Photo
October 08, 2012
0 comments
85 notes
LISTEN TO MOTHER EARTH!! A NASA spacecraft has sent back the first-ever recordings of Mother Earth singing to the universe, and the sound is awe-inspiring. It’s called “chorus,” an “electromagnetic phenomenon caused by plasma waves in Earth’s radiation belts,” as NASA described it in a release. Although the music is known to ham-radio operators, who have listened to it from far away, this is the first time they’ve been recorded at the source, NASA said. The signals were picked up by NASA’s twin Radiation Belt Storm Probes as they studied the radiation belts, which are regions of energized particles, mostly protons and electrons, that are trapped in Earth’s magnetosphere, about 4,000 miles from the planet’s surface, according to the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. The song is not generated by acoustic waves, NASA explained in a release. The probes’ receivers, which are configured specifically to study these belts, took the radio waves and translated them into 16-bit auditory sounds, just as on a CD. Indeed, the agency intends to prevent Mother Earth from being a one-hit wonder and record more of her music—in stereo next time. Click here to listen to an audio version of our Mother’s sweet siren song. If you want to learn about the science behind the sound, watch the video below. This is amazing!  Made me think of Jim Hansen and no wonder he fights so hard for Mother Earth, he’s talked to her!  ;-)

LISTEN TO MOTHER EARTH!!

A NASA spacecraft has sent back the first-ever recordings of Mother Earth singing to the universe, and the sound is awe-inspiring. It’s called “chorus,” an “electromagnetic phenomenon caused by plasma waves in Earth’s radiation belts,” as NASA described it in a release. Although the music is known to ham-radio operators, who have listened to it from far away, this is the first time they’ve been recorded at the source, NASA said.

The signals were picked up by NASA’s twin Radiation Belt Storm Probes as they studied the radiation belts, which are regions of energized particles, mostly protons and electrons, that are trapped in Earth’s magnetosphere, about 4,000 miles from the planet’s surface, according to the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

The song is not generated by acoustic waves, NASA explained in a release. The probes’ receivers, which are configured specifically to study these belts, took the radio waves and translated them into 16-bit auditory sounds, just as on a CD. Indeed, the agency intends to prevent Mother Earth from being a one-hit wonder and record more of her music—in stereo next time.

Click here to listen to an audio version of our Mother’s sweet siren song.

If you want to learn about the science behind the sound, watch the video below.

This is amazing!  Made me think of Jim Hansen and no wonder he fights so hard for Mother Earth, he’s talked to her!  ;-)

Tags: listen to earth nasa

Text
April 12, 2012
0 comments
1 note

Propaganda & Spinning Climate Change or How Heartland is Using NASA against us

I’m always hoping I can find someone to believe when it comes to debunking Climate Change.  I mean, it’s such a bad situation that it’s something I’d rather not believe.  Ya know?  So let me tell you about the latest.

It started with taking a peak at this Business Insider MAP OF THE DAY: The Three Climate Factors That Are Shaping Spring

It made me laugh out loud.  I love it that business can spin the weather we’ve been having into such a positive position and give it such wonderful root causes (volcanic ash #1? read this for the real science). 

So for more entertainment I read the comments and something there piqued my interest.   It was this statement -   “Interesting that the article about the NASA scientists was removed from the front page, in spite of being heavily viewed and commented on…”

Hmmm, how did i miss that?  And luckily someone else provided a link to exactly what all these other NASA scientists had said.  Here is an excerpt:

“The letter, sent at the end of March, includes former scientists, astronauts and two former directors of NASA’s Johnson Space Center who believe climate science is “not settled” and wish for NASA to look at all available scientific data before making claims of carbon dioxide’s “catastrophic impact”.”

The Blaze then goes on to post some excerpts from said letter but not the letter itself.  But I want to see the source.  In my search I come across another site  ’WATTS UP WITH THAT” supposedly “The world’s most viewed site on global warming and climate change”, that appears to have the entire letter and contact information.  

After reading the information, doing searches on many of the names, checking out more of the WUWT website, I concluded it is not a serious piece that adds anything meaningful to the topic.   Reasons being;

1) None of these are active employees and none of them are climate scientists.  However much we want to adore rocket scientists, that doesn’t make them climate SMEs. 

2) Many are associated to denier funding sources or websites especially the scientists the letter refers to as their oracles.  

Harrison Schmitt is a Geologist, retired from NASA, born 1935, and “Regarding the international scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, Schmitt has said that “[t]he CO2 scare is a red herring”,[15] that the “global warming scare is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision-making,” and that scientists who might otherwise challenge prevailing views on climate change dare not do so for fear of losing funding.[16]” source    AND HE IS A HEARTLAND BOARD MEMBER!!!  I’ve written plenty here about the Heartland group so I won’t dredge it all up again.  Search on it and decide about them for yourself.

