I, for one, have no problem calling that stupid.
Susan Anderson: https://www.desmog.com/robert-l-bradley-jr/
Oh, he’s that Robert Lee Bradley. Thank you, Susan. If I’d clicked on one more link (masterresource.org/about), I’d have made the connection. Many RC regulars are acquainted with RLB’s résumé. His denialism appears to be the cynical, mercenary sort. I’m pretty sure he’s not stupid. If it’s evil to profit by causing climate chaos, IMHO it’s evil to craft specious lies on behalf of those who pocket the profits.
Our similar reactions to him would seem to support Bonhoeffer’s warning:
One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless.
Not so sure about any sense of unease in RLB himself, but at least he’s been exposed.
“NOAA became politicized on climate issues”
Bullshit. The single example I can think of of “politicization” at NOAA is the Sharpie incident of the first a DT admin. Can you provide a single additional instance where NOAA presented political propaganda rather than the facts as best they know them? Even ONE???
And where, exactly, do you imagine those private sector weather forecasting companies get their raw data?
Inconvenient fact, that.
This commentary makes clear exactly WHY Trump and Musk are determined to destroy NOAA and the NWS: precisely BECAUSE of the absolutely essential work these agencies do and the value they have created.
DESTRUCTION IS THEIR GOAL. The complete destruction of the United States of America as a constitutional democratic republic, a functioning society and an international power is their goal.
While claiming to have been ” built as a battleship for the conservative movement.” the Heritage Foundation, has gone the way of the Titanic.
A more disinterested Commander in Chief would court marshal himself for being a party to the destruction of a national asset.
1) 83 billionaires backed Kamala Harris vs only 52 for Trump:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/10/30/kamala-harris-has-more-billionaires-prominently-backing-her-than-trump-bezos-and-griffin-weigh-in-updated/
2) Kamala Harris’s campaign got $1.15 BILLION in donations, Trump only got $464 million. less than half of Kamala’s haul.
https://www.opensecrets.org/2024-presidential-race
3) It is hilarious to think Democrat billionaires and their Congressional puppets are going to lift a finger to halt DOGE when the alternative is for them to pay higher taxes. Oh, sure — Congressional Democrats will shoot off their mouths and do meaningless political theater to exploit NOAA’s misery — but actually DO something? Not a chance. Because obviously the main threat to the nation is trans men not being able to play in women’s sports.
4) To claim that 13,000 NOAA employees are needed to make a weather report raises the question of how many it would take to change a light bulb. Obviously NOAA does many other important things —but notice the strange silence from the Democrat News Media on what those things specifically are and how they are being affected?
5) The $4 Trillion Trump is allegedly giving away to the Rich over the next 10 years is merely the extension of the current tax laws — and there are a lot of middle class families that like that $30,000 standard deduction. Plus the Democrats controlled the WHite House, the Senate and the House in 2021-2022 term. Anyone see them trying to CHANGE the tax giveways to the Rich in the current law?
NAILED IT!
And there you go again, believing lies simply to fit your agenda. Excellent example of your lack of critical thinking skills once again. Education is not your strong suit. Yet you flaunt that fact.
KIA: NAILED IT!
BPL: Jesus’s body to the cross?
“83 billionaires backed Kamala Harris vs only 52 for Trump:” A factoid without context!
The difference being is that the 53 who supported Trump are the ones who are working for their economic self interests while the 83 for Harris would appear to be OK with having their taxes raised as well as subsidizing things like child care, student loans, healthcare and protecting our environment. They might seem to recognize that they are the people who shape our world and might feel some social responsibility to help mitigate the damage that might be done. They aren’t the ones who tell working class people that China, Mexico and Canada will pay the tariffs so they can extend the tax cuts that the nation cannot afford. In what kind of world when our nation supposedly is 34 trillion in debt would it be the proper time to extend tax cuts?
So when Obama came to office his administration received a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit that Bush handed his administration on the way out the door. It was whittled down to 538 billion when he left office. Trump who had run on ending deficits had them back to a trillion at the end of his 3rd year. That was before COVID.
“…but notice the strange silence from the Democrat News Media on what those things specifically are and how they are being affected?”
Really pathetic that you have to make up a blatant lie to try to make a (wrong) point, junior.
Don Williams, your theory that The Democrats wont reverse DOGE, and won’t impose tax increases on the rich and that the Democrats are controlled by billionaires who are all greedy isn’t very convincing given 1) Harris planned to increase taxes on the rich and 2) past democratic government’s have increased taxes on the rich.
Regarding your claims about NOAA. They carry out a vast range of useful functions obviously justifying a lot of employees, including weather forecasts, climate monitoring, storm warnings, management and conservation of marine ecosystems and fisheries, research into all aspects of the earths environment and it operates a satellite network and advises planners and emergency managers.
Your claims that trumps tax cuts were merely an extension of tax cuts doesn’t make them justified. They are clearly for the benefit of certain greedy, never satisfied, high income people at the expense of useful government agencies.
I would argue the DOGE cost cutting isn’t justified on the basis of so called government bloat or high debt: While Americas federal debt is larger than ideal, the net interest is only around 14% so quite manageable, and Americas total government spend as a % of gdp is around OECD average, suggesting the federal government is not excessively large.
So DOGE is more plausibly motivated by a combination of Musk reducing regulatory impacts on his businesses, his libertarian small government ideology, and his over confidence and his desire to just break things because he can. He might not be thinking that clearly due to certain medications he takes. You have a man with huge power with all these attributes. It’s a perfect storm, a once in a generation thing, and it may permanently damage America and yet you are trying to justify this? You must be joking surely.
1) https://futurism.com/bill-gates-gives-up-climate-change
“By the early 2020s, billionaires had positioned themselves as the masters of climate change policy, taking advantage of their great fortunes to become indispensable to environmentalism.
Now, however, many of those same billionaires are pulling support at an alarming rate. And Bill Gates — Microsoft founder, sixth richest man in the world, and alleged sex pest — is the latest among them.
New reporting by Heatmap is signaling the end of a “major chapter in climate giving,” as Breakthrough Energy — Gates’ climate change nonprofit — has locked the doors on its policy and advocacy office, laying off dozens of employees throughout Europe and the US.”
2) https://apnews.com/article/democrats-congress-chuck-schumer-government-funding-shutdown-43d1acea20c34ad28d848edc08ad6375
“WASHINGTON (AP) — The Democratic Party was fracturing Friday as a torrent of frustration and anger was unleashed at Senate Democrats, led by Sen. Chuck Schumer, who faced what they saw as an awful choice: shut the government down or consent to a Republican funding bill that allows President Donald Trump to continue slashing the federal government.
After Schumer announced Thursday that he would reluctantly support the bill, he bore the brunt of that anger, including a protest at his office, calls from progressives that he be primaried in 2028 and suggestions that the Democratic Party would soon be looking for new leaders.”
As we say in poker, “read’em and weep, rubes”
Don Williams, none of your comments or sources rebut anything I said. It’s all completely unrelated. Your endless crusade against billionaires is tiresome because you present no solutions and appear to have a double standard where billionaires like Trump are ok but liberal leaning billionaires aren’t. The spending bill material is off topic, and you appear to enjoy seeing people being bullied. Wow what a nice guy you are.
The smirk that schoolyard bullies, thug/gangster bullies, and now MAGA bullies get when they think they are in some sort of power position is utterly telling. Why I remember when that bullying smirk was a Hollywood tell for a villain who was either a Japanese officer educated at UCRA. a Nazi educated at an Ivy, or a bit later an NKVD character, and sometimes even a martinet British officer and certainly none of them were red-blooded Amurricans! And up until the Army hearings in June, 1954 “Have you no sense of decency, sir” still worked as a check on public behavior.
