GEOSS is specifically key to integrate international data to curve warming GEO 11 (Group on Earth Observations, Copyright 2011, http://www.earthobservations.org/geoss_cl.shtml, accessed 6-22-11, JG)
The issue of climate change has moved to the top of the global political agenda. However, many aspects of the global climate system are still not fully understood. Key uncertainties involve clouds, sea-level rise, the carbon cycle and the impact of sulfates and other human-caused aerosols. Solving these uncertainties will assist governments to adopt more effective policies for mitigating, and adapting to, climate change. The Group on Earth Observations is a strong advocate for sustained and coordinated climate observing systems. It is supporting an ambitious and multidisciplinary effort to strengthen the ability of governments to minimize and adapt to the societal and environmental impacts of climate variability and change. As it matures, the Global Earth Observation System of Systems will represent a quantum leap in the speed, resolution, accuracy and sophistication of weather and climate modeling and forecasting. No single country or group of countries has the resources to achieve these advances on its own, but international collaboration promises to advance climate research and monitoring by ensuring that national investments are coordinated and mutually supportive. To strengthen the link between the providers and users of climate data and predictions, GEOSS disseminates user-friendly information and decision-support tools. Meanwhile, GEO plans to build capacity for using climate and Earth observation data and products more effectively and to integrate climate-risk management into national policies for sustainable development.
Increased funding for NASA would come from defense – its on the chopping block Roop 2/3 (Lee, writer @ The Huntsville Times, http://blog.al.com/breaking/2011/02/congress_will_cut_defense_cong.html) JPG
U.S. Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Huntsville, said here Wednesday that Congress will "probably" cut defense spending next year, possibly including R&D programs based in Huntsville, but, if he gets his way, it will boost NASA's manned spaceflight program. "I hate sounding so melodramatic," Brooks told The Times editorial board, "but I do want to emphasize the seriousness of (the deficit) .... We're looking at truly catastrophic effects on our country." Brooks took office in January and joineda new Republican House majority determined to cut federal spending. On Wednesday, he returned repeatedly to what he called the urgent need spend less while still funding programs he supports, such as NASA. Those programs benefit taxpayers, he says, as opposed to wealth-transferring entitlements that should be cut. Tax increases on "job producers" are off the table to bridge the budget gap, Brooks said, but capping unemployment benefits is not. The House will cut spending this year to 2008 levels, Brooks predicted, but that will be "across the board, not per agency." "I hope to increase (NASA) spending for manned spaceflight," Brooks said. The extra money would come from other agencies or other NASA line items such as studies of global warming, he said. Brooks, who sits on the House NASA oversight committee, said there will be hearings soon on global warming. Brooks also said money for NASA could come from the National Science Foundation budget. "We might have to shift money from there," he said. "I think national defense is probably going to lose some ground," Brooks said, although he will try for "level funding." Asked how cuts might affect Huntsville, Brooks said, "I don't know." There are at least three independent estimates already before Congress, he said, one of which would mean "$4- to $7 billion in R&D cuts and that's what we specialize in (at Redstone Arsenal)." Brooks emphasized those estimates are by outside experts with no vote on the outcome. Democrats "loudly proclaim there is a lot of waste" in the defense budget, Brooks said, adding, "Heck, it's a government program. I'm sure there's waste. There always is with any kind of government program. But it is extraordinarily difficult to cut only the waste. How do you separate the two?"
Specifically, F-35s get cut Goozner 2/10 (Merrill, independent author, former journalism prof @ NYU, http://gooznews.com/?p=2474) JPG
Critics ranging from the president’s bipartisan fiscal commission to former military officers to a coalition of liberal and conservative groups backing steep Defense Department cuts have put the F-35 at the top of their list of Pentagon programs that could be scaled back or eliminated without damaging national security. The Fiscal Commission, for instance, called for cutting the program in half. Their report suggested the fighter fleet could remain at its current size by extending production of modernized F-16, F-18 and A-10 jets, which would save $9.5 billion over the next five years. “The unit cost of F-35 aircraft is estimated at about $133 million compared to $40 million for an F-16 and $80 million for an F-18,” the fiscal commission report said. “The U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy, the military’s current fourth-generation fighters – the F-15, the F-16, and the F-18 – are superior to Chinese and Russian aircraft, and they are less expensive than the F-35,” noted Gordon Adams and Matthew Leatherman in an article in the latest Foreign Affairs.
The F-35 is critical to US air power which deters all adversaries Shackelford 11(Mark, Office of the Asst Sec-USAF, http://www.airforce-magazine.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Testimony/2011/March%202011/031511shackelford.pdf)
Fifth generation fighters like the F-22A and the F-35 are key elements of our Nation’s defense and ability for deterrent capability. Hostile nations recognize that U.S. airpower can strike their vital centers with impunity which enhances all other U.S. Government instruments of power. This is the timeless paradox of deterrence; the best way to avoid war is to demonstrate to your adversaries that you have the capability and will to defeat them.The F-22A and F-35 represent our latest generation of fighter aircraft. Both aircraft are necessary to maintain a margin of superiority that permits our air and ground forces freedom of maneuver and attack. The F-22A and F-35 each possess unique, complementary, and essential capabilities that provide the synergistic effects across the spectrum of conflict. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)-led 2006 QDR Joint Air Dominance study underscored that our Nation has a critical requirement to recapitalize TACAIR forces. Legacy 4th generation aircraft simply cannot survive to operate and achieve the effects necessary to win in an integrated, anti-access environment.