Walter Cunningham is also an old timer, born 1932, an astronaut, fighter pilot, physicist, entrepreneur, venture capitalist, author of The All-American Boys, lecturer, and host of the radio show Lift-off to Logic.   “In 2010, he published a pamphlet titled “Global Warming: Facts versus Faith” in which he states: “The current debate is not unlike Galileo’s historic disagreement with the Catholic Church, or the battle over evolution versus creationism. In all three cases, facts are pitted against faith and science against religion. The conflict over global warming has deteriorated into a religious war between true believers in AGW and non-believers, the so-called “skeptics”.”[3] This report was published by the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank engaged in “dispelling myths about global warming”. The Heartland Institute has, in its publications, made four points:

“Most scientists do not believe human activities threaten to disrupt the Earth’s climate.”[3] “The most reliable temperature data show no global warming trend.”[17] “A modest amount of global warming, should it occur, would be beneficial to the natural world and to human civilization.”[3] “The best strategy to pursue is one of ‘no regrets’.”[3]

In an editorial published in the Houston Chronicle on August 15, 2010, Cunningham argued that the empirical evidence does not support the claims of global warming. The editorial, titled “Climate change alarmists ignore scientific methods”, stated his opinion that the global warming debate hinged on four key points. “About 20 years ago,” he stated, “a small group of scientists became concerned that temperatures around the Earth were unreasonably high and a threat to humanity. In their infinite wisdom, they decided: 1) that CO2 (carbon dioxide) levels were abnormally high, 2) that higher levels of CO2 were bad for humanity, 3) that warmer temperatures would be worse for the world, and 4) that we are capable of overriding natural forces to control the Earth’s temperature. Not one of these presumptions (opinions) has proven to be valid.”[4]”  source

These are the guys they’re believing in?  They are entitled but, as I stated above, I don’t view this as a serious statement worth much consideration.

Lastly,

3) The piece isn’t critical analysis journalism, it’s as bias in the denier direction as this site is in the believer direction - the difference is, I’m not calling this site a science blog.  

I was please to see my opinion echoed elsewhere in the news.  

Attacks on climate science by former NASA staff shouldn’t be taken seriously

A letter from former administrators, astronauts, and engineers at NASA expressing climate change scepticism does not deserve parity with the agency’s peer-reviewed climate scientists.   source

Please read that entire article because Dana Nuccitelli does a much better job assessing than I have. 

I got myself all worked up, hoping there had been a real scientific rebuttal I could appreciate but once again, so disappointed that the political spin and propaganda is detracting from the reality.   I was played. 


Update #1:  Is NASA really in an open revolt over climate change? by Eric Burger / Houston Chronicle.   (Excerpt: “but there is almost no disagreement among climate scientists that the planet is, and will continue to warm due to human emissions of greenhouse gases. A recent study of warming by previously skeptical scientists, in fact, found that the planet has continued to warm in accordance with scientific predictions.”)  But this is lovely - what does Burger conclude?  ”Ultimately I believe this is probably part of a campaign to force Hansen out. Hansen has successfully resisted previous efforts to keep him quiet.”


Tags: climate change nasa deniers

Photo
March 03, 2012
0 comments
567,913 notes
unpossibly: NASA recently released imagery showing the deforestation of America, in just 34 years.

unpossibly:

NASA recently released imagery showing the deforestation of America, in just 34 years.

(Source: travelerschecks, via pedestalwarfare)

Tags: nasa deforestation

Video
January 30, 2012
0 comments
14 notes

NASA | Temperature Data: 1880-2011 -  See for yourself!

Tags: nasa video temperature data

Quote
December 15, 2011
0 comments
6 notes
"For more than 25 years, scientists have warned of the dangers of human-induced climate change,” said Jon Bergengren, a scientist who led the study while a postdoctoral scholar at Caltech. “Our study introduces a new view of climate change, exploring the ecological implications of a few degrees of global warming. While warnings of melting glaciers, rising sea levels and other environmental changes are illustrative and important, ultimately, it’s the ecological consequences that matter most."

— NASA - NASA - Climate Change May Bring Big Ecosystem Changes

Tags: nasa climate change

Photo
December 13, 2010
0 comments
6 notes
NASA TEMPERATURE MAPS: NOTICE ANYTHING DIFFERENT? NASA has just published two world maps showing temperature anomalies in the decades starting in 1970 and 2000. Looking at those maps, it’s pretty obvious that the planet is warming, especially closer to the poles. The quantity of extra energy that needs to be trapped in the atmosphere to warm up the whole planet for even a few degrees on average over a decade is quite large. We must also remember that the warming is not equally distributed, so some areas might see little of it while others can see increases of many degrees. This makes a bigger difference in marginal regions (ie. permafrost that is now melting, etc).” NASA DATA

NASA TEMPERATURE MAPS: NOTICE ANYTHING DIFFERENT?

NASA has just published two world maps showing temperature anomalies in the decades starting in 1970 and 2000. Looking at those maps, it’s pretty obvious that the planet is warming, especially closer to the poles.

The quantity of extra energy that needs to be trapped in the atmosphere to warm up the whole planet for even a few degrees on average over a decade is quite large. We must also remember that the warming is not equally distributed, so some areas might see little of it while others can see increases of many degrees. This makes a bigger difference in marginal regions (ie. permafrost that is now melting, etc).”

NASA DATA

Tags: Global warming Climate change NASA Treehugger

Photo
September 23, 2010
0 comments
NEW MAP OFFERS A GLOBAL VIEW OF HEALTH - SAPPING AIR POLUTION

NEW MAP OFFERS A GLOBAL VIEW OF HEALTH - SAPPING AIR POLUTION

Tags: NASA Pollution AIR Air Pollution