Turns out that “red-blooded Amurricans” were the _real_ myth I guess. And no one tries appealing to a bully’s “sense of decency”. They have none. Smirking over the pain of others is pretty indecent, but not to our resident “conservative” political commentators basking in that orange glow. They rather like it. Makes them feel STRONG. Makes them feel POWERFUL.
(Mods…I ask again, however: WHY are political commentators being published here? Including this very comment of my own right here for that matter?)
@NigelJ
1) You are a foreigner so your ignor..er.. lack of knowledge is understandable.
Interest on US federal debt is 14% of the budget PER YEAR.
2) What is the effect of the Funding Bill?
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2025-03-12/whats-in-the-gops-stopgap-funding-bill-to-avert-a-government-shutdown
“It will also notably bypass the yearly appropriations process in which Congress directs how to allocate the funds, allowing the Trump administration and the Department of Government Efficiency wide leeway in deciding how money is spent.
House Republicans plan to cut $13 billion in discretionary spending on areas other than defense and increase defense spending by $6 billion. An additional $6 billion for veterans’ health care is included.
Disaster relief for California was not included, and several programs – including international peacekeeping and National Institutes of Health research – will be hit.”
3) The Funding Bill in NOT OFF Topic given the topic is budget cuts to NOAA and employee layoffs.
4) The Funding Bill could NOT have been passed without the YES votes from 10 Democrat Senators — 60 votes were needed for it to be bought up for consideration and the Republicans only had 52. Hence the anger of House Democrats who voted unanimously to block the bill.
Don Williams, I realise the 14% interest payment is per year. Its normally measured per year. I didn’t say otherwise. Despite your view that this interest rate is excessively high America is not having difficulty paying this interest. Debt and interest on the debt becomes unsustainably high in 20 years if present trend continue. Obviously it would be wise to stop debt accumulation well before it gets to that point. Some references:
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/bonds/us-debt-crisis-gdp-ratio-unsustainable-default-treasury-bond-crash-2023-10
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-worried-should-you-be-about-the-federal-deficit-and-debt/
I accept that the budget bill potentially affects climate related issues, but none of your latest comments on the budget bill relate to climate science or mitigation issues or NOAA, so you are STILL effectively way off topic.
DW: Interest on US federal debt is 14% of the budget PER YEAR.
BPL: Right, we shouldn’t have had all those tax cuts.
Dear mods: Is this a political discussion site or a science of climate discussion site?
jgnfld,
Good point. Sounds familiar. How soon before DW is posting walls of text and extolling the virtues of China…
As long as people here allow themselves to be “owned” by the trolls, it’s a co-dependent cluster- thingy.
The mods are not our mommies; it’s about self control for the participants. Not answering over and over and over is the greatest punishment you can inflict on someone who is desperate to have power over you.
nigel jones: It’s a perfect storm, a once in a generation thing, and it may permanently damage America and yet you are trying to justify this? You must be joking surely.
Nigel, thank you again for your clear-eyed view of America from New Zealand. Again, the question is whether DW’s comments are informed by malice or stupidity. I, for one, won’t attempt that assessment. Don’t let that stop you, however 8^D!
Mal Adapted, thanks for the positive feedback. Thanks also for your astute comments elsewhere on the KVJ oligarchy issues. Regarding DW I detect more deliberate stupidity than malice. His comments are very political and often off topic so I don’t want to get into any more detail.
Where are American scientists going to go now that Republicans are defunding them?
China is hiring.
So is France. They’ve specifically set aside grants for Americans who have lost their funding. America’s loss will be Europe’s gain.
Where are American scientists going to go now th
1) Well, it is not just Republicans – Democrat billionaires and politicians are also pulling the plug
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/06/jeff-bezos-climate-group-trump-bezos-earth-fund-science-based-targets-initiative-decarbonisation-aoe
https://www.gtreview.com/news/americas/six-big-us-banks-pull-out-of-net-zero-banking-alliance/
https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/blackrock-quits-climate-group-wall-streets-latest-environmental-step-back-2025-01-09/
https://nysfocus.com/2025/01/15/state-of-state-climate-cap-and-invest
2) Evidently the billionaires decided they did not want to park their private jets and ride on Grayhound busses with working people.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/richest-1-account-for-more-carbon-emissions-than-poorest-66-report-says
3) Nor do they want to pay that nasty carbon tax – so Joe Biden signed a law making those private jets into Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs) from Alpha Centauri:
https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/us-billionaires-private-jet-carbon-emissions-b2550058.html
“A new law in the United States will prevent billionaires from being held accountable for their jet emissions by keeping passengers of private planes anonymous.”
https://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverwilliams1/2021/11/05/118-private-jets-take-leaders-to-cop26-climate-summit-burning-over-1000-tons-of-co2/ [snicker]
4) Mere millionaires are jumping ship also:
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/income-inequality-climate-change “Wealthiest 10 Percent of Americans Responsible for 40 Percent of U.S. Emissions”
5) Maybe Vilfredo Pareto can explain it to you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution
Apart from “Know it all” I agree with the majority of the comments. I am a retired teacher now citizen climatologist and have made use of NOAA data for decades. Trump’s destroying science is scarey to say the least. While an Australian I can readily see the enormous value of NOAA . Here the former Abbott and Morrison governments tried to destroy the CSIRO our equivalent of NOAA, fortunately they were tossed out of power before they could do serious damage. I strongly support any moves to remove these incompetent fools before they destroy science and put the U.S. back in the stone age.
Gavin O’Brien FRMetS.
Canberra Australia.
But there is only improved forecasting of worsening weather today (and tomorrow).
Insightful post! NOAA’s role in climate research is more crucial than ever. Science-based decisions are key to tackling climate challenges. Thanks for highlighting this! Best Schools in Noida for Nursery Admission | List of Preschools in Noida
Spam, spam spam, spam. Spam, spam, spam, spam. Lovely spam, wonderful spam
MONI should try The CO2 Coalition’s climate civics cartoon curriculum.
Its free programs cover all levels of education from Pre-scholarly & Failed First Grade through Senate Confirmation Denied.
https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2023/11/attack-of-user-friendly-anime-molecules.html
You must mean a different article as climate or climate related research is not mentioned once in the article about why “We need NOAA now more than ever”!
We’re ignoring the fact that other countries are still going to support their scientists in doing climate research. So, let’s continue to highlight efforts around the world, and do what we can given the circumstances. One thing that I continue to harp on is to push for an advanced Earth science discussion forum, and especially one that is not hamstrung like RC in posting capabilities (which lacks images, equations, charts, etc ). They are out there, but they actually require PARTICIPATION to make a difference — who’d a thunk that?
For your consideration, The Azimuth Project, which was started over 10 years ago, but was then deleted by its owner. I recovered the remnants to it with links to archives here, https://github.com/azimuth-project and a GitHub discussion page, which is very capable of supporting any kind of post featuring technical details.
People that don’t want to see the USA start falling behind in Earth science are all welcome to join..
BTW, The Azimuth Project forum has no moderation for posting as long as you have a GitHub account, but if Mr. Know It All or Rob Bradley shows up, they are toast.
1) One problem NOAA has is that most American voters do not know the full extent of what it does nor how cutbacks will affect them. The Democrat News Media is trying to tell ghost stories but their narrative is undermined by weasel words (“may”, “might”, “could”, “threatens’ etc.). Also, most voters don’t need a weather report—they look out the window to see if they need an umbrella or heavy coat. Farmers may be more interested but it is not as if they can do anything but endure the effects of weather.
2) Fortunately the Rich need weather reports – it is dangerous to crew a yacht across the ocean or fly a private jet without the info , including winds at various altitudes. Plus large corporations – oceanic shipping, commercial aviation for passengers and cargo – need it also. So only 20% of NOAA has been cut. Because one version of the Rich’s “Free Market” is Free services paid for by middle class taxpayers.
