No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

To Roger

Climate imbalance,and it is an imbalance is just the mechanism for
losing heat,it is not evil or otherwise.

I have noted that climatologists still stick with observations based on
non existent hemispherical axial tilt properties to the Sun or orbital
plane and that fact alone highlights the dismal prospects of
comprehending what is going on.Even allowing for the silly technical
arguments derived from an astronomical mechanism (btw,it is changing
orbital orientation movingthrough fixed axial orientation that causes
cyclical seasonal changes),it is the poor intellectual standard that
presents itself as the immediate obstacle to comprehending what is
going on.

In other words,none of you are up to the job.

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

First their products make the Hurricanes, then it costs $100,000,000 to
evacuate from the hurricane consuming their products, then they raise
the price of the product because of the hurricane. Apply, lather,
rinse, repeat.

---------
This message is brought to you by Global Warming,
ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, Cato Institute,
Koch Oil, Tech Central Station, Satan Inc.,
George C. Marshall Inst., Ford and GM.
---------

---------
Additional sponsors of this message are Karl Rove,
Scoop Libby, GOP, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh,
Vice President Halliburton, American Enerprise Inst.,
Competitive Enerprise Inst., Council on Foreign Relations,
Satan Inc., and the World Bank.
---------

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

Melchizedek wrote:
First their products make the Hurricanes, then it costs $100,000,000 to
evacuate from the hurricane consuming their products, then they raise
the price of the product because of the hurricane. Apply, lather,
rinse, repeat.

---------
This message is brought to you by Global Warming,
ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, Cato Institute,
Koch Oil, Tech Central Station, Satan Inc.,
George C. Marshall Inst., Ford and GM.
---------

---------
Additional sponsors of this message are Karl Rove,
Scoop Libby, GOP, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh,
Vice President Halliburton, American Enerprise Inst.,
Competitive Enerprise Inst., Council on Foreign Relations,
Satan Inc., and the World Bank.
---------

The price of being politically saavy is the exclusion from the actual
technical details of what generates climate imbalances.Put global
imbalances down to whatever conditions and characters that may
influence a deviation in climate from a mean cyclical average but all
that tells me is that the intellectual atmosphere,along with climate
imabalance ,is so far out of kilter that perhaps nothing can be done to
understand either.

If a person suffers high temperature,it is a sign of a response to a
departure from a balanced working condition likewise the planet
responds in a similar manner ,whether generated by human activity or
natural causes.

A doctor would know what the working condition of a person is and
recognise the rise in temperature as a symptom but climatologists have
no working model for a cyclical average,or at least the cartoon version
they work with is absolutely useless and primitive for the material
involved.

People are not doing their jobs and it shows,this forum is more or a
chat room than a means to sort and sift issues of substance,little
more than a place for complainers worthless political agendas.The
planet is not diseased,the planet is responding accordingly to
conditions influenced by contemporary living but contemporaries are
hopelessly lost in matters concerning what influences the cyclical
balances from a global perspective.

We may be the dumbest race of people ever to set foot on the planet for
although our technological achievements are great,we greedily imagine
that we have reached a point where we dictate natural things rather
than let us be instructed by astronomical and geological nature.Nature
is pitiless on those who are so silly that they mistake a cure for a
disease.

This is what is happening with climate imabalances and the more we
inflict an unatural dumping of gases into the atmosphere,the more the
planet will respond.Pity none of you care to comprehend what causes the
cyclical balances on which understanding climate changes depend.

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

You seem to have confused seasonal changes
with climate change. Seasonoal changes happen
fast, one cycle every year, in fact.

The current warming has happened too fast to
be due to astronomical forcing. Astronomical
forcing, Milankovic cycles, space dust, or
whatever, makes changes over the course of
millennia. The only know source of
astronomical forcing known to be operating
is a slow cooling from Milankovic cycles,
which is about two decimal orders of magnitude
below the warming from anthropogenic
greenhouse gases.

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

Roger Coppock wrote:
You seem to have confused seasonal changes
with climate change. Seasonoal changes happen
fast, one cycle every year, in fact.


Yeah,yeah,yeah,cyclical seasonal changes occur in a hemisphere over the
annual cycle thereby affirming my point that the people dealing with
climate change variations off a cyclical average still stick to
primitive models that are just slightly above a flat Earth.






The current warming has happened too fast to
be due to astronomical forcing.

But assigning a variable axial tilt properties to the Earth against the
Sun or orbital plane is a symptom of a diseased mind for no such
variation occurs.Get the mechanism for seasonal changes incorrect and
you are a poor commentator on everything else.


Astronomical
forcing, Milankovic cycles, space dust, or
whatever, makes changes over the course of
millennia. The only know source of
astronomical forcing known to be operating
is a slow cooling from Milankovic cycles,
which is about two decimal orders of magnitude
below the warming from anthropogenic
greenhouse gases.

