Feds cut funding to key science facility


MHz
#91
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

I'm all for people getting degrees to do jobs in their locales.

A full blown university course might be over the top, perhaps some training at the manufactures level for the specific equipment that is actually installed. They just collect and send the data they do not do the interpretation. Send a few 20 yr old high school grads down and one month or so they are fully qualified on the equipment.
 
L Gilbert
#92
Yeah ok. I took an electronics technology course in college. A month? lmao
 
Tonington
#93
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Why not move the camp to a full-time settlement and do the experiments from there, the operating costs would certainly come down and the locals could be taught most of the daily routines with just a few guys (trained scientist) to keep it running as intended.

Remote is what you want. Remote means no contamination of the data from nearby human settlements.
 
MHz
#94
ROFLMAO That would be at uour speed apparently if that is an example of your ability to read and understand in one swipe. one month or so"
 
Tonington
+1
#95
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

A full blown university course might be over the top, perhaps some training at the manufactures level for the specific equipment that is actually installed. They just collect and send the data they do not do the interpretation. Send a few 20 yr old high school grads down and one month or so they are fully qualified on the equipment.

So...remove the funding and the people who are trained to work there, only to turn around and train other people to do the same thing? Where's the logic in that?
 
MHz
#96
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Remote is what you want. Remote means no contamination of the data from nearby human settlements.

Then you better upgrade the village facilities to something from this century. Do they not know how to subtract that data? Drive 3 K on a skidoo and it is as prime as it gets not counting Polar Bear farts that is.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

So...remove the funding and the people who are trained to work there, only to turn around and train other people to do the same thing? Where's the logic in that?

My point was moving it to a place people already live at. that cuts the expenses (getting things there and then back out again), the $1.5M better not be the ****ing wages alone for a handful of people.
 
taxslave
#97
I only questioned the spending on the basis of are we getting value for the money or are we just creating government jobs? Ton came up with enough good reasons to persuade me that it should be kept. At least for now. Actually I am fairly impressed that this facility can be runby a government department for a million bucks a year. Unless there are hidden costs in some other budget.
 
Tonington
#98
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Then you better upgrade the village facilities to something from this century.

What are you on about? The facility is fine where it is. It is ideally located. Why do you think so many nations operate atmospheric research facilities in polar regions? It's not because of the balmy weather, it is because they are ideally situated. Three kilometers is not far enough when you're looking at aerosols in the atmosphere. Some days in PEI I can smell the smoke from a pulp mill on the Southern Northumberland Straight coast in Nova Scotia, and my nose is far less sensitive than the equipment they operate in these research stations.

Quote:

My point was moving it to a place people already live at. that cuts the expenses (getting things there and then back out again), the $1.5M better not be the ****ing wages alone for a handful of people.

It's 15 kilometers from Eureka. There are people there year round. $1.5 million is operating expenses...how do you figure that is only salary? That makes even less sense than your other posts...

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

I only questioned the spending on the basis of are we getting value for the money or are we just creating government jobs? Ton came up with enough good reasons to persuade me that it should be kept. At least for now. Actually I am fairly impressed that this facility can be runby a government department for a million bucks a year. Unless there are hidden costs in some other budget.

Yes, it's like I said earlier, the baseline funds keep the facility operating, and that allows more funds for research to flow through. For instance check out these numbers from one of the researchers (external - login to view) who uses this facility:

Project: The Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory
Institution: University of Toronto
Research Sector: Environment
Principal Investigator: James Drummond
Trust Investment: $1,807,730
ORF Investment: $815,590
CFI Investment: $3,293,176
Total research investment from all sources: $8,721,306

Other funding (external - login to view) comes from:
  • Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Environment Canada
  • Canada Foundation for Innovation
  • Ontario Innovation Trust
  • Ontario Ministry of Research and Innovation
  • Nova Scotia Research and Innovation Trust
  • Canadian Space Agency
  • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) - Study of Environmental Arctic Change program
  • Government of Canada - International Polar Year program
  • University of Toronto Centre for Global Change Science
  • Indian and Northern Affairs Canada - Northern Scientific Training Program
  • Polar Continental Shelf Project
  • Nunavut Research Institute
 
L Gilbert
#99
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

ROFLMAO That would be at uour speed apparently if that is an example of your ability to read and understand in one swipe. one month or so"

It's closer to a year to understand the equipment. DUH
 
MHz
#100
Fine that still makes the staff a permanent resident of the community rather than somebody on a shift and off they go south with the wages.

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

What are you on about? The facility is fine where it is.