3) However, climate science is also done in our universities and there the threat is more serious:
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/11/trump-universities-protest-antisemitism-government-00224272 an excerpt:
“In 2021, JD Vance proclaimed “the universities are the enemy.” This week, the White House declared war against them.
President Donald Trump and his administration are escalating their attacks on higher education, intensifying a yearslong effort to hobble the campuses they say breed progressive ideology by casting them not as spaces of innovation, but as hotbeds of hate.
Republicans have long blamed college campuses for being ground-zero for a number of “woke” culture war issues to which they’re now taking an ax, including diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and academic frameworks like critical race theory.”
See also https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5195511-universities-colleges-research-funding-trump-doge-columbia-harvard-mit-johns-hopkins/
4) But won’t Democrat billionaires come to the rescue? Er…No.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/14/nyregion/trump-columbia-university-antisemitism.html
“The goal of the current White House to dismantle higher education — while running for the Senate, JD Vance plainly called universities the enemy — has elicited alarm from many quarters, but it is striking how little we have heard from the megadonor class.,,,,,Under a different set of conditions, it would be easy to imagine wealthy Ivy League Democratic donors rising up to fill in the gaps left by an unwelcoming government. But in the current environment, the grievances of those donors — against diversity initiatives and unruly agitators — stand in precise alignment with the agenda in Washington.”
5) As I have noted, Climate Science is being hurt most by some of its alleged supporters. Guilt by association. The people the Republicans strongly dislike –with justification – are in the Humanities and Social Sciences. So Climate Science leaders should point out to Republicans leaders that there is not a single University Monolith. I.e point out that claim is a construct of dishonest leftist rhetoric. Rather there is a Second university – the departments of physical sciences, life sciences, math , engineering and medicine – that provide extremely useful products and services to the country and which deserve to be supported. Including meteorology. People who work for a living instead of spending their life constructing false narratives.
Don Williams says most people dont need a weather report, they just look out the window. In fact a recent yougov poll found at least 50% of people look at a weather forecast daily. People like to plan ahead.
https://today.yougov.com/health/articles/45672-how-and-where-americans-get-information-weather
This along with important functions like forecasting hurricanes is ample reason for a well resourced NOAA and suggests the cuts are idiotic.
But abolishing the NOAA is what Libertarians have wanted for the last 60 years if not longer.
LOL.
N: . In fact a recent yougov poll found at least 50% of people look at a weather forecast daily. People like to plan ahead.
BPL: My wife and I always punch in “Pittsburgh weather” in the morning.
1) A free good has high demand. I don’t hear a loud outcry from 340 million Americans that their forecasts might lose some accuracy. If anyone wants to know today’s weather they can simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is. A check of the barometer tells one if the low is approaching or moving away. Like the Sophists in ancient Greece, our urban elites in the News Media think they can speak about any subject unhampered by any need to actually have knowledge of the subject.
2) From ignorance the News Media is FAILING to report on some of NOAA’s important services. In 2012 I noted that NOAA’s Rainfall Atlas 14 is used to size our infrastructure and that it is faulty because it is based on rainfall records from the past 100 years –not recognizing the increasing rainfall from climate change. Resulting in stormwater infrastructure with a 100 year lifespan being undersized. I asked the people here to have NOAA update the Atlas. Ray Ladbury, bless his heart , supported my request. After the streets/subways of New York City and Philadelphia were submerged under 8 feet of water NOAA is planning to issue a Rainfall Atlas 15 which will forecast increased rain changes in the future — due out in 2027. Real estate developers have to build stormwater infrastructure to get zoning approved and so they like cheaper , undersized drainage.
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/09/why-bother-trying-to-attribute-extreme-events/#comment-250570
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2012/09/why-bother-trying-to-attribute-extreme-events/#comment-250598
https://www.weather.gov/media/owp/hdsc_documents/NOAA_Atlas_15_Flyer.pdf
3) In the private sector, First Street is issuing flood maps showing projected flooding 20 years hence from climate change. When people can’t sell their houses because the banks won’t give a mortgage to the buyer then the light will dawn.
4) I am surprised by the interest in weather forecasts. When I try to note the geopolitical gale force winds and rip currents hitting NOAA/Climate Science I get criticized. It is as if I suggest someone with a house on a Florida beach turn on the TV for the hurricane forecast and they stick their fingers in their ear and go “Off Topic Off Topic Off Topic…”
DW: If anyone wants to know today’s weather they can simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is.
BPL: Great! And how will they tell tomorrow’s weather, which may also bear on their plans? Crystal ball?
Don Williams “ I don’t hear a loud outcry from 340 million Americans that their forecasts might lose some accuracy. If anyone wants to know today’s weather they can simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is.”
So your MAGA message to the families who will lose loved ones caught by hurricanes, tornadoes or rapidly spreading wildfires: will be
“ simply stand with your back to the wind and hold out your left arm to point to where the low pressure is.“. (c) Don Williams
Are you a MAGA convert, or you were always like that?
@Piotr
People die in hurricanes because they don’t evacuate to inland even though the warning signs appear 36 hours in advance: https://sciencestruck.com/warning-signs-of-approaching-hurricane Weather forecasts are merely stating the obvious. People die in tornedos because they don’t have a tornedo shelter beneath their house even though the need is well known. Weather forecast does nothing to help them—and tornedo weather is obvious. The News Media ghost stories on weather forecasts will have little influence on the US voters.
@Nigel Jones said: “Despite your view that this interest rate[on US federal debt] is excessively high America is not having difficulty paying this interest. Debt and interest on the debt becomes unsustainably high in 20 years if present trend continue.”
My response:
1) The Penn Wharton Budget Model on US federal debt –that you cite — is deceitful claptrap. Which raises the question of where are the $Trillions for the renewable energy transition coming from?
2) Starting with Penn Wharton’s first assumption:
“The U.S. “public debt outstanding” of $33.2 trillion often cited by media is largely misleading, as it includes $6.8 trillion that the federal government “owes itself” due to trust fund and other accounting. The economics profession has long focused on “debt held by the public”, currently equal to about 98 percent of GDP at $26.3 trillion, for assessing its effects on the economy.”
3) The Financial Report of the United States Government says its liabilities also include an additional $15.033 Trillion in Federal Employee and Veterans Benefits, raising total debt to $39.884 Trillion.
https://fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/financial-report/nation-by-the-numbers.html
4) In addition, it notes that Social Insurance Net Expenditures (Social Security, Medicare, etc) are $78 TRILLION in the hole – future benefits being that much greater than what will be collected from young workers’ payroll taxes. See bottom of above ref plus following: https://fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/financial-report/statements-of-social-insurance.html#table1 However the US Government does not consider those liabilities because the Supreme Court has said that Social Security and Medicare are Ponzi schemes – that workers have to pay into them for decades but that the government has no legal requirement to pay anything back out to them when the workers retire.
5) So good news is that Gavin’s retirement is secure. The rest of you guys– not so much. Heh heh
6) The UPenn study also fails to mention NIIP – what we owe to foreigners minus what they owe to us. In 2006 we were $1.6 Trillion in the hole – and in less than 20 years our net debt to foreigners has plunged to $23.6 Trillion. Aside from $4 Trillion? in US Treasuries that debt is in addition to the federal debt.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IIPUSNETIQ/
7) Look at the dollar price of Gold – from $1600 to $3000+. Gold is not gaining in value – the dollar is losing value. Hence the desperate DOGE cuts to NOAA and other government agencies.
Don Williams
“The Penn Wharton Budget Model on US federal debt –that you cite — is deceitful claptrap.”
