My guess is one of the tech bros running this country will get into the weather satellite biz and the government will “buy” them and then charge to use them. Because they are grifters
My comment is accurate and it stands: the current trend (and the trend of the past 18 months) is for an increase in Arctic ice.
I am always amused by non-atmospheric science people telling those of us who have both the educational credentials and decades of experience in the field that we are wrong.
I have 45 years professional experience as a meteorologist (FSU Grad major in math & Physics) with a specialty in Hurricane forecasting - and 30 years in the aviation industry.
And I'm always disgusted by people who purport to have expertise in some relevant area of science and then present cherry-picked data to try to manipulate others into thinking that AGW is no big deal. (A minor increase - most definitely not close to a recovery to previous norms - over just the last 18 months is IRRELEVANT on a climactic scale.)
"Arctic sea ice extent on 8th July 2024 was 8.81 million sq km. This was 1.36 million sq km below the 1981-2010 average, but was 0.60 million sq km above the record low for this date, which occurred in 2020 (Figure 1)."
Here is a link to an even more recent graph (last data from 31 May 2025) that shows the overall trend as well as the confidence limits of the daily data. I'm sure you won't be surprised to see the distinct downward trend that is quite clearly not reversed by recent ("18-month") natural variations:
But frankly, for the very near term - I'm far more concerned with the loss of Microwave imagery/data for monitoring tropical cyclones. It is KEY to both overnight analysis and in general, the structure of the cyclone. This is a far bigger loss than many probably realize.
Arctic ice is NOT increasing (as it happens, EXTENT was the lowest on record for the date. The amount of multi-year ice continues to trend down - as does annual volume
I do not mean to be callous, but a bunch of states that voted, often overwhelmingly, for Trump, are exiting the FA and heading towards the FO. As I often remind the anti-science crowd; facts don't care if you believe in them or not.
No big money donors utilize this info. If they cancel the info sharing and force users to buy from commercial sat operators they open the door for future donation opportunities.
What is it about the position and structure of hurricanes per microwave satellite that could be a national security issue? I wish that had been explained in the article.
I thought someone with both the 'educational credentials' and 'decades of experience in the field' would know why the satellite data would be a national security issue. You know, you being on the inside and all.
Amused, please go back and re-read my comment. Of course, weather conditions are a national security issue. But, that wasn't my question. My question is, "Why is microwave data a national security issue?" as surmised in the article.
I did not read the last bit of your post before commenting and we have the same observation here:
Will WSF-M not be taking over in this role though? The WSF Program was setup to replace DMSP but I am not seeing any indication here that the new data will be shared beyond the DoD. The satellite was approved for full operation in April so we at least put a replacement up there and I would hope NOAA at least gets access to that data soon.
Welp, it's usually the red states that get hurricanes so allowing this to happen will hurt them the most. It sort of blows my mind that they want to do this unless they are clearing the way for privatization.
Maybe someone should mention that Mar a Lago is in Florida and accurate hurricane notifications will no longer be available to protect that property. Nor Bedminster.
Seem as tho we have a much better understanding of how, why, when, where and have come a long way in forecasting storms, to want to disrupt it. Save the people!!
My guess is one of the tech bros running this country will get into the weather satellite biz and the government will “buy” them and then charge to use them. Because they are grifters
Probably correct - then you have Kennedy and Vaccines, Cancer Research and all the rest of it - they are clearly trying to kill us.
Swear to God, they're trying to kill us. What I don't get is why.
Maybe he really is a Russian asset.
Increasingly seems like it. But now that he has decapitated the intelligence community, I wonder if we will ever know.
I wrote to my US House and Senators yesterday about this loss as it pertains to Arctic Ice Extent / volume data.
My guess is Arctic Ice analysis is the real reason for this discontinuation. Trump doesn't want any science directed at climate change.
Arctic ice is INCREASING so I doubt President Trump has anything to do with this.
No, Arctic Sea I've is not increasing. While there are annual variations, the trend over recent decades is quite clearly, unmistakeably down
Who said anything about "decades"?
