The Tonka Report

Real News In A Changing World

Archive for August 17th, 2010

Disaster In The Gulf: Relief Wells Delayed Over Fears Of New Spill

leave a comment »

August 17, 2010: Tom Elay / Global Research – August 17, 2010

As of Monday, BP had yet to resume drilling of two relief wells which aim to permanently seal off its Macondo well.

The latest delay arose over concerns that the operation might create a new spill.

It had been widely reported that the completion of the relief wells would begin on Tuesday, but National Incident Commander Thad Allen cast doubt on that in a Monday press conference. “Timelines won’t be known until we get a recommendation on the course of action,” Allen said, adding that the process “will not start until we figure out how to manage the risk of pressure in the annulus.”

The annulus is a ring that surrounds the well’s casing. Last week scientists found evidence to suggest the annulus was breached during the “static kill” operation in late July, during which heavy mud and cement was used to force oil back down toward its reservoir.

In the procedure, oil very likely became trapped in the annulus between the seafloor and the reservoir. This has raised concerns over how to maintain a safe pressure level when the relief well intersects the Macondo and the “bottom kill” of pumping cement into the lower reaches of the well can begin. Some engineers have criticized the decision to use the static kill prior to the completion of the relief wells. “It would have been easier and safer to kill the well with the relief well,” Les Ply, a retired petroleum engineer, told Bloomberg.

It cannot be excluded that the relief well may cause a new blowout or in some other way open up an avenue for the oil to escape its reservoir, estimated at a volume of between 2 billion and 4.2 billion gallons — 20 and 40 times the magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon blowout.

To control pressure in the well casing, two procedures are reportedly being debated. One would involve removing the new capping stack, placed over the wellhead on July 15, and replacing it with another blowout preventer. Another possibility would involve BP creating a new pressure relief device for the capping stack now in place. Whatever the risks, no confidence can be placed in either BP or the Obama administration. From the beginning the response, cleanup, and efforts to contain the well have been animated by one overriding concern — the defense of BP and the oil industry as a whole.

The Macondo erupted in the biggest sea blowout in history on April 20 [2010] after BP ignored a series of warnings and unsafely expedited well-capping with its exploratory Deepwater Horizon rig. Eleven workers died in the resulting explosion and upwards of 200 million gallons of oil were dumped into the Gulf of Mexico by mid-July.

In its efforts to contain the gusher BP moved from failure to failure — “top hat,” “containment dome,” “junk shot,” “top kill,” and so on. All through the process, however, BP maintained that the ultimate and fail-safe means for finally closing off the Macondo reservoir would be through the drilling of relief wells that would intersect with it far below the seabed and plug the well by pumping cement into it.

But in mid-July BP abruptly suspended drilling of the relief wells, even though one of the two was reportedly within feet of the Macondo. It then put in place a new capping system, ostensibly to conduct a 48-hour pressure test. Even though the pressure test failed to achieve the results BP had said were necessary, the cap was left in place permanently. This was followed by the static kill operation.

No rationale was provided for the suspension of the relief wells in July. This was in keeping with the modus operandi of BP and the Obama administration throughout the disaster: cover-up.

The mysterious stop-and-go of relief well drilling continued last week. After bad weather temporarily suspended drilling early in the week, BP intimated that it would not be necessary to complete the relief wells at all. “After all this effort, why would they quit before they’re done?” asked Richard Charter, an analyst with Defenders of Wildlife. “If you had a trustworthy company and they said it’s done, it’s done. But in this case BP has not been a trustworthy company.”

Then on Friday Allen publicly declared that the relief wells would be completed. “The relief well will be finished,” Allen said. “We will kill the well.” When this might take place has been thrown into doubt by the discovery of the breach in the annulus.

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: BP and the Obama administration are mired in a false flag conspiracy to cover up the truth concerning the Macondo reservoir. The seabed is breached, oil and methane are still leaking, dispersants are still being sprayed, people are getting sick, massive plumes of oil and dispersants are killing all sea life and destroying the food chain, fisherman refuse to fish, while Obama tells us the Gulf is “open for business!” – SJH

Link to original article below…

Top Climate Scientists Speak Out About The SatelliteGate Scandal

leave a comment »

August 17, 2010: John O’Sullivan / Canada Free Press – August 16, 2010

US Government admits global warming satellite sensors are “degraded” – temperatures may be out by 10-15 degrees. Now five satellites are in controversy.

Top scientists speak out, in an escalating row now being dubbed ‘Satellitegate’ as further evidence proves that NOAA knew of these faults for years.

Both world renowned top climate scientists and even prior released governmental reports now cite underfunding and misallocation as the trigger for spiraling satellite data calamities. Key flaws with five satellites undermines all global data.