I don’t think so. It calculates various debt trajectories based on as starting point of debt of 26 trillion last year which is about 100% of gdp. The liabilities and social security payments that you list are ongoing they don’t all apply as a debt RIGHT NOW. They will add to debt over the coming years. The model would have included this in their debt calculations where debt reaches 200% of gdp in about 20 years (according to them, and this is the danger point)
I do think you’re correct there’s a deficit and debt problem and demographic changes aren’t going to help this, so something has to change. It’s a question of what. I would suggest the government cancel the Trump tax cuts. Increase taxes on multi millionaires. This will hugely reduce the deficit. The Last Trump tax cut achieved very little economic benefit. Government should stop subsidising so many things. Then you don’t need draconian cuts to essential basic government services like NOAA or the EPA or critical social security programmes.
Don Williams: “ People die in hurricanes because they don’t evacuate to inland even though the warning signs appear ”
Don’t change the subject, Mr. Williams – you were NOT ridiculing the people who deliberately ignore the hurricane and tornado warnings that could have saved – you were trying to discredit the value of the extreme weather warmings produced by the The National Weather Service (NWS), which gutting you are promoting, by suggesting that don’t have to rely on NWS forecasts, but:
“ can simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is” (c) Don Williams
Therefore, the Mad King, his Hand – Musk, and the MAGA supporters like you cheering them on – all you – will have the blood of the Americans who died because they could no longer get or could no longer trust the extreme weather warnings – on your hands.
But the MAGA will dismiss their tragedy and its culpability – with barely hidden contempt toward the victims a la – a modern version of the “Let them eat cake” advice:
“ simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is” (c) Don Williams
That comment may well be the most fatuous single example from DW’s pen. People do like to know more than today’s weather, and if the “put your back to the wind and then consult the barometer” method were actually all you needed, we’d hardly have bothered to do anything in meteorology since 1900, if not much earlier. Per an online website analysis tool, Weather.com received over 800 million visits in February.
Don, let me suggest that you go point your arm at the nearest low!
More Than 150 ‘Unprecedented’ Climate Disasters Struck World in 2024, Says WMO.
PS to Nigel, Piotr and Barton
1) Forgot to mention re weather forecasts: https://phys.org/news/2025-03-fully-ai-driven-weather-accurate.html
“A new AI weather prediction system, Aardvark Weather, can deliver accurate forecasts tens of times faster and using thousands of times less computing power than current AI and physics-based forecasting systems, according to research published in Nature ****
****The weather forecasts that people rely upon are currently generated through a complex set of stages, each taking several hours to run on bespoke supercomputers. Aside from daily usage, the development, maintenance and deployment of these complex systems requires significant time and large teams of experts.****
**** The new model takes in observations from satellites, weather stations and other sensors and outputs both global and local forecasts. This fully AI-driven approach means that predictions are now achievable in minutes on a desktop computer.
When using just 10% of the input data of existing systems, Aardvark already outperforms the United States national GFS forecasting system on many variables and it is also competitive with United States Weather Service forecasts that use input from dozens of weather models and analysis by expert human forecasters.”
2) NOAA should not rely on the ignorant Ivy Leaguers at the New York Times –and the unemployed humanities majors on Democrat blogs — to market NOAA’s value to US voters. That is not a good strategy –just ask Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. NOAA’s Rainfall Atlas 15 is a more useful sell.
Maybe you guys need to get out more often.
Don Williams told us previously that theres no no problem cutting weather forecasting at NOAA because there’s no need for weather forecasting because people can “just put their hand outside a window, or buy a small barometer, or look at the waves in the ocean.” (DW @ 17 March, 19 March, and 21 March). This wont give you much information about what storms will do and doesn’t sound terribly appropriate in a warming world with increasingly bad weather.
He now tells us about an allegedly great new AI weather forecasting system reported in the publication Nature, having told us we don’t need weather forecasting. I wish he would get his story consistent.
“Maybe you guys need to get out more often.”
40+ years as professional meteorologist speaking here. What’s yours? (crickets chirping) Yeah, thought so.
You have no absolutely clue about how models are used. Or how forecasts are made using multiple models. Furthermore, Aardvark is not in the public domain as is the GFS, ICON, UKMET, the CMC, the NSSL models, etc.
Note the quote: “…we are particularly indebted to ECMWF for their ERA5 dataset, which is essential for training Aardvark.”. Gee, guess what is among the data that goes into the ERA5 dataset? Radiosondes. As in the ones launched at 00z and 12z everyday from NWS sites and others around the world.
1) Hmmm. According to the journal NATURE:
“Machine learning is transforming numerical weather prediction (NWP) by replacing the numerical solver with neural networks, improving the speed and accuracy of the forecasting component of the prediction pipeline 1,2,3,4,5,6.
However, current models rely on numerical systems at initialisation and to produce local forecasts, limiting their achievable gains. Here we show that a single machine learning model can replace the entire NWP pipeline.
Aardvark Weather, an end-to-end data-driven weather prediction system, ingests observations and produces global gridded forecasts and local station forecasts. The global forecasts outperform an operational NWP baseline for multiple variables and lead times.
The local station forecasts are skillful up to ten days lead time, competing with a post-processed global NWP baseline and a state-of-the-art end-to-end forecasting system with input from human forecasters. End-to-end tuning further improves the accuracy of local forecasts.
Our results show that skillful forecasting is possible without relying on NWP at deployment time, which will enable the full speed and accuracy benefits of data-driven models to be realised.
We believe Aardvark Weather will be the starting point for a new generation of end-to-end models that will reduce computational costs by orders of magnitude, and enable rapid, affordable creation of customised models for a range of end-users.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08897-0
2) Sounds to me like your expensive NWP models are obsolete—although the Aardvark developers acknowledge past achievements just as we acknowledge the contributions Archimedes and Galileo made to science.
3) Or is NATURE wrong? My understanding from Ray Ladbury is that NATURE is one of the lofty Peer-Reviewed science journals that ensure Climate Scientists do not ..er. make things up.
4) I think many US voters will not view weather forecasts as an essential good nor agonize over the accuracy. The ignorant urban dwellers who do depend on tech crutches will race to adopt the latest hi-tech solution, esp if Apple can make it run on an Iphone.
5) Of course weather data has to be collected — that means releasing balloons twice a day at 92? NWS locations. Most of them at CONUS airports? Does inflating and releasing the balloon require a PhD? Or even a Bachelor’s degree?
Don Williams, you are trying to justify the current DOGE cuts to NOAA weather forecasting on the basis of some new AI weather model that is still theoretical, isn’t in use yet, hasn’t been tested in the real world, and which has unclear impacts on jobs. Do you understand how crazy that is?
Don Williams:
1) “Hmmm. According to the journal NATURE. […] Is NATURE wrong?”
Nature is right – wrong you are – the article in Nature does not mean what you think it means.
As several people had already explained to you in this thread. Which you, of course, were utterly incapable to understand either. Like Don Trump, like Don Williams:
“ If anyone wants to know today’s weather they can simply stand with their back to the wind and hold out their left arm to point to where the low pressure is.” (c) Don Williams.
Now go away or we shall taunt you with your own words some more.
1) You guys explain nothing. You evade discussing major facts by levying slurs at anyone who tries. Including editing their comments in a dishonest way — e.g in the above citation leaving out my statement about checking a barometer for changes.
2) Any sailor will recognize the truth of what I said. So your “taunt” will reflect more on your lack of knowledge than on mine.
Don Williams,
A home barometer is not an adequate substitute for a proper professional weather forecast. A home barometer only tells me the air pressure locally and whether its changed since yesterday indicating we might have stormy or fine weather coming, in a very general sense. Weather forecasts are far superior because they tell me details of the weather for the next couple of days including how fine or stormy it will be, numbers on rainfall intensity and patterns during the day, wind intensity. It informs me in my local area and for the whole country. You also get a slightly less detailed forecast for the next ten days or so.
This helps people plan everything from work to exercise to travel to exploration. There is no comparison to a baromoter. Saying all we need is a barometer because ships used to rely purely on a barometer. This is like saying they used to navigate by eyeballing the stars so by your logic a sextant or gps is a waste of time. Now of course you would be right that sometimes humans invent things that dont add any significant value,, but are you really going to argue weather forecasts fall into that category? Because I would have thought the exact opposite.
