Michael Tobis wrote:
> Consequently, some blazingly obvious things worth doing (continuing to
> maintain existing lengthy observation series, for instance) are often
> left undone. They are undone because it is in nobody's personal interest
> to promote them, despite the fact that it is very much in the common
> interest that they be done.
I'm sure there's some truth in that, but note that what we really need
are more observations from a hundred years ago :-)
> If you think this is bad consider observational oceanography, which is
> more expensive and arguably more crucial (since satellite observations
> can only tell us about surface conditions) but equally unsupported. We
> do not have a single instantaneous picture of the temperature structure
> of any ocean.
Don't you think that the thousands of ARGO buoys represent a massive
improvement over the previous situation, even as ship tracks are declining?
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
