| Like others nearby, I’d like to see something more specific. I’m willing to believe that in some silos (like relatively high-cadence seismographs) there might be some censoring. For example, it’s believable that siting of permanent stations is nudged away from some sensitive areas. Also, more believable in the past (say, 1980s) than the present. Related, I’m sure that some sensors aren’t allowed to be flown over some areas (e.g., certain military bases) in the US. However, you are claiming a broad based program of censoring US scientific data - gathered by the government or by government contractors. Like you, I’ve worked in this space for a long time. But I have not seen what you describe. I wonder if we are working under different definitions of “censor” (see military base remark above)? For people’s reference, the US-sponsored seismograph network is under EarthScope (https://www.earthscope.org/gsn/). Your remarks caught my notice because I have personally worked with GNSS (lower cadence than seismograph) data, and personally know people who placed the sensors, wrote the data assimilation algorithms it uses, and set up the data pipeline. This data is not censored. (Although, famously, it was, before GPS was opened up.) I’m trying to find a way to rectify these two viewpoints. |