Stop !. The relationship between axial and orbital motion changes as
the Earth's orbit becomes more elliptical or more circular.Insofar as
cyclical seasonal changes are rendered in hemispherical terms of the
Sun's orientation and motion to the Equator (high/summer,low/Winter)
there is no facility availible to treat the Earth's climate in terms of
the actual astronomical mechanism which generates the cyclical
averages.

The most relevent point is that in accounting for cyclical seasonal
variations,the astronomical forcings ,as you call it,do not split at
the Equator but straddle in in bands towards the poles nor can
variations in an annual cycle be assigned as variations in axial tilt
to the Sun.

The mechanism for cyclical changes and the correct intepretation of
what causes those changes ( changing orbital orientation against fixed
axial orientation) is the basic requirement to investigate any
imbalance from the cyclical averages up to an including more severe
meteorological events such as hurricanes.

Every single one of you here fail the basic requirement so before you
bother to express your phony concern make sure you understand the
basics of how the planet responds to human activity in terms of
pollution as a means to maintain a balance due to in present
astronomical motions and the relationship between axial and orbital
motion.

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

First their products make the Hurricanes, then it costs $100,000,000 to
evacuate from the hurricane consuming their products, then they raise
the price of the product because of the hurricane. Apply, lather,
rinse, repeat.

---------
This message is brought to you by Global Warming,
ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron, Cato Institute,
Koch Oil, Tech Central Station, Satan Inc.,
George C. Marshall Inst., Ford and GM.
---------

---------
Additional sponsors of this message are Karl Rove,
Scooter Libby, GOP, George Bush, Rush Limbaugh,
Vice President Halliburton, American Enerprise Inst.,
Competitive Enterprise Inst., Council on Foreign Relations,
Satan Inc., and the World Bank.
---------

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

"Well Done" wrote in message
...
"Alastair McDonald" k
wrote:
GWB's
procrastination over the levees in NO will be nothing compared with
the effects of his procrastination over global warming!

GW did NOT "procrastinate" over the levees!
The floodwall that gave way was almost brand new, you idiot.

Procrastination is far too generous a term for what he really did, which was
to actively cut the flood control budget. And indeed some work continued,
as with the new flood wall, but it was wholly inadequate. We should bear in
mind that he was only the latest in a string of national leaders to have
ignored or minimized the problem, though.

Cheers, Alastair. *PLONK*
--
): "I may make you feel, but I can't make you think" :(
(: Off the monitor, through the modem, nothing but net :)

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

To Alastair

Cannot even begin tio imagine why a person would talk of seasonal
hemispherical averages and then shift to a global view as if this was
perfectly fine.

The daylight/darkness asymmetry generated by constant axial rotation
passing through changing orbital orientation (thus generating the
cyclical global variations in climate) cannot even be used by
contemporaries who insist on a subhuman axial tilt mechanism and how
sunlight strikes the Earth*.

It is not at all difficult to determine that the asymmetry between
daylight/darkness is absent from explanations because the cataloguers
combine axial and orbital motion off the Earth's axis and treat axial
and orbital motion as a single sidereal motion.

Daylight/darkness asymmetry and the length of time a location spends in
sunlight is extremely imporatant but does NOT factor into contemporary
primitive explanations for seasonal variations and more importantly,the
enormous task of providing a correct global mechanism for seasons from
a global perspective.

None of you take your jobs seriously but then again,common sense was
never a strong point of those who knew much of the empirical 'occam's
razor'.

* http://www.answers.com/topic/axial-tilt

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

"oriel36" wrote in message
oups.com...


Daylight/darkness asymmetry and the length of time a location spends in
sunlight is extremely imporatant but does NOT factor into contemporary
primitive explanations for seasonal variations and more importantly,the
enormous task of providing a correct global mechanism for seasons from
a global perspective.

To ???????,

From a global point of view, it is invariably true that half of the Earth is
lit by the Sun and the other half is in darkness. This fact is used in zero
dimensional energy balance models. On a local scale, it is only true on two
days of the year that daytime equals nightime. That is one reason General
Circulation Models (GCMs) are used to model climate. The
ClimatePrediction.net model http://www.climateprediction.net/ uses a time step
of 30 minutes, thus ensuring that different length of day is properly treated
throughout the globe.

I was taught at school that the Arctic was infested with mosquitos because the
length of day compensated for the low angle of incidence of the sun. The idea
that scientists would ignore such an obvious fact is so laughable that I, and
perhaps everyone else, have found it incredible that someone as literate as
yourself could be making it.

The scientists who produce the models, and who are predicting that global
warming is going to cause major probelms for the world, have considered more
"angles" than you could come up with even if you spent your whole life
thinking about it. That is what they are doing, spending their lives thinking
about the different 'angles', and there are thousands of them!

