This was the news release put out by NASA in response to observations of high carbon monoxide readings over the western United States
News
release from NASA
Erroneous
CO emissions over California cause unrealistic CO concentration in
GEOS-5 model
March
1, 2016
IMPORTANT
NOTICE: Elevated carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations over California
in the GEOS-5 products since February 25, 2016, are incorrect. They
are a consequence of unrealistic emissions derived from satellite
observations of fires, which led to elevated concentrations of
atmospheric CO (as well as other species).
NASA's
EOS-Terra spacecraft entered safe mode on February 18, 2016, during
an inclination adjustment maneuver. This caused the MODIS instrument
to enter safe mode, with the nadir and space-view doors closed. When
the Terra MODIS transitioned back to science mode on February 24,
2016, the operating temperatures for the SWIR and LWIR (Short-wave
Infrared and Longwave infrared) focal planes have not yet stabilized.
As a consequence, some data products have been severely degraded.
This includes the "Fire Radiative Power" fields that are
used by GEOS-5 to compute emissions of CO, CO2, and carbonaceous
aerosols by biomass burning.
GMAO
is working to correct this problem. The GEOS-5 analyses will be
re-run from February 24, 2016, using only the EOS-Aqua MODIS data, in
order to exclude the unrealistic CO emissions. EOS-Terra observations
will be re-introduced once the instrument has stabilized.
With my lack of technical and scientific knowledge I was beginning to feel a bit like a conspiracy theorist in questioning NASA's explanation of instrumentational errors to deny the high readings.
So I am very pleased to have the company of Paul Beckwith who rejects the official explanation for very similar reasons to me. I believe he is spot-on.
Paul is no radical as we know.
I sincerely hope someone will take up Paul's suggestion and do some investigation.
Questioning
the NASA version of events
California
Dreaming, Instrumentation Error Seems illogical
1
March, 2016
I
took the day off to break ice, shop, get my hair cut, and see
friends. What a day to take off:). I
stand by both of my videos released on February 29th on the
California gas emissions on the major fault lines.
In
my opinion NASA’s
explanation below makes no sense whatsoever. I am actually
amazed that this was claimed, since to me it is not consistent with
the images. Obviously, I will generate more videos to support
my views.
For starters:
1)
They only mention CO, and say nothing about CO2 and SO2.
2) The
emissions are spatially located over the fault-lines; how could fires
aggregate in these regions?
3) There was an Earthquake in New
Zealand around Feb 29th that showed CO release.
4) They are trying
to say the error was just over California. Really? Was the data wrong
over the whole globe?
5) I discussed the idea of “instrumentation error” in my second video yesterday. In my opinion, the explanation from NASA does not address any of the points in my video, which I stand by 100%.
If
NASA had said that there was a gamed simulation that got into the
data set that would have seemed more realistic to me–still
implausible, in my opinion, but harder to prove wrong. Facebook
friends and others, please help me out by doing the following:
A)
Go to the USGS
site and pick an Earthquake that
occurred within the last few months, say over 5 and anywhere in the
world.
B) Go to Earth NullSchool and look at the CO, CO2 and SO2 data for a few weeks before and after the quake.
C) Share your findings, positive or negative below this post and throughout social media.
D) Do it quickly, in case the Earth NullSchool site is potentially compromised.
Thanks.
The fact that NASA is
claiming “instrumentation” makes
me think even more that my videos are correct. Remember that I am not
claiming that a quake will occur. See the conclusion of my second
video yesterday to hear my thoughts.
———- ———-
———- ———-
Why
was nothing said at all for five days? By NASA, scientists,
satellite engineers, climatologist? Why was nothing said at
all
The data will be rerun according to NASA. Based on the info you've been working with up to March 2nd, how long before you'd rate an 'all clear' after these readings? p.s. So far I haven't seen anyone post that they are waiting for an explanation from the earth.nullschool site itself.
ReplyDelete