Home weather stations cost at least $300 for anything remotely decent. Without weather forecasts everyone would have to buy one. Assuming there are about one million homes in America that is $300 million. You would get a lot of professional equipment for that money. Moral of the story weather forecasts are a good thing and shouldn’t be cut form NOAA.
Regarding the new AI weather model and why its not a reason to cut jobs, and why this should be apparent from the Nature article. My understanding is the Nature article indicates that the AI model is a new weather model that improves accuracy and speed but it still required the same data to be collected and prepared and extracted and presented, so it doesn’t appear to reduce the need for staff very much, if at all. In any event you don’t cut staff until the model is in use. Obvious surely.
There may be some genuine overstaffing of government departments in the sense of more people than is needed to do the prescribed jobs. This would be genuine waste. but Musk has presented exactly zero proof of this. His cuts are just his personal opinion on what is waste and don’t make any sense to me or pretty much anyone else.
Of course the MAGA people love seeing the establishment get attacked because Trump has goaded them to hate the establishment – he loves the uneducated and easily manipulated- but the MAGA crowd are clearly having some second thoughts now that reality of the cuts is coming into sharp focus.
Don Williams: 1) You guys explain nothing.
No, it is you, Don Williams, who are either incapable to understand anything, or unable to accept anything that questions your MAGA orthodoxy – applies to both our posts and to the Nature paper which in your ignorance your believe supports your MAGA ideology:
1. Your Aardvark IS not a silver bullet that would replace the need for NOAA.
2. And even Most Artificially Intelligent – needs the current data to validate the models – the data collected by the people from NWS and NOAA – your Orange God and his Musk have been cutting out, alongside air-traffic controllers, nuclear safety experts or ebola research. Who are the MAGA people who thought this would be a good idea to eliminate those?
Musk intern, known by his handle: “Big Balls” ? So much for the MAGA declared era of competence.
You, with your modest proposal for the improvement in the hurricane and tornado warnings:
simply stand with [your] back to the wind and hold out [your] left arm to point to where the low pressure is.”
(c) MAGA expert on climate and meteorology, Don Williams
you would fit in Musk/Trump crew – right in. Next to “Big Balls”, I presume?
Do something, do everything you can and more to stop the destruction of public services, the common good and the major contributions of US public science to the world. Unite to Save NOAA rally took place on March 20th, I was there with hundreds of people who do not accept to go back! Science and democracy are co-dependent, we must protect them both.
“The American people count on NOAA’s weather forecasting, seafood safety inspections and protection of our fisheries for sport and commercial fishermen,” said Representative Jamie Raskin. “Without the National Weather Service, the forecast for America is cloudy with a 15% chance of fascism. That’s why we rallied outside NOAA’s headquarters in Silver Spring: we’re defending science, facts and democracy itself. The thousands of federal workers illegally sacked from NOAA by DOGE must be allowed to resume their vitally important jobs — not just get paid for them, which is ridiculous. Trump, Elon Musk and MAGA should know that Congress and the people created NOAA and we’re not letting it go down to their plutocrat games.”
“NOAA has been a leader internationally in weather, therefore the World Meteorological Organization does what NOAA does. Weather-Ready Nation came from NOAA and is now an international enterprise, an international activity,” said Craig McLean, Former Director of NOAA Research. “Every advancement that has been going on internationally in global ocean science came out of here. It came out of the United States, it came out of the agency that is responsible for integrated ocean science all around the world, and that’s NOAA. When the United States surrenders its leadership in science, you wind up losing.”
https://ccanactionfund.org/hundreds-of-dmv-activists-linked-arms-to-protect-noaa-headquarters-in-protest-against-job-cuts/
When I give credit for research results, I will make it a point that this Trump administration had no part — funding or otherwise — to support it. That will be the truth.
According to this AP article, NOAA is only reducing their workforce by 10%. That is not a deep cut. Unpleasant for those who get the axe for sure, but probably a great thing for the organization – assuming they lay off those least qualified.
https://apnews.com/article/noaa-job-cuts-weather-forecasts-trump-doge-musk-7e35e9d5d757d8fc3f0f50b2bd71c87d
Democrats are making a lot of noise about nothing, AS USUAL.
KIA: NOAA is only reducing their workforce by 10%. That is not a deep cut.
BPL: We need some blood for another patient, so we’re going to take 10% of your blood. That is not a deep cut.
[Response: Also, the cuts so far (of the probationary employees) are totally random – worse because you tend to hire new people to do things you critically need. The claim that every single probationary employee was a poor performer is transparent nonsense. Meanwhile, sonde launches are being curtailed. – gavin]
1) But WHY are radiosonde launches being curtailed? I ask not to debate a point but out of genuine curiosity.
2) They have been halted at 8 locations out of 92? IF they are so vital — and if NOAA still has 10,000 employees — then why are none being sent to the 8 locations to launch the balloons? It takes –what? — half an hour to do a launch? Then 10 minutes to process and send the data later? And the job doesn’t look particularly skilled to me:
https://www.weather.gov/ama/upperair2
https://www.weather.gov/ama/upperair3
1) This is the result of critically low staffing at NWS offices. If there is only one person in the office, they can’t commit to that person being outside to launch a balloon when there are other inside duties to perform. The people who formerly had a dedicated job that included balloon launches, observations, answering the phone, and other combined duties, have been reduced gradually for years. Now, they are increasingly cutting into forecast positions, too.
2) Locations that do balloon launches are typically in semi-rural or rural areas, where the NWS office is not co-located with any other agencies. They don’t occur during normal work hours except in the Pacific time zone. (Launches are timed for 00UTC and 12UTC worldwide.) You have to pass a certification test and be a federal employee. Filling in from other NOAA agencies, if they exist in the area, would mean taking somebody off their regular job, having them commute to a remote location and back at odd hours, and sharing a budget between different NOAA agencies. When everyone is under pressure to cut budgets and positions at the same time, you won’t find surplus NOAA employees to fulfill this duty.
DW: IF they are so vital — and if NOAA still has 10,000 employees — then why are none being sent to the 8 locations to launch the balloons?
BPL: Because they have other jobs to do which may be equally vital?
DW: It takes –what? — half an hour to do a launch? Then 10 minutes to process and send the data later? And the job doesn’t look particularly skilled to me:
BPL: A radiosonde typically takes two hours for its ascent. I Googled that and got the answer in literally two seconds.
But the radiosonde and receiver software are doing the work — the NWS site I cited indicated maybe 2-5 minutes of human work after launch. Checking initial data and then sending the received data at two intervals.
NOAA might be able to get a local teenager to do the work for $25 a day plus some weed.
https://cw3e.ucsd.edu/cw3e-conducts-radiosonde-launch-with-ucsd-earthlab-high-school-students/
https://eclipse.montana.edu/education/science-course/sci-lesson11.html
DW: NOAA might be able to get a local teenager to do the work for $25 a day plus some weed.
JP: Quite a pipe dream you’re having there. And the contents of that pipe are probably something illegal to have at a federal workplace, let alone pay somebody with.
DW: The NWS site I cited indicated maybe 2-5 minutes of human work after launch.
JP: Nearly all the work is BEFORE the launch. It has to happen in good weather and bad, year around. Have you ever tried jockeying metal objects such as a heavy tank of high-pressure hydrogen when it’s -17F (-27C), and then tying off a balloon nozzle bare handed? I have. It’s an educational experience, all right. Overall, hydrogen is dangerous enough that you have to be certified to do it in the NWS, and it’s not something you would want an unsupervised teenager screwing around with. Better not wear any platinum jewelry when you’re filling the balloon, either.
in Re to John Pollack, 31 Mar 2025 at 8:01 PM,
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2025/03/we-need-noaa-now-more-than-ever/#comment-831545
Hallo John,
It is true that fine particles of platinum group metals glow in contact with hydrogen. I observed it myself when I worked with Pt hydrogenation catalysts.
