Trump doesn’t see the elephant in the room.

Jump to Last Post 1-4 of 4 discussions (30 posts)
  1. peoplepower73 profile image87
    peoplepower73posted 4 months ago

    That elephant is mother nature. Al Gore, who was Clinton’s VP, made a film called An Inconvenient Truth. He predicted many years ago that because of Global Warming, storms of all types would become more severe. Politicians and others disregarded it as untruthful and conspiracy theory.

    However, we are now seeing the effects of what he predicted. In the west, the temperature is rising and creating more wildfires and draughts with higher velocity winds. On the east coast, the storms are more severe with heavier rainfall, blinding snow, and stronger hurricanes. In the Midwest, heavier rainfall and stronger tornadoes.

    The effects of these severe storms are causing havoc for the people, businesses, and the economy in general.  Each year, there is more loss of life and property. Currently there is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to handle the funding for the recovery of these disasters. But now Trump is thinking about abolishing FEMA.

    Trump has said that he wants to take the burden from the federal government for funding the recovery of the effects of these storms and place it on each state. So, they would be responsible for their own disaster recovery. But what if the states don’t have the total funding for the recovery of these severe storms? If the federal government does not provide the funding, where will that funding come from?   

    Recently, the Trump administration implemented significant layoffs at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), affecting around 5% of its workforce. These cuts included meteorologists, hurricane researchers, and other specialized personnel, raising concerns about the impact on weather forecasting, disaster preparedness, and public safety. Critics argue that these layoffs could hinder NOAA's ability to provide life-saving information and maintain its essential services…

    What are your thoughts?

    1. wilderness profile image76
      wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately, we have gone far down the road of simply accepting that any "disaster" (defined as any property or bodily damage) be paid for by someone other than the one affected.  The result is that we have people all over the country building houses in flood plains, in forest fire territory, in places where natural disasters commonly occur...and then failing to insure their property.  In the case of fires, we have for decades made very poor choices about land/fire management, increasing the opportunity for nasty fires, because we don't want to see burnt trees in our backyard.

      Let government rebuild is the common thread any more, without regard for personal responsibility for their decisions.  It is not a reasonable request.

      "Critics argue that these layoffs could hinder NOAA's ability to provide life-saving information and maintain its essential services…"

      But they don't mention the duties of those laid off.  They just say it COULD hinder NOAA's ability, without giving any details.  We scream out and demand specifics from DOGE...but simply accept exaggerations and foggy "if's" and "maybe's" from it's detractors?  Not me, thank you; if you have a negative about what DOGE is doing and who is let go, give specifics on duties, how many are doing it, what they are paid and what the results of their employment is.  Then I can make an informed decision on whether DOGE did right or not; simply stating that their action might have negative consequences means less than nothing.

      1. peoplepower73 profile image87
        peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        I'm glad you asked.  Of course, you could have done the research yourself.

        The layoffs that hit about 800 NOAA employees last week will hamstring the agency's fleet of hurricane research aircraft, experts warn.

        Threat level: NOAA's aircraft have specialized equipment that the Air Force's Hurricane Hunters lack. Their flights during hurricane season are aimed at feeding data into computer models to improve forecast accuracy.
        hreat level: NOAA's aircraft have specialized equipment that the Air Force's Hurricane Hunters lack. Their flights during hurricane season are aimed at feeding data into computer models to improve forecast accuracy.

        The now-thinly staffed team of flight directors, engineers, scientists and mechanics means NOAA will struggle to maintain a 24-hour-a-day tempo of flying its modified Gulfstream jet and aging WP-3 research aircraft, said Josh Ripp, who was laid off as a flight engineer since he was a probationary employee.

        Ripp said the missing flights will translate into less accurate forecasts and greater risk for coastal residents who are used to having at least two to three days' warning of a hurricane's predicted landfall location.

