Comment Re:Why NASA? (Score 1) 291
There's no reason why NOAA can't use and study the data. They would have the access to the satellites and data that NASA has.
Only if NASA gives them the data. If the program is cut, then maybe not so much.
There's no reason why this couldn't be rolled under NOAA's budget as a cost savings measure
What evidence to you have that 1) NOAA would be funded for this; and 2) savings would result? I find both assertions dubious.
There's no reason why NASA, a Space Engineering Agency needs to be independently checking NOAA
They're not. NOAA is doing its own thing using different instruments and methods. Having multiple tracks for something as important as climate change is just good science.
This Notion that NASA is a science agency needs to stop now. It is an Engineering agency.
A demonstrably false assertion. You may not like that NASA does science, but it definitely does.
If we can shift that 10 Million from NASA to NOAA, and NOAA orders the satellite from NASA and uses the leftover cash
What evidence do you have that there would be leftover cash?
for more climate studies instead of hiring climate experts (which NASA would have to do. NOAA already has experts),
Again false. NASA has climate experts. One of the major climate data sets, GISTEMP, is produced by NASA.