Most disturbing of all is that it took publication of my article last week to persuade the authorities to withdraw the errant NOAA-16 satellite from service. But as Dr. John Christy indicates, the real Satellitegate is not about one satellite. The scandal is endemic with comparable flaws across the entire network; the scandal is also that it took a tip-off from a member of the public and the widespread broadcast of my article before one of the offending junk boxes, NOAA-16, got taken down. Readers who missed the details when this sensational story first broke can see here at

NOAA’s chief Program Administrator, Chuck Pistis, at first disingenuously tried to discredit my report and whitewash the matter with disinformation. Indeed, we may have a smoking gun of a cover up when we contrast and compare latest announcements with the offending satellite’s AVHRR Subsystem Summary.

The official summary shows no report of any ‘sensor degradation’ since its launch in September 2000. Yet on the advice of top climate scientists, I’m reliably informed that such failures were made known to NOAA years ago. Nonetheless, the U.S. agency continued to sell its flawed data products to numerous international institutions without making it public that satellite sensors were “degraded” and unreliable for assessing climate change.

NOAA-16 had been commissioned as a polar-orbiting satellite featuring AMSU, AVHRR and High Resolution Infrared Radiation Sounder (HIRS) measuring instrumentation which were discovered by a member of the public last week to have suffered catastrophic failure. Dr John Christy drew my attention to specific concomitant flaws he had uncovered and reported with the AMSU years ago.

NOAA In Fear Of Rush Of International Lawsuits?

The snuffed out satellite had been run continuously up until being taken offline soon after my article went viral (August 10, 2010) in which I exposed the full extent of how seriously degraded it’s sensors were. The automatic readings had been contaminated by hundreds, if not thousands, of false and absurdly high temperature readings, some as high as 612 degrees Fahrenheit (boiling point of water is 212 F.). We now know NOAA was aware of these outrageous anomalies at least since 2006 but they were not remedied (see below).

Worryingly, as to how many of its users (mostly international meteorologists and climate researchers) were affected has not been revealed by NOAA. But we know the automated numbers were sold throughout the world and it’s readings of land and ocean temperatures have been used by climate scientists in their models since the satellite’s launch in September 2000. As a consequence and without full disclosure by NOAA, it is feared innumerable scientific studies about rising global temperatures are now rendered entirely invalid.

It is open to speculation whether NOAA may have been hesitant to admit to long standing faults for fear of a rash of lawsuits from its customers, mainly national governments and university research institutes. Based on such data most scientists agree that our planet may have warmed by 0.6 degrees Centigrade during the 20th century (with a margin of error of 0.5C degrees – but this error margin now looks way off).

From analysis of the bogus online temperature data before NOAA removed it from view, it may be determined that almost all the false temperature readings were far in excess of expected averages – many by a factor of four or five – almost none of the bogus temperatures were lower than average.

US Government Foresaw Satelligate Failures Mounting

But it wasn’t just a handful of skeptical climatologists sounding the alarm. The National Academy of Sciences, in its 2007 455-page report concluded that because of degradation in the U.S. satellite network, the country’s ability to monitor the climate and severe weather was “at great risk.”

By coincidence, in the same week my article led to the shut down of NOAA-16, Susan Bohan published her excellent article here in which she exposes the broader systemic failures in the wider satellite network. Among the calamities Bohan reported, “the satellite, Landsat 7, is broken. And it’s emblematic of the nation’s battered satellite environmental monitoring program.”

The term ‘satelligate’ was coined by the blog after it diligently picked up on the piece.

At Least Five Climate Measuring Satellites Compromised

Crucially, Bohan’s article wasn’t based on any so-called unsubstantiated ‘big oil’ funded skeptic disinformation plot, a dying urban myth anyway, but on a US Government Accountability Office report (GAO). GAO concedes that nine new climate instruments on the latest generation of satellites were canceled or their capabilities scaled back in 2006. GAO is the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress.

As a consequence at least five such satellite programs have been identified as being either degraded or seriously compromised:

  • Landsat 7 (currently in orbit) is broken leaving data gaps. Scientists do not get all the information they should.
  • NPOESS (National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite) will not have any sensors that measure the sun’s energy output on the 2nd and 4th satellites.
  • GOES-R (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite – R Series) has had 14 sensors cancelled. No data for cloud base height, ozone layer, ocean color, ocean turbidity and cloud imagery, snow cover, etc. Effectively neutered.
  • No sensor for movement of greenhouse gases and pollutants. No sensor to monitor temperature changes on Earth over time. (NOAA didn’t even bother to try to get the funding to keep the eliminated sensors!).
  • The sensor to measure how Earth’s temperature reacts to changes in Solar energy was cancelled by the Obama Administration at the end of June 2010.

Perhaps its no accident that the current head of NOAA, Dr. Jane Lubchenco and hand picked by President Barack Obama, declared that her agency would play its role in developing a green economy.

