Quote:
Originally Posted by wolf
what's the purpose of a warning system for something we can't do anything about. It's not like you can head for the Storm Cellar, like when the tornado is coming.
|
AT&T once took that attitude. Spending money subscribing for such warnings only decreased profits. AT&T did not take the precautions necessary to avert satellite damage. As a result, two of their communication satellites were destroyed. Not just one - two failed simultaneously. These carried critical data networks for credit cards, the PBS network, and numerous other channels.
Electric grids are also subscribers to this critically important data so that the grid can be configured to avert damage or blackouts.
ISS gets reconfigured so that a destructive CME does not do internal damage. Even the crew retreats to a more heavily shielded part of the station.
The Mars Science Laboratory current in transient needs it. Oppurtunity on Mars needs it since Mars does not have a protective magnetic field.
A list of organizations that need this data is long. But that is science. A president (who was an MBA) was more concerned with his political agenda. Environmental sciences are contrary to their politics. Extremists have contempt for science (global warming, stem cells, space exploration, Quantum physics, etc). They canceled many satellites necessary to learn science and to warn of specific threats.
There was no political glory in launching that satellite or learning about environmental sciences that would only contradict their political agenda. Then we will blame it on a shortage of power plants in CA, a mythical obsolete power grid, or it was only an accident.