Weather at South Pole

oriel36

https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm

At the South polar latitude, it is roughly the equivalent of 2 AM in terms of the single polar day/night cycle while it is roughly 2 PM at the North pole. This filters down to lower latitudes closer to the equator where temperatures are still responding to solar radiation post-solstice just as there is a lag in temperatures rises after 12 noon due to daily rotation.

The conclusion remains the same - if daily rotation and all it's effects are subtracted, the entire surface of the Earth still turns once to the Sun each year as a function of the Earth's orbital motion. Temperatures (weather) respond to this surface rotation in much the same way as the 24 hour fluctuations respond to daily rotation.

It is not a theory but a 100% observational certainty.

Gaoth Laidir

oriel36 wrote: »

https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm

At the South polar latitude, it is roughly the equivalent of 2 AM in terms of the single polar day/night cycle while it is roughly 2 PM at the North pole. This filters down to lower latitudes closer to the equator where temperatures are still responding to solar radiation post-solstice just as there is a lag in temperatures rises after 12 noon due to daily rotation.

The conclusion remains the same - if daily rotation and all it's effects are subtracted, the entire surface of the Earth still turns once to the Sun each year as a function of the Earth's orbital motion. Temperatures (weather) respond to this surface rotation in much the same way as the 24 hour fluctuations respond to daily rotation.

It is not a theory but a 100% observational certainty.

I think this should be in the WTF thread.

Donegal Storm

Gaoth Laidir wrote: »

I think this should be in the WTF thread.

This poster has a remarkable ability of turning extremely simple statements into long rambling streams of nonsense

Gaoth Laidir

Donegal Storm wrote: »

This poster has a remarkable ability of turning extremely simple statements into long rambling streams of nonsense

Still, at least the link is useful. That's some windchill there right now (or is temperature also a figment of the great scientific fallacy?).

oriel36

I appreciate that most restrict themselves to current weather conditions, however, it would be also productive to consider weather conditions in 6 months time rather than misdirect long term weather into meaningless 'climate change' modeling. Climate, on a global scale, is the rate of change in temperature conditions across latitudes over the course of half an orbit/6 months with this rate determined by the degree of inclination to the orbital plane.

https://calgary.rasc.ca/images/planet_inclinations.gif

Clearly the North and South polar latitudes have a single day/night cycle with a single sunrise/sunset happening at opposite equinoxes but as these polar latitudes do not have any rotational velocity as a function of daily rotation, the explanation for the polar day/night cycle is found elsewhere.

All planets has two distinction surface rotations to the Sun as an observational certainty with Uranus and its unique polar inclination providing a visual affirmation of this climate and planetary trait (about 50 seconds in) -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=612gSZsplpE&t=56s

Cyclical weather conditions and events like the Atlantic hurricane season or Arctic sea ice appearance and disappearance rely on the two distinct surface rotations acting in combination as temperature fluctuate North and South towards either poles -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvbV9llG5L8&t=27s

Would reasonable people come to understand the surface rotation behind the single polar day/night cycle, then long term cyclical weather would not be diverted towards modeling monstrosities like 'climate change' but towards a clear description of weather as a cyclical event in terms of temperatures.

Modeling atmospheric weather conditions for the week involves various components in the atmosphere, considering cyclical weather conditions across 6 months or an entire year requires just as much consideration. There will be a lot of those 'wtf' comments, however, these people can ignore something as basic as the cause of the polar day/night cycle where the Sun is in view or out of sight for 6 months at a time at the North and South poles. There is an actual cause which is crucial for researching planetary climate within a solar system framework.

Nabber

oriel36 wrote: »

I appreciate that most restrict themselves to current weather conditions, however, it would be also productive to consider weather conditions in 6 months time rather than misdirect long term weather into meaningless 'climate change' modeling. Climate, on a global scale, is the rate of change in temperature conditions across latitudes over the course of half an orbit/6 months with this rate determined by the degree of inclination to the orbital plane.

https://calgary.rasc.ca/images/planet_inclinations.gif

Clearly the North and South polar latitudes have a single day/night cycle with a single sunrise/sunset happening at opposite equinoxes but as these polar latitudes do not have any rotational velocity as a function of daily rotation, the explanation for the polar day/night cycle is found elsewhere.

All planets has two distinction surface rotations to the Sun as an observational certainty with Uranus and its unique polar inclination providing a visual affirmation of this climate and planetary trait (about 50 seconds in) -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=612gSZsplpE&t=56s

Cyclical weather conditions and events like the Atlantic hurricane season or Arctic sea ice appearance and disappearance rely on the two distinct surface rotations acting in combination as temperature fluctuate North and South towards either poles -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvbV9llG5L8&t=27s

Would reasonable people come to understand the surface rotation behind the single polar day/night cycle, then long term cyclical weather would not be diverted towards modeling monstrosities like 'climate change' but towards a clear description of weather as a cyclical event in terms of temperatures.

Modeling atmospheric weather conditions for the week involves various components in the atmosphere, considering cyclical weather conditions across 6 months or an entire year requires just as much consideration. There will be a lot of those 'wtf' comments, however, these people can ignore something as basic as the cause of the polar day/night cycle where the Sun is in view or out of sight for 6 months at a time at the North and South poles. There is an actual cause which is crucial for researching planetary climate within a solar system framework.

Nonsense as always, your post do very little to help conversation and are laden with language used to allude to something when really nothing is mentioned.

From what I can read you are telling weather enthusiast forum that the earths tilt and motions around our sun determine our weather.... FFS really?
Why stop at the Day/Night cycle? Why not go further back and tell us how our brain view images of our day/night cycle. Surely their is fallacy in what we perceive as we know our eyes can be tricked?

oriel36

Nabber wrote: »

Nonsense as always, your post do very little to help conversation and are laden with language used to allude to something when really nothing is mentioned.

The reactions are all wrong considering what is being expressed, in this case the polar day/night at the North and South poles where daily rotational velocity is zero. The fact is that when daily rotation and all its effects are subtracted, the entire surface of the Earth still turns once to the Sun each orbit and the omission of this fact is considerable by any measure. You may not see it but others may with a little familiarity and effort.

Even for weather enthusiasts who only deal with short term pressure variations in the atmosphere without having to deal with dynamical concerns, it is obvious that the cyclical weather patterns across an annual cycle are dictated by dynamics so none of the usual cop-outs are allowed or to disqualify this expression in a weather newsgroup.

It is as though the polar day/night cycle and the surface rotation behind it is an affront to observers even though it is not possible to explain the Atlantic hurricane season and Arctic sea ice season without the fluctuation in temperatures and warm water geographically towards and away from either poles as a reflection of daily and orbital dynamical traits -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvbV9llG5L8&t=32s


It is the implied combination of the Earth's daily and annual surface rotations off a median temperature which causes the fluctuations and present in all planets as an observation. I posted the time lapse of Uranus as a 100% observational certainty so your " earths tilt and motions around our sun determine our weather" falls far short of what cyclical weather entails.

Granted that the success of short term computer modeling of weather can keep people busy but when the curtain rises on cyclical weather patterns and the dynamics behind it, there should be no weak reactions or prejudice towards this more expansive inspection of weather.

Gaoth Laidir

This nonsense has to stop