From: -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com>
Newsgroups: alt.global-warming,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,can.politics,alt.politics.liberalism,alt.politics.democrats,alt.politics.usa.republican
Subject: Re: When Liberals Are Too Chicken Shit To Look Upon Answers To Their
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 08:12:10 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
On 7/11/25 00:14, AlleyCat wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2025 20:23:58 -0400, -hh says...
>
>>> Despite an 11% cut to NOAA's National Weather Service staff since 2025, ...
>>
>> So one can just cut staff .. and there's never any consequences?
>
> The NWS in Texas hadn't had any staff cut. (see below)
"Fahy, of the NWS employees union, told us that the Austin/San Antonio
weather forecasting office was operating with six job vacancies and the
San Angelo office had four job vacancies on July 4. Each office had five
meteorologists on duty when the flooding occurred.
But Fahy said he was concerned that the Austin/San Antonio office had
not filled two top-level positions, a permanent science officer who
oversees implementation of new technology and a warning coordination
meteorologist."
<https://www.factcheck.org/2025/07/staffing-cuts-at-nws-and-the-tragic-flooding-in-texas/>
> The weather service issued a series of timely alerts: ...
Yup, but that doesn't mean that said alert was *disseminated* to Kerr
county officials in an equally timely fashion to take action.
I assume you heard the one Kerr firefighter who called in a flood
emergency alert that then took ~45 minutes for the County supervisor to
approve it. If not, here ya go:
"Texans did not immediately receive flood alerts after request, audio
reveals"
<https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cq537dp2ello>
"Newly released audio from the moments the deadly flash flooding in
Texas Hill Country suggests critical real-time delays in warning the
most vulnerable communities."
<https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/News/video/new-questions-emergency-response-texas-after-flooding-123637619>
> Although Trump's cuts did affect staffing at the two weather service offices
> in charge of the affected area, an agency spokesperson told us via email
> that BOTH OFFICES WERE FULLY STAFFED AT THE TIME OF THE FLOODS.
They were short-staffed; the existing staff working overtime to cover.
> In other words, THE FORECASTING WASN'T THE PROBLEM.
Because it was the coordination of the forecast which failed, and the
NWS is a known part of that communication chain:
"... Austin/San Antonio office had not filled two top-level positions, a
permanent science officer who oversees implementation of new technology
and a warning coordination meteorologist."
-hh