Nod For Nasa Project Hangs In The Balance: U-Tapao

[webfact]

Nod for Nasa project hangs in the balance

Somroutai Sapsomboon,

Piyanart Srivalo

The Nation

Plodprasob says study on the need for Parliament debate will take time; questions intentions of Democrat Party

BANGKOK: -- Nasa's request to base its weather-research project at the U-Tapao airbase appeared to have hit a snag as the government and the opposition remained at loggerheads over the legal response under the Constitution's Article 190.

(click for larger image)

The government needs time to study and listen to all concerned agencies about whether the issue should be sent to Parliament, Science Minister Plodprasob Surassawadee said yesterday.

"I don't know how long the study would take and I don't know if it would be completed in time for Nasa to begin its project in August and September," he told The Nation over the phone, while blaming the opposition party for obstructing the project.

"Without the project, we will have no advance knowledge on accurately forecasting the weather, and we will not have precious information needed to avoid floods," he said.

The minister said he found the Democrat Party's intentions questionable as it demanded that the government have the issue discussed in Parliament though the Democrats themselves had failed to do so when the project was first proposed in 2010.

The joint statement of intent signed by Nasa's administrator Charles F Bolden and the Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (Gistda) chairman Somchet Thinaphong on September 28, 2010, should be considered the main document and the one filed in March as a secondary one, he said.

"If it needs to be discussed in Parliament, it should have been done when the main document was signed at the time of the Democrat-led government," he said. "If what I am doing is wrong, then what you [Democrats] did in the past was wrong, too," he said.

Plodprasob added that he would consult the Council of State, the government's legal adviser, on the issue and look at any possibilities there might be for the National Anti-Corruption Commission to consider if the Democrat-led government's action was unconstitutional.

The minister released a copy of the joint statement signed by Nasa and Gistda in 2010 to the press at Government House yesterday.

Plodprasob also said that he would ask all concerned agencies if they think the US proposal needs Parliament approval. If these agencies indicate that the Cabinet has the authority to carry on, the government will continue with the project, otherwise the issue will be taken to Parliament, he said.

So far, security agencies have indicated that the project will have no implications on national security, hence Parliament does not need to be involved, the minister said.

The Council of State told the government earlier that a proposal such as this one did not require a Parliament reading in accordance with Article 190, a source said yesterday.

Officials from several agencies testifying at the House of Representa-tive's Committee of Foreign Affairs said they saw no security implications from the Nasa project and that scientific cooperation such as this one did not need Parliament approval. The Cabinet has the authority to approve such scientific cooperation with a foreign country, the Foreign Ministry's director of Legal Division Warunee Pankra-chang told the committee.

Article 190 requires that all agreements with foreign countries or international organisations that create a change in territory, sovereignty over territory or have a serious impact on social and economic interest of the country must be taken to Parliament first.

The Nasa research project became a political issue when the opposition accused the government of allowing the United States to use U-tapao airbase in exchange for former premier Thaksin Shinawatra being granted a US entry visa and demanded that the proposal be debated in Parliament for transparency.

Academics, meanwhile, are worried that the US might be using the Nasa project as a front for high-technology research for military purposes as part of a US strategy to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region.

Plodprasob said the government had the mechanism to monitor the Nasa project and ensure that it was a purely scientific one and was beneficial to the country. The committee includes representatives from the military, Foreign Ministry, Meteo-rology Department, Bureau of Royal Rainmaking, academics as well as Gistda. The committee will examine the project before it goes into operation and monitor it closely thereafter, he said.

-- The Nation 2012-06-21

[Tonawatchee]

_{Sounds so framilar.}

[easybullet3]

"Without the project, we will have no advance knowledge on accurately forecasting the weather, and we will not have precious information needed to avoid floods," he said.

- What a load of rubbish!!!

Weather forecasting is ONLY accurate for about 5 to 8 hours ahead of time! (and that is not even 100% accurate!!)

after 1 or 2 days, the % accuracy goes right down.

in a Study measuring nearly 10 years of BBC weather prediction, they were 30 - 40% accurate for 4 days ahead. (they got it wrong two times out of three!)

http://weather.slimyhorror.com

10 day forecasts are even less accurate, the percentages of accuracy fall below 15%.

So, HOW ON EARTH WITH SOME BOGUS WEATHER PROJECT HELP ANYONE? - - it seems they are using the 'flood prediction' story as a cover-up for something else. (and probably something quite big)

personally, I don't care if NASA will be illegally spying on other places, but I DO care if they start doing scary weather project stuff affecting Thaialnd and Asia region. I certainly hope that we are not going to be a new test-ground for some nasty research or plan.

sorry, I really dont buy the Weather Forecasting Story. its definitely a 'cloak' for another background operation.

- if anyone knows anything; please speak up!

Edited June 21, 2012 by easybullet3

[h90]

"Without the project, we will have no advance knowledge on accurately forecasting the weather, and we will not have precious information needed to avoid floods," he said.

- What a load of rubbish!!!

Weather forecasting is ONLY accurate for about 5 to 8 hours ahead of time! (and that is not even 100% accurate!!)

after 1 or 2 days, the % accuracy goes right down.

in a Study measuring nearly 10 years of BBC weather prediction, they were 30 - 40% accurate for 4 days ahead. (they got it wrong two times out of three!)

http://weather.slimyhorror.com

10 day forecasts are even less accurate, the percentages of accuracy fall below 15%.

So, HOW ON EARTH WITH SOME BOGUS WEATHER PROJECT HELP ANYONE? - - it seems they are using the 'flood prediction' story as a cover-up for something else. (and probably something quite big)

personally, I don't care if NASA will be illegally spying on other places, but I DO care if they start doing scary weather project stuff affecting Thaialnd and Asia region. I certainly hope that we are not going to be a new test-ground for some nasty research or plan.

sorry, I really dont buy the Weather Forecasting Story. its definitely a 'cloak' for another background operation.

- if anyone knows anything; please speak up!

There was a study that showed that if you forcast just the same weather than you have today than you are more often right than the real forcast.

(which is also logic because often there is the same weather in a row for many days).

But no one reasonable really believes the USA need to stay on a military airport to forecast the weather.

If they would fly from Don Muang and in Cooperation with Chula University I would believe it.