My comment is accurate and it stands: the current trend (and the trend of the past 18 months) is for an increase in Arctic ice.
I am always amused by non-atmospheric science people telling those of us who have both the educational credentials and decades of experience in the field that we are wrong.
I have 45 years professional experience as a meteorologist (FSU Grad major in math & Physics) with a specialty in Hurricane forecasting - and 30 years in the aviation industry.
You won't be able to convince someone with a closed mind. He is invested in his foolish belief and won't give it up.
And I'm always disgusted by people who purport to have expertise in some relevant area of science and then present cherry-picked data to try to manipulate others into thinking that AGW is no big deal. (A minor increase - most definitely not close to a recovery to previous norms - over just the last 18 months is IRRELEVANT on a climactic scale.)
You are correct that the reduction in sea ice is not at a record low - that happened in 2020 - but in 2024 it was not only substantially lower than the 1981 - 2010 median, it was lower than most years since 2007 (see link: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/approach/monitoring/sea-ice/2024/briefing-on-arctic-and-antarctic-sea-ice---july-2024)
"Arctic sea ice extent on 8th July 2024 was 8.81 million sq km. This was 1.36 million sq km below the 1981-2010 average, but was 0.60 million sq km above the record low for this date, which occurred in 2020 (Figure 1)."
Here is a link to an even more recent graph (last data from 31 May 2025) that shows the overall trend as well as the confidence limits of the daily data. I'm sure you won't be surprised to see the distinct downward trend that is quite clearly not reversed by recent ("18-month") natural variations:
https://psc.apl.uw.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/schweiger/ice_volume/BPIOMASIceVolumeAnomalyCurrentV2.1.png
Come at me. But bring data and relevant commentary along with your sneers, or expect the ridicule you deserve.
For a real quick look at today's extent & concentration: https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent/time=2025-06-25%2000:00:00
Daily Concentration: https://data.seaice.uni-bremen.de/amsr2/today/Arctic_AMSR2_nic.png
But frankly, for the very near term - I'm far more concerned with the loss of Microwave imagery/data for monitoring tropical cyclones. It is KEY to both overnight analysis and in general, the structure of the cyclone. This is a far bigger loss than many probably realize.
Arctic ice is NOT increasing (as it happens, EXTENT was the lowest on record for the date. The amount of multi-year ice continues to trend down - as does annual volume
Hey it's the completely discredited non-expert!
I do not mean to be callous, but a bunch of states that voted, often overwhelmingly, for Trump, are exiting the FA and heading towards the FO. As I often remind the anti-science crowd; facts don't care if you believe in them or not.
No big money donors utilize this info. If they cancel the info sharing and force users to buy from commercial sat operators they open the door for future donation opportunities.
What is it about the position and structure of hurricanes per microwave satellite that could be a national security issue? I wish that had been explained in the article.
Strange.
I thought someone with both the 'educational credentials' and 'decades of experience in the field' would know why the satellite data would be a national security issue. You know, you being on the inside and all.
Huh.
Amused, please go back and re-read my comment. Of course, weather conditions are a national security issue. But, that wasn't my question. My question is, "Why is microwave data a national security issue?" as surmised in the article.
I did not read the last bit of your post before commenting and we have the same observation here:
Will WSF-M not be taking over in this role though? The WSF Program was setup to replace DMSP but I am not seeing any indication here that the new data will be shared beyond the DoD. The satellite was approved for full operation in April so we at least put a replacement up there and I would hope NOAA at least gets access to that data soon.
Welp, it's usually the red states that get hurricanes so allowing this to happen will hurt them the most. It sort of blows my mind that they want to do this unless they are clearing the way for privatization.
Maybe someone should mention that Mar a Lago is in Florida and accurate hurricane notifications will no longer be available to protect that property. Nor Bedminster.
Thank you for this, M Lowry... Cheers...
Seem as tho we have a much better understanding of how, why, when, where and have come a long way in forecasting storms, to want to disrupt it. Save the people!!
Well as someone who lives in southwest Florida I am beyond p-ssed.
Elect a 🤡, expect a 🎪
Gobsmacked
*speechless*