I have, however, not heard yet that a danger could arise also from hydrogen contact with a compact platinum object with a smooth surface. Are precautions such as avoiding Pt jewelry indeed recommended for workers handling with pressurized hydrogen?
Greetings
Tomáš
Hello Tomáš
Not wearing platinum jewelry when filling balloons with hydrogen was perhaps an unnecessary precaution. We were very careful around hydrogen. If I recall correctly, the tanks we used were compressed to over 100 bar when full. There were a lot of possibilities for a bad accident.
In Re to John Pollack, 2 Apr 2025 at 8:56 PM,
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2025/03/we-need-noaa-now-more-than-ever/#comment-831805
Hallo John,
I fully agree that adhering to prescribed safety rules at work with pressurized gases is essential. Hydrogen is specific because its inversion temperature of Joule-Thomson effect is below normal temperature. In combination with hydrogen flammability, Joule-Thompson heating during hydrogen expansion through narrow orifices may contribute to a spontaneous ignition of the escaping gas in case that it mixes with air.
Interestingly, although the conditions increasing the risk of the spontaneous hydrogen ignition in case of a sudden hydrogen release from pressurized systems are studied for more than 100 years, it appears that the complexity of the process is not fully understood yet:
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930084765
https://h2tools.org/sites/default/files/2019-08/paper_39.pdf
Anyway, I appreciate your original remark. It was a good reminder that very different safety issues linked to handling with pressurized hydrogen shall be kept into consideration.
Greetings
Tomáš
Don Williams: ” 1) But WHY are radiosonde launches being curtailed?”
Are you playing dumb? Because Trump and Musk are NOT about making the government more efficient – the name of DOGE is an Orwellian exercise in the same tradition as “Ministry of Peace” and “Ministry of Truth”. The goal is one – hack as much of the government work force –
the effects to Americans and the world be damned – that’s why to somebody in DOGE it sounded like a great idea to fire the nuclear safety specialists, air-traffic controllers, or the funding for the research on Ebola. Musk and his Merry Men are judged by Trump by one criterion – the amount of money they “saved” for the tax cuts for corporations and the billionaires when the results of their cuts cause American deaths – they won’t be around to answer for it,
DW: “why are none being sent to the 8 locations to launch the balloons?”
Because they have own jobs they are responsible for, and using Gavin for the low-skill labour would have been the OPPOSITE of the efficiency your Musk and Trump are in their declarations about.
And assuming that being a MAGA troll is not your full time job – what would you think if your boss, to increase the profit margin – fired half of the cleaners, and asked you to get away from your computer and drive to another town at 5 am to clean the toilets there?
Would you thank profusely your boss for making sure that your professional skills are used in the most effective way?
BS. For a staggering example of high competence, I give you Zack Labe.
https://zacklabe.com/arctic-sea-ice-figures/
It’s hard to understand why you are promoting your ignorance at a site dedicated to science.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. Mark Twain
KIA says: “According to this AP article, NOAA is only reducing their workforce by 10%. That is not a deep cut.”
This is false. From the article: “The new cuts come after earlier rounds of Trump administration firings and encouraged retirements at NOAA, plus the elimination of nearly all new employees last month. After this upcoming round of cuts, NOAA will have eliminated about one out of four jobs since President Donald Trump took office in January.” This is a 25% cut. And nothing in the article says it will be the last.
KIA – The article you referenced said that it’s a 10% reduction so far, but they are aiming for 25%.
There is now a gaping hole in the rawinsonde observations in the central U.S., brought on by short-staffing.
DW – It takes a human to launch a balloon. You have to pass a test, and volunteers aren’t allowed – not that you’d find many wanting to launch every day at 5 am during the winter. It would be interesting to see what the AI program you keep bringing up would do with this situation. It was undoubtedly trained on a data set in which the balloon observations were available. AI programs are known for making stuff up when they can’t find them, and the results are often “creative.”
John Pollack said:
If we aren’t going to get new data for, say QBO measurements, from balloons, we will have to at least deal with the data we already have. There’s more than enough there to do further work with cross-validation of models against the historical data — at least 70 years worth of monthly readings.
Since AI is mentioned, how can AI help with understanding QBO, which by most accounts is still a mystery? Yesterday, I prompted ChatGPT with this prompt
It answered in part with:
https://chatgpt.com/share/67e34488-7ecc-8005-91c2-10ec862ea7c8
Interesting that it came up with that suggestion, which is in support of a QBO model that I have been proposing and cross-validating with historical data for several years now.
In the full blown scientific breakthrough sense, this is the way that AI was intended to help. So the full reasoning stages for letting loose emergent knowledge is (1) LLMs such as ChatGPT for hypothesis generation, (2) deep learning for pattern recognition, and (3) symbolic regression for equation discovery.
LLMs such as ChatGPT are the apps that will weed through the vast scientific literature that already exists, and then make the connections of what paths to pursue. After that, more brute force AI — steps (2) and (3). I’ve been doing exactly that, and more people should follow that lead. Practically speaking, it doesn’t take a lot of funding for computational resources.
I’m certainly not in support of the cuts in funding for satellites and personnel, but when life gives you lemons, you should know what to do with the lemons.
Paul Pukite: “ If we aren’t going to get new data for, say QBO measurements, from balloons, we will have to at least deal with the data we already have. There’s more than enough there to do further work with cross-validation of models against the historical data – at least 70 years worth of monthly readings.”
NOBODY is discussing here cross-validation of the models of your QBO (Quasi-biennial Oscillation?), Mr. Pukite. The discussion is about the short-term weather forecast – such as in “predicting the pathway and likely strength of the incoming hurricane”, or “issuing tornado warning for later this afternoon in a given area or not”.
For THAT – your monthly readings of your QBO measurements from say 1956 – are of little use.
Let me work on the fundamentals every time. The equatorial QBO apparently has a correlation with the polar vortex, and that is what drives much of the northern hemisphere variability,
Hot of the press https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/25/3465/2025/ “The joint effect of mid-latitude winds and the westerly quasi-biennial oscillation phase on the Antarctic stratospheric polar vortex and ozone” :
“The quasi-biennial oscillation (QBO) is a dominant mode of interannual variability in the tropical stratosphere (Lindzen and Holton, 1968; Andrews and McIntyre, 1976; Baldwin et al., 2001; Anstey and Shepherd, 2014; Yamashita et al., 2018; Rao et al., 2019, 2020a, 2023a). It is a quasi-periodic oscillation of the equatorial zonal wind between easterlies and westerlies in the tropical stratosphere, with a mean period of approximately 28 months (Lindzen and Holton, 1968; Andrews and McIntyre, 1976; Baldwin et al., 2001). The QBO plays a crucial role in influencing atmospheric circulation and chemical species outside the tropical stratosphere (Holton and Tan, 1980; Ruti et al., 2006; Garfinkel and Hartmann, 2011; Yamashita et al., 2015; Gray et al., 2018; Rao et al., 2019, 2020a, b, c; Zhang et al., 2021). Holton and Tan (1980) proposed that the QBO can modify upwardly propagating planetary waves by altering the zero-wind line in the stratosphere, which further affects the extratropical waveguide (Baldwin et al., 2001; Anstey and Shepherd, 2014; Zhang et al., 2019). During the westerly QBO phase (WQBO), the zero-wind line of the zonal-mean zonal wind shifts equatorward. This causes planetary waves to be reflected away from high latitudes, leading to a strengthened stratospheric polar vortex by reducing wave-driven disturbances in the polar regions.”