        He told Axios in an interview that the agency is now either short one person or is at just the level of personnel needed to staff 24/7 flight operations, which has been the desired tempo during past seasons.

        However, that assumes no one gets sick or has a family emergency and cannot crew a flight. NOAA, he said, is now "playing the odds that everyone there is going to be fine all season."

        Two others associated with NOAA's hurricane research program confirmed the challenges the agency faces after the layoffs hit its Office of Marine and Aviation Operations in Lakeland, Fla.

        According to Andrew Hazelton, who was laid off from working on hurricane forecast models at the National Hurricane Center, the cuts may compromise forecast accuracy and ultimately cost lives.

        He said NOAA uses the information from the flights in two ways. One is to gauge the intensity and movement of a storm, since such data is immediately relayed to the Hurricane Center.

        The other is to use the specialized equipment — such as powerful, tail-mounted-Doppler radar — to gather data that's fed into hurricane forecast models to better anticipate a storm's movement and shifts in intensity.

        Consistent NOAA and Air Force Reserve hurricane reconnaissance has helped lead to vast improvements in hurricane track forecasts in particular, with new gains made in intensity projections in recent years.

        Between the lines: NOAA only has a minimum capacity of flight directors, positions that require years of training, according to one source familiar with staffing issues who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution if they are rehired.

        It missed out on gaining three who were in the hiring process when the Trump administration instituted a government-wide freeze, and then lost two to the layoffs, the source said.

        "This leaves the exact number for staffing four total WP-3 and G-IV crews," the source said. "It leaves no room for anyone to get sick or have a life event that precludes them from being able to fly."

        "It will, of course, also lead to burnout of the remaining flight directors," they said, noting that flight engineers are also at "critically low" levels of personnel.

        Hazelton told Axios that NOAA is running the risk that a storm will approach the coast and that the agency won't be able to fly into and around it with its advanced capabilities.

        Your thoughts please.

        1. wilderness profile image76
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Let me see if I got it right.  NOAA has enough personnel (undefined as to their task) to fly their planes.  But a laid off man says they they will now have trouble manning their planes, and that they will not be able to fly their planes.

          Others say that because they are not over-staffed they will not be able to fly.  Sorry, but I worked in a factory for 22 years with the exact number of employees needed to operate it and never once shut it down for lack of help. 

          But I asked for the job of someone laid off that would prohibit operations.  Did they lay off 800 pilots or 800 janitors?  800 stewardesses or 800 mechanics?  Once more, we're being told that layoffs will hurt massively...but without being given knowledge of just WHO was laid off, why they were laid off, how many others do the same job and what they were paid. 

          No one seems to care - we just assume that the job won't get done now.  Unfortunately for that concept my own personal experience with government agencies is that they are grossly overstaffed compared to private industry - that they could lose as much as 50% of the crew and still get the job done...if they all worked as private industry workers do.

          1. Credence2 profile image82
            Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            "Unfortunately for that concept my own personnel concept with government agencies is that they are grossly overstaffed compared to private industry -"

            Your personal concept as is with most of your others, is incorrect...

            1. wilderness profile image76
              wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              If you say so....

          2. peoplepower73 profile image87
            peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            They laid off enough people to make it detrimental to do their jobs. Comparing factory workers to what it takes to fly and maintain sophisticated aircraft and forecast severe weather in advance is a false equivalence, which you are very good at bringing it up.

            You don't get it.  If they don't have the people to forewarn of hurricanes and other severe weather, it could be even more disastrous, especially for people living in the coastal areas. They need advance notice to get the hell out of DOGE. A little play on words.

            1. wilderness profile image76
              wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

              "They laid off enough people to make it detrimental to do their jobs."

              PP, you keep saying that.  And you keep neglecting to give any specifics at all showing it to be true.  And I keep asking. 

              I don't think we're going to get anywhere.  You don't know who was fired and what their job was.  You don't know how many are left to do the work, or how many the work takes.  You just assume there aren't enough, and I assume I (and you) don't know enough to make that determination.