Thus, despite the US Government spending in excess of $80 billion in climate research, a failure to allocate sufficient funds to the satellite program has now resulted in serious damage to the credibility of the entire data set (note: the cost of a typical NOAA satellite is around $11 million and the network recoups the US government millions by selling data worldwide).

Evidence From Climate Experts Points To Conspiracy To Deceive

Dr. Roy Spencer commented, “Obviously, whatever happened to NOAA-16 AVHRR (or the software) introduced HUGE errors. We always had trouble with NOAA-16 AMSU, and dropped it long ago. It had calibration drifts that made it unsuitable for climate monitoring.”

Dr. Christy particularly addressed faults exclusively with the AMSU instrumentation and not problems with the AVHRR system. He advised me, “We spent a lot of time in 2006 trying to deal with the issues of NOAA-16, but the errors were so erratic, we ended up eliminating it as one of the backbones of our dataset.”

As many such analysts have long been advising, these failures go way beyond the shockingly absurd numbers of 604 degrees recorded at Egg harbor, Wisconsin.

Dr. Timothy Ball, climate consultant to the military and lead author of a new book debunking the greenhouse gas theory observes, “At best the entire incident indicates gross incompetence, at worst it indicates a deliberate attempt to create a temperature record that suits the political message of the day.”

Mainstream Media Turn Blind Eye To Another ‘Gate’ Scandal

In 2006 Christy and Spencer had sought to complete a technical analysis on NOAA-16’s AMSU, but Christy reveals that it, “was very tedious and we chased a lot of rabbits that turned out to be dead ends.”

Such appalling facts just don’t appear in the ‘on message’ mainstream media and all the while researchers have been struggling in vain to keep pace with the ever-increasing numbers gap due to ongoing sensor degradation. For example, each month Dr. Christy works with Dr. Spencer trying to piece together the faltering patchwork of global temperature datasets given by a total of eleven instruments flying on eleven different satellites since 1979.

Over such a long time period it has been suggested that cosmic rays or particle impacts may be deteriorating the highly sensitive instrumentation on board the crafts. Spencer publishes his findings on his blog while a fuller assessment of the satellite problems found by Dr. Christy is found here.

Will Systemic Measuring Failures Cost Even More Lives?

Respected internationally for his world leading weather forecasts, Piers Corbyn, of is another expert lamenting the scandalous failures in the satellite network.

Piers thundered on the Climate Realists blog, “This revelation further confirms something I and Tom Harris said on Russia Today TV Feb (5th) 2010 namely that WE JUST DO NOT reliably KNOW what world temperatures are and have been doing over the last decade or century.”

Corbyn had correctly forecast this summer’s West Russia heatwave and a general increase in VERY extreme events (evidenced by Pakistan & China’s horrendous floods and “super cold” in parts of the Southern hemisphere) weeks and months in advance.

A Growing List Of Global Warming Satellite Measuring Failures

Satelligate points to yet another infuriating government cover up of fudged global warming numbers. Despite the clamor for years from scientists from all sides of the global warming debate for more transparency and better access to such data, zealous gatekeepers within NASA and Britain’s CRU have refused such requests and unlawfully defied Freedom of Information (FOIA) demands.

As indicated on WattsUpWithThat such errors and deficiencies along with plain old-fashioned data fraud have long been swept under the carpet with ever more lives put at risk. Indeed, public confidence in the reliability of official warnings of apocalyptic doom from purveyors of NOAA’s trumpeted fake data has been met with increasing cynicism. A growing number of taxpayers are voicing opposition to the zealous rush towards crippling tax hikes dismantling first world standards of living without first having ascertained the proper facts.

Questions NOAA Refuses To Answer

In light of concerns that NOAA has officially admitted to only withdrawing “images” from its archives without confirming all bogus data has also been dumped, I posed the following and yet unanswered questions to NOAA’s Dr. Jane Lubchenco:

  • What steps have you taken to ascertain the scope and extent of this data error and what action will be taken to avoid further recurrence?
  • Have you identified whether these temperature anomalies impact other data sets and findings; in particular does this undermine in any way the credibility of official government statements already made about climatic changes, and if so by how much?

Until Lubchenco comes clean, I fear we may be witnessing another ‘Phil Jones’ in the making. For without full transparency and frank answers, then the endless media hype about the dangers from the so-called ‘greenhouse gas theory’ remains just that—hype.

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Global Warming Or Global Governance?

The Tonka Report Editor’s Note: I mentioned these newest revelations of the man-made global warming scam to a co-worker. One young lady who over heard our conversation literally said in disgust (exasperation?), “I don’t want to hear about this!” I should add that she also worked on the Obama campaign for President here in Chicago. The truth is a mighty hammer when you’re the nail living a lie being hammered into reality! – SJH 

Link to original article below…