Environmental News

Also see

Governorate of Vatican City State.

 

“This study is probably the most depressing project I’ve been involved with in my entire life,” Amaral said. “Since I was a kid, I was excited about science. It’s distressing to see others engage in fraud and in misleading others. But if you believe that science is useful and important for humanity, then you have to fight for it.”

Organized scientific fraud is growing at an alarming rate | EurekAlert!

 

...sticks in my craw

 

The fraud here is building reputations within scientific fields by improper means. As the posted summary indicates, this happens by what are generally called paper mills.

It is quite different from scientists being said to chase grants, etc. by publishing results crafted to agree with 'popular' notions. That is what I read about here, mostly. I consider it generally unfounded and essentially a distraction from this real problem.

 

I was also dangling 'craw' in front of you but you didn't pick it up.

 

Missed it by that much.

==
To no ones' surprise, flights over mountains have risk of turbulence. but this gets linked:

https://turbli.com/historical-data/most-turbulent-flight-routes-of-2024/

Because it looked widely and offered quantification. Which is like, my thing. Nothing from Taiwan included though, where I had a wild ride.

Besides mountains, cumulonimbus clouds also move air vertically. Pilots generally keep good distance but I was on a Panama City flight that did not. With predictable consequences.

 

Quotes below are from:
NASA’s acting chief calls for the end of Earth science at the space agency - Ars Technica

Some readers will know of NASA'fundaments

" ... the law that created the agency, the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958.
This charter legislation established "the expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space" as part of the space agency's core mission. To meet this mandate, NASA has typically spent about 10 percent of its budget annually on Earth science, including key missions to observe the planet's atmosphere, monitor weather, study land use changes, and more.
"This area of research positively impacts our economy and national security beyond measure," said Lori Garver, NASA's deputy administrator from 2009 to 2013. "Ignoring scientific evidence and stripping NASA of one of its most tangible public purposes throws NASA into the fire of partisan politics. Enacting this agenda would set back our status as a global leader and risks our economic future."
Garver added that surveys repeatedly indicate that the public would increase prioritization of NASA’s research in Earth and climate science above other areas, which currently receive significantly more funding at the space agency."

Few readers with catch a reference - Duffy ain't here from old radio show days

"All the climate science, and all of the other priorities that the last administration had at NASA, we’re going to move aside, and all of the science that we do is going to be directed towards exploration, which is the mission of NASA," Duffy said during the appearance. "That’s why we have NASA, to explore, not to do all of these Earth sciences."

"Many people in the space industry welcome Duffy's push to focus NASA on exploration of deep space and other planets, particularly his emphasis on the Moon. NASA's effort to establish a sustainable lunar presence could certainly use some focus, as it appears increasingly likely that, absent serious changes, China will land humans on the Moon before NASA returns.

However, in abandoning Earth science, NASA would be violating the law that created the agency,..."

Folding into the earlier quote. So, Duffy ain't here and finds the law establishing the Agency he heads to be something he can choose among. Is there something about Earth Science research that he hopes not to know? Or has been instructed to 404? Beats me.

 

These areas of NASA research have had budget squeezes before, and some irony is noted in:

Republicans outraged over NASA earth science programs… that Reagan began - Ars Technica

 

Readers probably know that a whole lot of carbon is stored in soils. Depending on forms and local conditions, it is more or less stable there. When not stable it returns to atmosphere as CO2, which is not a good thing according to a concordance of evidence.

Humans have vastly altered landscapes, and growing crops and revising forests to better produce things we want has improved our lot a lot. This has also lowered the amount of carbon stored in soil. A recent study quantified this as a 24% loss:

Land use severely reduces global carbon in plants and soils | EurekAlert!

Those studying soils and climate science are most interested in things like this, yet I hope normal people might enjoy this glimpse into our abnormalities.