              1. peoplepower73 profile image87
                peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this
                1. wilderness profile image76
                  wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Sorry, but I do not choose to give the NYT my information.  But looking at the first sentence (all I can see): "Together with recent firings and resignations, the new cuts could hamper the National Weather Service’s ability to produce lifesaving forecasts, scientists say.

                  So could a bad weather day.  Ice on the roads, a flash flood.  A demonstration in the streets, a pack of 1,000 wild dogs running into the building. 

                  The point is that could (or "might" or "maybe" or "possibly" all mean the same thing.  Not that there will be problems, but that there might be problems.  And consider that there might be problems if we doubled the workforce twice.  "Might" is an awfully big word and is commonly used to scare people into believing something that has a really low probability of happening, but suits the policies and desires of the speaker.

                  (I couldn't see the rest of the article, but highly doubt that it gave specifics on who was fired or would be fired.)

                  1. peoplepower73 profile image87
                    peoplepower73posted 4 months agoin reply to this

                    You are right when you have a work force of over 13,000 people compared to your factory worker example. You expect them to name all he departments and job descriptions of the people who were let go.

                    I'm tired of going down a rabbit hole for you. Either accept it or don't.  I hope you and yours are not affected by the increase in severe storms as a result of climate change or global warming.

                    Here is the latest article from the NYT.

                    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the nation’s premier agency for weather and climate science, has been told by the Trump administration to prepare to lose another 1,000 workers, raising concerns that NOAA’s lifesaving forecasts might be hindered as hurricane and disaster season approaches.

                    The new dismissals would come in addition to the roughly 1,300 NOAA staff members who have already resigned or been laid off in recent weeks. The moves have alarmed scientists, meteorologists and others at the agency, which includes the National Weather Service. Some activities, including the launching of weather balloons, have already been suspended because of staffing shortages.

                    Together, the reductions would represent nearly 20 percent of NOAA’s approximately 13,000-member work force.

                    Managers within NOAA have been told to draw up proposals for layoffs and reorganizations to trim the agency’s staff by at least 1,000 people, according to eight people who requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the plans publicly. The effort is part of the “reductions in force” that President Trump required as part of an executive order last month, as he and the billionaire Elon Musk make rapid, large-scale cuts to the federal bureaucracy.

                    NOAA managers have been asked to complete their proposals by Tuesday, one of the people said. The proposals are likely to involve eliminating some of the agency’s functions, though managers have received little guidance about which programs to prioritize for cutting.
                    Representatives for NOAA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Saturday.

                    The recent employee departures have already affected NOAA’s operations in many realms: predicting hurricanes and tornadoes, overseeing fisheries and endangered species, monitoring the changes that humans are bringing about to Earth’s climate and ecosystems.

                    NOAA, a $6.8 billion agency within the Commerce Department, has been singled out for cuts by some of Mr. Trump’s allies. Project 2025, the policy blueprint published by the Heritage Foundation that is echoed in many of the Trump administration’s actions, calls NOAA “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” The document calls for the agency to be dismantled and some of its functions eliminated or privatized.

                    (My research)

                    NOAA's budget is relatively small compared to many other federal agencies. For fiscal year 2024, NOAA received approximately $7.1 billion in funding. In contrast, larger agencies like the Department of Defense and the Department of Health and Human Services have budgets in the hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars2. For example, the Department of Defense's budget is over $1 trillion.

      2. Credence2 profile image82
        Credence2posted 4 months agoin reply to this

        What is the basis then of NOAA being overstaffed? What evidence has DOGE presented to support what and who and why they cut? Where is the evidence of that?

        1. wilderness profile image76
          wildernessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

          Why don't you ask DOGE?  Certainly I don't have that information!