Fine shut it down completely then, don't forget to take all the pierces with you.

If they don't know to go upwind to take a measurement then they suck at your job.

Perhaps the data doesn't support global warming so it became an anchor to the science community pushing that agenda and they stopped the funding drive.

Who cares if a few more people are unemployed.
 
damngrumpy
+1
#101
As someone who is involved in agriculture and the politics of agriculture I would like to
inform you, that this government is cutting science and research in almost every field.
The Pacific Agricultural Research facility in Summerland BC has seen a substantial
reduction in funding. They are in fact entering or getting ready to enter into a science
cluster format. The language suggests they are going to privatize the whole works over
time.
The worst thing that could happen, government needs to be involved scientifically for
the good of promoting advances in Canada and for the social and industrial development.
Turning this over to the private sector means they will only concentrate on what makes
money for them and to hell with everything else and that is a drawback over time.
 
MHz
#102
At least it clears up who has the power.
 
L Gilbert
#103
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Fine that still makes the staff a permanent resident of the community rather than somebody on a shift and off they go south with the wages.

So ..... I agreed with that in the first place.
 
petros
#104
Quote:


It's 15 kilometers from Eureka. There are people there year round. $1.5
million is operating expenses...how do you figure that is only salary? That
makes even less sense than your other posts...

Perfect. Just a short helo ride to maintain from Eureka. No need for full timers.
 
L Gilbert
#105
Quote: Originally Posted by damngrumpyView Post

As someone who is involved in agriculture and the politics of agriculture I would like to
inform you, that this government is cutting science and research in almost every field.
The Pacific Agricultural Research facility in Summerland BC has seen a substantial
reduction in funding. They are in fact entering or getting ready to enter into a science
cluster format. The language suggests they are going to privatize the whole works over
time.
The worst thing that could happen, government needs to be involved scientifically for
the good of promoting advances in Canada and for the social and industrial development.
Turning this over to the private sector means they will only concentrate on what makes
money for them and to hell with everything else and that is a drawback over time.

Yep.
 
MHz
#106
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Perfect. Just a short helo ride to maintain from Eureka. No need for full timers.

Walk otherwise you contaminate the area, lol
 
petros
#107
Oh that's right. It's better to have someone there full time burning heating oil to keep things clean instead of remote sensing.
 
Tonington
#108
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Oh that's right. It's better to have someone there full time burning heating oil to keep things clean instead of remote sensing.

They are remote sensing right now, not all of the work done up there is done by remote sensing...
 
MHz
#109
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Oh that's right. It's better to have someone there full time burning heating oil to keep things clean instead of remote sensing.

Not quite, a sleeping bag for two and a wind powered oven.
 
MHz
#110
Data Tampering: GISS Caught Red-Handed Manipulating Data To Produce Arctic Climate History Revision (external - login to view)
 
Tonington
#111
Quote: Originally Posted by MHzView Post

Data Tampering: GISS Caught Red-Handed Manipulating Data To Produce Arctic Climate History Revision (external - login to view)

Manipulating? You were the one who wanted scientists and their equipment moved inside larger settlements... which would actually add biases to the data in multiple fashions...the corrections GISS makes are made by looking at nearby rural stations, and it's justifiable due to the autocorrelation that exists between two sites that are close in proximity. Anthony Watts claim to fame was driving around the US and taking pictures of poorly situated weather stations. Then volunteers got involved. They made lots of noise about the data processing and poorly situated sites, but analysis has refuted their claims that the methods alone are responsible for the trends scientists have reported on.

The agencies who track global temperature anomalies adjust stations that have obvious biases, due to things like development building up around historical weather stations, or station moves, changes in the equipment, how the temperature data is gathered, etc. You can read about the methodology of the GISS changes in this paper where they describe the processing of the data. Believe it or not, raw data is not sacrosanct....and you can download all the source code and data you want from the GISS website. Or even the CRU website if you like.

The agencies like GISS, and CRU and NCDC were corroborated by scientists, whose work was hailed by folks like Anthony Watts. That is until the BEST team showed that GISS, CRU, and NCDC were in fact solid methodologically, and that their temperature records had been validatedHome|BerkeleyEarth.org (external - login to view)
 
Tonington
#112
Declining sea ice leading to more bromine, less lower tropospheric ozone, and more mercury falling out in the Arctic:
Sea ice decline driving changes in arctic air pollutants (external - login to view)

Add mercury to the list of accumulating toxins in the Arctic. Going back to a more traditional diet would be cultural suicide for the Inuit, paradoxically.
 
no new posts