Cheers, Alastair.

No escape for dramatic Arctic thaw?
 

Alastair McDonald wrote:
"oriel36" wrote in message
oups.com...


Daylight/darkness asymmetry and the length of time a location spends in
sunlight is extremely imporatant but does NOT factor into contemporary
primitive explanations for seasonal variations and more importantly,the
enormous task of providing a correct global mechanism for seasons from
a global perspective.

To ???????,

From a global point of view, it is invariably true that half of the Earth is
lit by the Sun and the other half is in darkness.

Assuming that you have not actually familiar enough with certain
distinctions and why they becomes important,ease up and let the
planet's axial and orbital motions and orientations dictate this the
course of this thread than any personal opinions.

From a global point of the view,the Earth's changing orbital
orientation,due to its orbital motion,passing through fixed axial
orientation causes cyclical changes.You will never hear the change in
orbital orientation used is descriptions of cyclical changes but
taking your description and placing it is graphic form,it looks like
this -

http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...ages/04f15.jpg

Contemporaries find it nearly impossible to isolate orbital motion and
orientation even though the explanation for cyclical seasonal
changes,the averages from those changes and imbalances (including
global warming) from those averages depend on the accurate
astronomical mechanism with close attension to the relationship
between axial and orbital motion.






This fact is used in zero
dimensional energy balance models. On a local scale, it is only true on two
days of the year that daytime equals nightime. That is one reason General
Circulation Models (GCMs) are used to model climate. The
ClimatePrediction.net model http://www.climateprediction.net/ uses a time step
of 30 minutes, thus ensuring that different length of day is properly treated
throughout the globe.


http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/astronom...ages/04f15.jpg

As axial rotation and orbital motions are independent of each
other,there is an asymmetry in the relationship between axial and
orbital motion between Sept/Mar and Mar/Sept.While the graphic above
contains no information on axial rotation and orientation,you can
assume that axial rotation/orientation remained constant and fixed.

Taken from your cited website to illustrate why the contemporary view
is a very poor description -

"The Seasonal Cycle

The seasonal cycle in the atmosphere is driven by the fact that the
Earth's axis is not at right angles to the sun (it is actually 23°
away from perpendicular ). This means that, at different times of year,
different latitudes get the most incoming solar radiation. At the
equinoxes, the sun is overhead at the equator, at the June solstice,
the sun is over the Tropic of Cancer and at the December solstice, it
is over the Tropic of Capricorn. This means that, in June, July and
August (northern hemisphere summer), the northern hemisphere is warmer
than the southern hemisphere. Similarly in December, January and
February, the southern hemisphere is warmer. These months are not
symmetrical about the solstice (for example, we do not talk about the
November, December, January season) because the climate system tends to
lag the sun: it takes a while to heat up or cool down. "

http://www.climateprediction.net/science/cl-intro.php

Attributing a change in position of the Sun against the Earth's
Equator/axis demostrates a shocking lack of appreciation for the size
of our parent star and no attribution to the changing orbital
orientation of the Earth.It affirms that by combining axial rotation
and orbital motion working off the Earth's axis,the valuable asymmetry
that straddles the Earth's position at the perihelion (Sept/Mar) and
aphelion (Mar/Sept) is lost.








I was taught at school that the Arctic was infested with mosquitos because the
length of day compensated for the low angle of incidence of the sun. The idea
that scientists would ignore such an obvious fact is so laughable that I, and
perhaps everyone else, have found it incredible that someone as literate as
yourself could be making it.

The scientists who produce the models, and who are predicting that global
warming is going to cause major probelms for the world, have considered more
"angles" than you could come up with even if you spent your whole life
thinking about it. That is what they are doing, spending their lives thinking
about the different 'angles', and there are thousands of them!

Cheers, Alastair.

Presently they are wasting their time,to be any less blunt would be
inaccurate.

The root of the problem goes back to the 17th century celestial
cataloguers who first combined axial and orbital motion into a sidereal
average and justified it astronomically(your cited website does just
that).I assume most people with common sense would be puzzled as to why
the daylight/darkness asymmetry is absent from the explanation of
cyclical seasonal changes in favor of hemispherical axial tilt.

You can always stick with what you know and I would not blame
you,Taking the route of an accurate astronomical mechanism for seasonal
changes using a true global picture rather than splitting the
hemispheres into summer/winter can be intricate (but oh so rewarding)
just as the consequences of an El Nino event cannot be isolated to a
hemisphere.

It requires that you initially let the planet's motions and
orientations dictate matters rather than imposing 'angles' but as
scientists adopt the wrong relationship between axial and orbital
motion in terms of how they assign the value for axial rotation* and
subsequently destroy the relationship with orbital motion and changing
orientation ,you are not doing your jobs and wasting people's time.

* http://hypertextbook.com/facts/1999/JennyChen.shtml