  2. IslandBites profile image69
    IslandBitesposted 3 weeks ago

    ‘Lives and livelihoods at risk': John Morales' take on forecasters losing critical hurricane tool

    Forecasters will lose another hurricane monitoring and forecasting tool by Monday. It adds to the incomprehensible affront to science which is putting lives and livelihoods at risk.

    A service change notice distributed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on Wednesday afternoon stated, “users should expect all […] data from […the] Special Sensor Microwave Imager Sounder (SSMIS) to be terminated,” adding, “this service change and termination will be permanent.”

    The SSMIS instruments, which fly aboard three weather satellites operated by NOAA in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), provide critical information that regular weather satellites can’t.

    When you look at satellite pictures during a TV weathercast, you’re either looking at what the plain eye can see from space, known as the visible spectrum, or an infrared picture. The infrared wavelength allows satellites to “see” clouds at night. Microwaves have even longer wavelengths than infrared. That allows the SSMIS sensors to penetrate through clouds and see what is happening under them.

    The ability to peer under the clouds of a developing tropical cyclone is critically important for hurricane specialists, including those at the National Hurricane Center (NHC). With two-thirds of all Atlantic basin storms out of reach for aircraft reconnaissance, SSMIS does yeoman’s work in monitoring storms in real time.

    By being able to accurately locate the center of a hurricane, especially fledgling ones in which the eye hasn’t cleared out, SSMIS is indispensable for storm tracking. The proper placement of a hurricane’s exact center provides the good, precise data that weather forecast models need to be able to project what will happen to a storm.

    SSMIS also allows for more frequent monitoring of tropical cyclones. While there are other microwave weather sensors on satellites in polar orbit, starting Monday the loss of SSMIS will bring a 50% reduction in data scans. Since models aren’t always right and hurricane forecasters aren’t either, not being able to follow the lifecycle of a storm on a nearly continuous basis can lead to unpleasant, costly, and potentially deadly surprises.

    I don’t need to remind you that rapid intensification cycles are happening more frequently today due to global warming. Nearly 80 percent of all major hurricanes—category 3, 4 and 5 systems described by NHC as devastating and catastrophic—undergo rapid intensification.

    Today, we’re all on a time machine collectively taking us back to the previous century.

    Combine the dropping of half of the microwave scans of tropical storms with the loss of data from missing weather balloon launches brought on by cuts to NOAA and the National Weather Service, plus the risk of a radar or aircraft breakdown and/or mission cancellation because of a lack of trained technicians, and we’re back to tracking hurricanes like it’s 1999.

    VIDEO

  3. IslandBites profile image69
    IslandBitesposted 3 weeks ago

    User notice: SSMIS data processing to end by 30 June 2025

    WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25, 2025

    The NASA National Snow and Ice Data Center Distributed Active Archive Center (NSIDC DAAC) learned yesterday that the Department of Defense (DoD) will stop processing and delivering the Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS) data no later than 30 June 2025. The SSMIS data are used as input for the following NSIDC DAAC-produced data sets, which will therefore stop processing no later than 30 June 2025:

    Bootstrap Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I (NSIDC-0079)
    DMSP SSM/I Daily Polar Gridded Brightness Temperatures (NSIDC-0001)
    Near-Real-Time DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS Daily Polar Gridded Brightness Temperatures (NSIDC-0080)
    Near-Real-Time DMSP SSMIS Daily Polar Gridded Sea Ice Concentrations (NSIDC-0081)
    Near-Real-Time SSM/I-SSMIS EASE-Grid Daily Global Ice Concentration and Snow Extent (NISE)
    Sea Ice Concentrations from Nimbus-7 SMMR and DMSP SSM/I-SSMIS Passive Microwave Data (NSIDC-0051)

    Additionally, the SSMIS data available in the Calibrated Enhanced-Resolution Passive Microwave Daily EASE-Grid 2.0 Brightness Temperature ESDR (NSIDC-0630) data set will end, but the data set will continue to update with data from the AMSR2 sensor.