PP.: Let me work on the fundamentals every time. The equatorial QBO apparently has a correlation with the polar vortex, and that is what drives much of the northern hemisphere variability ”
– P: Your “A” is irrelevant to the discussed subject (“B”)
– Paul Pukite: Let me work on the fundamentals of “A” every time.
=============== for reference – the original =======
P. “NOBODY is discussing here cross-validation of the models of your QBO (Quasi-biennial Oscillation?), Mr. Pukite. The discussion is about the short-term weather forecast – such as in “predicting the pathway and likely strength of the incoming hurricane”, or “issuing tornado warning for later this afternoon in a given area or not”. For THAT – your monthly readings of QBO measurements from say 1956 – are of little use. ”
===============
Just ignore Piotr.
He has a bug up his butt when it comes to fundamental climate research.
Considering that I’m not dependent on federal funding now, I recall when a team that I was research lead on got $5 mil in funding from DOE through a DARPA grant. The goal was on applying AI (in general) for doing environmental modeling to be used in a library setting. It was all open science, meant for general use:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283579370_C2M2L_Final_Report
That was fun, largely because there wasn’t always some stick in the mud like Piotr screaming across the cubicles that it was all so pointless.
Can you imagine that happening at your work?
But I keep commenting here so that if others are interested they can join in — such as at the Azimuth Project forum. Examples or modeling all the climate indices here: https://github.com/orgs/azimuth-project/discussions/17#discussioncomment-12621276
Cheers!
Paul Pukite: “ Just ignore Piotr”
When the going gets tough, the tough … get going ? ;-) What else can you do, Mr. Pukite, when you can’t counter (or perhaps even understand) my simple arguments?
1. discussion is about the effect of firing of the NWS personnel releasing radiosondes would have on the accuracy of the SHORT-TERM WEATHER predictions
2. Paul Pukite joins the discsussion, assuring that we don’t have to worry about these cuts, because we still have .. historic MONTHLY readings from the last 70 years that we can use to model … QBO (Quasi-biennial Oscillation)
3. I point that historic MONTHLY data for QBO are USELESS for calibration of the operational forecasting the weather IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.
4. Paul Pukite, unable to grasp the diffrence between the subject of the discussion he joined – weather forecast for the next few days – and studying past biennial oscillations replies with:
PP: “ [Piotr] has a bug up his butt when it comes to fundamental climate research.”
PP: ” some stick in the mud like Piotr screaming across the cubicles”
Those who can, counter the arguments. Those who can’t – try to discredit the messanger.
Paul Pukite – everyone.
As we all know, Piotr just likes to argue in the rhetorical sense.
In the past, when I have brought up some interesting piece of research in the context of this site, he will jump on it and claim it doesn’t have any relationship to long-term climate change — which he claims is the ostensible primary rationale for RealClimate.com. But looky here — now he claims that my interest in radiosondes for intermediate time-scale understanding has no relevance for short-term weather prediction!
Piotr is what one would call the fly in the ointment. — an irritation that can be dealt with, but just annoying to have to waste time over.
An anecdote related to QBO, is that one scientist that has studied QBO extensively, since the late 1970’s in fact — Tim Dunkerton — recently posted a tweet whereby he claims “The climate scam has set back atmospheric sciences by ~50 years”. Of course I take issue with that assertion, but put the shoe on the other foot and realize that it has been that many years and perhaps longer that anyone has been able to make heads or tails out of the source for QBO velocity phase reversals (and thus any accurate prediction of polar vortex changes).
I have started a PubPeer review of a recent Dunkerton paper on the QBO where I challenge the foundations of whatever weak consensus that exists. https://pubpeer.com/publications/E27F0929E64D90C32E9358889CC80F
Of course Dunkerton has refused to engage and defend his paper on PubPeer, as he prefers the wasteland of X.
Paul Pukite 30 Mar 2025 at 1:16 AM “Just ignore Piotr.”
Later in the same post:
P. Pukite: – “He has a bug up his butt”
– “some stick in the mud like Piotr screaming across the cubicles”
Later on the same day:
P. Pukite: “- Piotr just likes to argue in the rhetorical sense.”
– “he will jump on it and claim it doesn’t have any relationship to long-term climate change”
– “Piotr is what one would call the fly in the ointment.”
– “But looky here — now he claims that my interest in radiosondes for intermediate time-scale understanding has no relevance for short-term weather prediction!”
Make up your mind Pukite – you can’t make a virtue out of how you proudly ignore me AND after that go on and on about me. You can’t be a virgin only on Mondays.
I am not interested in your “the full blown scientific breakthroughs” – from your inability to understand even simple arguments, from the massive gaps in your logic, your undiscplined mind drifting onto tangents, and your complete inability of critical introspection – I doubt you will ever produce anything worthwhile. That’s why challenge your inferioriry complex leads you into bed with deniers, who appreaciate:
– your attempts to divert interest and funding away from the global climatological TREND in T and toward your interests in the shorter term … oscillations around the mean ^1
– your arrogant, contemptuous attacks on Gavin Schmidt and his collegues ^2
– your minimizing the effects of the MAGA cuts to NOAA and NWS (this thread)^3
===
^1: Paul Pukite, claiming the reserach into AGW pretty much achieved all it could and now the reserach interest and funding should be redirected toward ENSO – justifying it with the promise that a better prediction of the timing of the onset of the next EL Nino … “ can save COUNTLESS LIVES“, and when I asked you for providing the plausible mechanisms for doing so – tried to sve his face with going into …semantics – that by “saving COUNTLESS LIVES” obviously he DIDN’T mean saving “very many” lives
^2 Paul Pukite – in response to our host, Gavin Schmidt, quantifying the contribution of the solar cycle in his explanation of the 2023 and 2024 hot weather:
“ That’s embarrassing to mention sunspots. Attributing solar sunspot cycles to climate variation is the equivalent of prescribing Ivermectin to a medical condition. Perhaps worse because you guys claim to understand the physics. (c) Paul Pukite
^3 In the current discussion of the effects of the MAG cuts to the radiosondes would have on the accuracy of the short-term weather forecasts and hurricane/tornado warning – Paul Pukite wrote join to write that the firings of the NWS personnel collecting these data …. is not a problem for him because … quasi-biennal oscillation studies that can use monthly reading from the last 70 years. No wonder that the only person in this thread who supported our P.Pukite here was a MAGA denier Don Williams, an enthusiastic supporter of Trump firings.
By their bedfellows you shall know them …
Actually, the QBO is a good behavior for studying anomalies. It has shown anomalies in 2015/2016 and in 2019/2020, and then there’s the anomaly of stratospheric water vapor from the Hunga Tonga volcanic eruption in 2022 that hasn’t been fully reconciled yet. The high levels of H2O hasn’t destroyed the oscillation, but the phasing is apparently so dependent on altitude/pressure that who knows what will shake out if the high quality radiosonde-based data collection is not itself terminated.
I started a comment at the ATTP blog on how machine learning could be applied on the QBO data https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2025/03/16/reaping-the-whirlwind#comment-223214
In spite of Piotr’s likely protestations, let me just say that it is such a good commentary on the state of climate science analysis that I want to reiterate it here.
Consider that when a behavior of a time series that results in Fourier sidebands of a suppressed carrier with the carrier frequency matching that of an external source, it has to be modulation of the external frequency by another signal. That’s basic signal processing deduction and has been known in artificial data such as FM and AM radio for decades, and remarkably this same sideband behavior is happening in a natural signal, the QBO. Yet, ever since Richard Lindzen published his model of the QBO, the focus has been on some internal resonance defining the cycling, with the typical claim that density and pressure determine the resonant frequency, as in a Brunt–Väisälä frequency, or that it could be some self-organizing behavior determining the periodic overturning. But of course this resonant class of behavior would not display sidebands. Only some externally forced modulation could do that. I offered up tidal forces as a matching frequency, as that had originally been proposed by Lindzen in his early papers, but he could not match the period directly from tidal harmonic.s, so he quickly gave up on that (can find that out in at least two of his papers). Alas, he gave up too soon, because they are sidebands on the annual carrier! He never considered that.
