The photographs were taken by spy satellites, then requested by scientists as part of a program that allows scientists to request classified photographs of environmentally sensitive areas. At the time, the Bush Administration released the photographs to the scientists but deemed them unsuitable for public release. Earlier this month, the National Academy of Sciences recommended the Obama Administration declassify the photos. The Interior Department released the photos to the public the same day, as reported in a July 16 story by Reuters.
Would you people just please read REDDIT.com and keep yourselves 5 days ahead of Slog before they catch up to/rip the headline and then add their ZOMG commentary??
@9 And why wouldn't those oil fields still be vulnerable now? What's changed? The main thing I can think of is that we no longer have an anti-science administration in the White House.
Look, I'll admit that I'm speculating, but unless you're part of the inner workings of the U.S. spy community, so are you.
There was no reason to classify one-metre-resolution overheads---that's the same quality offered by the really good commercial photo sats, when the G isn't exercising "shutter control." So why were they deemed "unsuitable" for public release? I think we should be told.
Wow, the Guardian has gone further down the path toward a left-wing tabloid-rag than I thought.
(1) It's thinkable that the Bush administration didn't release these because of its position on AGW, but the article presents no evidence of that. The Bush adminstration was way more into keeping stuff classified than the Obama administration. This could well just be a case of reflexive secrecy for all military satelite imagery.
(2) This is not "evidence" for AGW in any scientific sense. It's pictures of one place seperated by one year. One-year fluctuations are way down on the noise of the climate record, and there are so many places in the world that it's no problem to find some place with a big fluctuation in either direction over any given year. This isn't to say that there isn't good scientific evidence for AGW, but these pictures aren't it. They have a lot more PR value than scientific value.
Global Warming: if its true or not. Some say the Earth will go through ups and downs. So they use that as an excuse.
Lets just say fuck it, its not true.
What is so fucking wrong with crushing a water bottle before you through it away? Using less electricity once in a fucking while? Recycling? Its fucking easy to do!
Apathy and laziness is the real reason people say shit like "global warming doesn't exist". Even if it "doesn't exist".. why don't we do something to help the future? Help our children, our nephews/nieces, grandkids?? Shit, what is so wrong with that? Especially when we easily could. Easy little things we can do to perhaps slow the process and decrease our waste... yeah.. thats a good thing.
OH MY GOD!!!!!
it
was
gone.....
TRULY HORRIFYING!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxN_pbMOF…
Bush tried to keep it a secret
but I just blew his scam wide open...
Reddit? No there is an accurate website for ya! Let me book mark that right next to wikapedia.
Look, I'll admit that I'm speculating, but unless you're part of the inner workings of the U.S. spy community, so are you.
No, but I think I can see "Quitter" palin's house from there!
That debate is completely manufactured, just like the evolution "controversy."
http://www.markusrothkranz.com/iceberg/i…
(1) It's thinkable that the Bush administration didn't release these because of its position on AGW, but the article presents no evidence of that. The Bush adminstration was way more into keeping stuff classified than the Obama administration. This could well just be a case of reflexive secrecy for all military satelite imagery.
(2) This is not "evidence" for AGW in any scientific sense. It's pictures of one place seperated by one year. One-year fluctuations are way down on the noise of the climate record, and there are so many places in the world that it's no problem to find some place with a big fluctuation in either direction over any given year. This isn't to say that there isn't good scientific evidence for AGW, but these pictures aren't it. They have a lot more PR value than scientific value.
Lets just say fuck it, its not true.
What is so fucking wrong with crushing a water bottle before you through it away? Using less electricity once in a fucking while? Recycling? Its fucking easy to do!
Apathy and laziness is the real reason people say shit like "global warming doesn't exist". Even if it "doesn't exist".. why don't we do something to help the future? Help our children, our nephews/nieces, grandkids?? Shit, what is so wrong with that? Especially when we easily could. Easy little things we can do to perhaps slow the process and decrease our waste... yeah.. thats a good thing.
Temperature in Seattle July 29, 2009: 100
Omg golobal warming