  4. IslandBites profile image69
    IslandBitesposted 3 weeks ago

    This was before knowing the SSMIS was going to be shut down.

    John Morales says he's worried about 2025 hurricane season after NWS suffers loss of staff and resources

    2025’s hurricane season is already unprecedented. Never have we faced the combustible mix of a lack of meteorological data and the less accurate forecasts that follow, with an elevated propensity for the rapidly intensifying hurricanes of the manmade climate change era.

    Am I worried? You bet I am! And so are hundreds of other scientists, including all living former U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) directors, who fear a “needless loss of life” as a result of the loss of staff and resources at NWS brought on since January. 

    Central and southern Florida’s NWS offices are currently 19 to 39 percent understaffed. While that might be barely enough on a sunny day, long stretches of impending severe weather—like a hurricane—could lead to mistakes by tired skeleton crews can only work so many back-to-back shifts. Across the country, less data is being collected by fewer weather balloon launches as a result of the staff shortages.

    The National Hurricane Center (NHC) isn’t facing such a severe scarcity of employees. But there are critical departments linked to NHC’s mission that have been seriously impacted. Namely, NOAA’s Hurricane Hunters saw two flight directors and one electronic engineer terminated in late February.

    Hurricane flights also include the Air Force 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron. But should NOAA be unable to fly as many missions, there is a real risk of hurricane specialists occasionally “flying blind."

    You might think that attempting to forecast a storm’s track and intensity with limited data is a thing of the past. But it happened just two years ago. And the result wasn’t pretty.

    In 2023, Hurricane Otis struck very near Acapulco, Mexico, as a monster 165-mile-per-hour category 5 cyclone. About 24 hours before landfall, NHC was predicting it would do so as 70 mile-per-hour tropical storm!

    VIDEO

    1. peoplepower73 profile image87
      peoplepower73posted 11 days agoin reply to this

      I wrote this and posted it four months ago. If you read the Trumper's comments they are all about dismissing that DOGE's  dismantling of FEMA and NOAA would not effect how they deal with disastrous weather conditions

      And now that we are entering into hurricane and tornado season, we are beginning to see the effects of reduced staffing in both FEMA and NQA.A, especially in the states where Trump supporters live.. 

      This is the reply from AI when I asked about states where Trump supporters live.

      Yes — many states with strong Trump support are facing serious challenges due to cuts and restructuring at FEMA and NOAA, especially in the wake of recent disasters like the catastrophic floods in Texas.

      Texas as a Case Study

      - Texas, a Republican stronghold, has been hit hard by flash floods that killed over 100 people, including dozens of children.

      - FEMA and NOAA staffing cuts have raised concerns about emergency preparedness and response. For example, the Austin/San Antonio Weather Service office lost key personnel like its warning coordination meteorologist — a role critical for alerting local agencies.

      - Despite Trump’s push to phase out FEMA, the federal government did respond quickly to Texas’s disaster declaration. However, experts warn that eliminating FEMA would leave states scrambling to coordinate aid and resources on their own.
      Cuts and Consequences

      - The Trump administration has proposed 28% cuts across NOAA, including shutting down major research labs that support forecasting and climate resilience.

      - FEMA’s grant programs — which many states rely on for basic emergency management — have been delayed or rescinded, leaving local agencies uncertain about future funding.

      - States like North Carolina, Arkansas, and West Virginia have had disaster aid requests denied, even when they met traditional FEMA criteria.

      Political Alignment vs. Vulnerability

      - Many of the hardest-hit states — Texas, Florida, North Carolina — are Republican-led and have received billions in federal disaster aid in the past.

      - Trump’s push to shift disaster response to the states has created tension, especially in places where local infrastructure and budgets aren’t equipped to handle large-scale emergencies without federal support.

      So yes, the impact is real — and it’s falling heavily on states that have historically supported Trump. Whether that leads to political recalibration or deeper decentralization of disaster response remains to be seen.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)