Now, could some form of machine learning deduce this from the info I presented at the above link, via a combination of symbolic regression (to find the critical Fourier component pattern of sidebands) and an LLM to infer relationships? Or does this all have to be nudged along by the physics as I have described?
I published the basics back in late 2018, but it hasn’t been cited elsewhere. Will it take a machine learning discovery of this same signal processing pattern for it to drum up some interest? As it stands I can prompt an LLM such as ChatGPT or Gemini and it does an excellent job of paraphrasing what I have already published. That’s because the LLM training actually reads the scientific literature and actually tries to make sense (in the usual non-sentient sense) of what has been presented. That’s perhaps more than one can say about would-be scientists such as Piotr, who just write knee-jerk rhetorical responses, apparently as a means to gatekeep the status quo in climate science. Yet Piotr should realize that with science & technology. no amount of gatekeeping will work, as scientific truths can not be bottled up forever. They will eventually emerge, and as Max Planck said, it just may take a funeral or two — “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” . Replace the “new generation” with LLM and AI in general as keepers of the truth and it will be interesting to watch how scientific breakthroughs and further understanding unfold. Piotr can try to stand there like Hans Brinker with his finger in the dike trying to prevent progress, but we all know from the history of scientific advancement that’s a hopeless task.
We need NOAA to support climate science, but more than anything, we need ideas to advance our understanding. My contents above refer to QBO, but also consider that there is still no consensus on ENSO behavior., as this recent submitted paper points out => “Is ENSO a damped or a self-sustained oscillation?” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2504.05513
This explanation is contradicted by the following: (1) The autocorrelation in the ENSO signal shows a very strong annual periodicity and (2) the ENSO frequency spectrum is folded about 0.5/year, indicating that the annual cycle is driving ENSO, and thus producing sidebands. This occurs even after the annual cyclic signal is filtered out, thus definitely ruling out a self-sustained oscillation, and any damped resonance is a characteristic of the forcing response.
from the charts in: https://geoenergymath.com/2019/02/16/autocorrelation-of-enso-power-spectrum/
(1) Not the strong annual periodicity in ENSO autocorrelation — This suggests that the ENSO system has a tight coupling with the seasonal cycle, not just as a boundary condition but as a core driver of variability.
(2) Note the spectral folding in ENSO around 0.5 cycles/year (i.e., the annual cycle) — This is a hallmark of nonlinear interaction with a periodic driver, leading to sidebands (e.g., sum (+) and difference (-) frequencies about the carrier frequency). Even when the annual component is removed, the fingerprint of its influence remains, which implies structural dependence on the annual forcing. See Double-Sideband Suppressed-Carrier Modulation https://geoenergymath.com/2020/05/17/double-sideband-suppressed-carrier-modulation-vs-triad/
The interpretation is that these features strongly support a forced-damped view of ENSO, where the observed variability (including irregularity and multi-year cycles) is primarily the response of a damped oscillator driven by seasonal forcing, not an internally sustained oscillation. My model of course is of a tidal forcing origin, as with the QBO where the tidal factor is very clear.
Model fitting and especially nonlinear model fitting is ambiguous (https://geoenergymath.com/2021/12/15/the-harmonics-generator-of-the-ocean/) and tends to bias toward damped interpretations (there is always friction) , but observational features, especially those tied to the annual cycle, clearly indicate ENSO is a forced, damped oscillator. The “self-sustained” hypothesis may remain theoretically possible for certain models — if the resonant frequency fortuitously was also annual, for example — but is empirically ruled out by signal characteristics like spectral folding and persistent seasonal coherence a la autocorrelation.
Those interested can always interact with an LLM such as ChatGPT, DeepSeek, Claude, Copilot, or Gemini and note how it can expand one’s understanding , especially in terms of bringing in signal processing concepts that an LLM would “understand” yet may not be widely known in climate science.
LOL Piotr, you practicing for a PhD defense in Rhetorical Sciences?
Oh well, here is more research analysis of QBO data based on up-to-date radiosonde data.
https://geoenergymath.com/2025/04/05/qbo-pattern-recognition-and-signal-processing/
I predict that this will be emergently discovered by machine learning at some point. I post it here because I can.
BTW, here is a BlueSky feed I am maintaining on Symbolic Regression
https://bsky.app/profile/pukite.com/feed/copernicus
@Paul Pukite
1) I have a question about your research as it applies to desertification.
( Ignore Piotr –in my opinion, he “discusses” nothing, he merely yells at people. Yells with little to no useful factual content, in my opinion. Look at his statements above prior to your first posting.)
2) JCM et al have suggested here that human changes to the landscape affects the climate as well as CO2 buildup. In other forums landscape changes have been discussed by scholars looking at climate changes from ancient times in places like the African Sahel. I am not an expert –my (amateur) interest is in ancient history and environmental disruptions to civilizations.
3) In the 1970s scholars thought removal of forests and vegetation caused a drying and shrinking of rainfall but some recent scholars have argued the cause was disruption to the Hadley cell from warmer sea surface temperatures due to CO2 global warming. https://rmets.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.49710142802
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6617823/
4) However, other scholars have argued that large scale vegetation changes by humans increase surface albedo:
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/earth-science/articles/10.3389/feart.2017.00004/full
“ In this paper, the termination of the AHP is reviewed with the perspective that humans are potentially effective agents for inducing large-scale changes in vegetation, which can, in turn, force the crossing of ecological tipping points”
5) This is somewhat outside your area but do you have any info or opinion on the issue (causes of desertification)?
Don Williams 31 Mar: on Piotr “ he merely yells at people. Yells with little to no useful factual content, in my opinion. ”
Let’s put that opinion to the test. The same paragraph:
DW: “ @Paul Pukite 1) I have a question about your research as it applies to desertification.
It doesn’t. ENSO is an OSCILLATION around the mean. Oscillations do NOT cause TRENDS (like: “desertification”). Ergo, PP’s ENSO research is not applicable in your denial of the AGW trend.
…. “ yelled Piotr, with little to no useful factual content [(c) Don William’s]
Keep at it Piotr.
From the nook “Late Victorian Holocausts: El Niño Famines and the Making of the Third World” by Mike Davis (2002)
The worst ever. I suppose thanks to Piotr for providing ammo for the introduction section of my next publication on climate cycles.
From a review
Several have pointed out the similarity of the recent warming spike to that of the 1877/1878 El Nino.
American academics seek exile as Trump attacks universities
Professors flee elite US institutions in the face of what many characterise as a direct assault on education and science
eg Earlier this month, France’s Aix Marseille university launched its “Safe Place for Science” campaign, earmarking €15mn to fund at least 15 American scientists, and quickly received several dozen applications from those it said were “considering scientific exile”. It has said efforts are under way for broader national and European support.
Even the rector of the Kyiv School of Economics posted an invitation on social media last week. The unspoken implication was that Ukraine — which is feeling the brunt of Russia’s full-scale invasion — might be a safer place for academics.
“If you’re an academic feeling uncertain or threatened, [we] would be delighted to welcome you.”
https://www.ft.com/content/541b1796-e747-46de-ac64-55264f298061
Summer Vacations on the Black Sea must sound delightful. With snow skiing in Sochi barely an hour away.
Poor Peru: “ Summer Vacations on the Black Sea must sound delightful. With snow skiing in Sochi barely an hour away.
Sochi is not in Ukraine. JD Vance school of geography, or a graduate of Trump University?
And the Trump induced brain-drain is America loss and our gain. What the oppresive regimes learned the hard way. But it’s not about what’s good for America, it’s all about what’s good for Trump:
“We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated”
DJ Trump