Boards.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more x
Post Reply  
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
28-06-2020, 10:16   #2341
Akrasia
Registered User
 
Akrasia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Birdnuts View Post
The accurate recording of temps in the likes of Siberia goes back barely 100 years, so your assumptions on the matter count for little
When permafrost stops being perma or frosty, you don’t need thermometers to tell you that it’s not normal
Akrasia is offline  
(2) thanks from:
Advertisement
28-06-2020, 10:57   #2342
Oneiric 3
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 4,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akrasia View Post
ooookaaay

I know what the summer solstice is, it happens every year, so it doesn't explain why this particular year is seeing such unprecedented temperatures with places in Siberia reaching 38c
That video I posted a while back explained how the decrease in pollutants & aerosols has caused the Arctic region to warm and sea ice to decrease even more than it was already doing since the 'lockdown' began.
Oneiric 3 is offline  
28-06-2020, 14:07   #2343
Akrasia
Registered User
 
Akrasia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oneiric 3 View Post
That video I posted a while back explained how the decrease in pollutants & aerosols has caused the Arctic region to warm and sea ice to decrease even more than it was already doing since the 'lockdown' began.
Even if that is the explanation it’s terrible news that human particulate atmospheric pollution is masking some of the effects of anthropogenic global warming. It means the underlying warming is worse than we have already measured
Akrasia is offline  
29-06-2020, 01:02   #2344
Birdnuts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 7,145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akrasia View Post
When permafrost stops being perma or frosty, you don’t need thermometers to tell you that it’s not normal

Actually it ebbs and flows - which is why the likes of Wooly Mammoths etc. got stuck in it thousands of years ago, which again suggests nothing we see in the region currently is out of the ordinary
Birdnuts is offline  
29-06-2020, 07:39   #2345
M.T. Cranium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,187
The heat wave in Siberia this year is being caused by a massive blocking high in the upper atmosphere. One could argue that this is a random variation that would occur somewhere in the hemisphere most years and just happened to pick Siberia this year. I don't take that approach but believing there would be a cause and effect is not enough to have the actual cause pop out of the shadows.

The AGW lobby will say it's because of greenhouse gases but then that begs the question, why this year, as with the warm spike I mentioned in December 2015. By the way, maps more or less contradict the "explanation" that was offered, there was no random meandering of jet streams but a well-organized northward shift of the subtropical jet from central North America to central Europe which is one third of the hemisphere. I don't see any of the sorts of patterns these AGW proponents tell us we are to expect, but just amplified versions of patterns I've seen many times before. The warmth in December 1982 was similar but not quite as amplified.

My own theory is that after several centuries of negative forcing from various external drivers (principally lower solar constant) the past 120-140 years have seen a generally positive forcing, and certainly human influences play a role in that. But even without us around, I suspect it would be a fairly robust warming trend. We are back to the oscillating peak of the inter-glacial warming and there could be step functions involved in that. Just as melting snow packs creates step function increases in temperatures in the subarctic from March to May, the larger scale changes in climate can do the same thing, I believe, so this is partly why we are seeing "unprecedented" warmth at times. Not sure if it is that unprecedented or just a return to warming that might have occurred several other times in this inter-glacial.

Why anyone would be surprised that it is generally warming, I am not sure about that -- it would seem like a very sure bet after decades of strong solar activity, human influences, urban heat islands spreading out and inter-connecting -- none of these phenomena argue for cooling.
M.T. Cranium is offline  
Advertisement
29-06-2020, 07:46   #2346
M.T. Cranium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,187
The "meandering jet stream" concept is something that was trotted out to explain the inconvenient appearance of the polar vortex over North America in 2014 and 2015, which at the time was linked to earlier severe cold spells in Europe around 2010 to 2012. Something had to be invented to explain how in a steadily warming climate there would be severe cold spells and months that were just about the coldest on record. So they came up with this displaced polar vortex theory as a supposed consequence of meandering jet streams. It is neither provable nor disprovable, as with a lot of AGW sub-theorems which are actually descriptions rather than theories.

It is rather like saying the Sun is hot because it is emitting a lot of heat. Bingo.

I don't accept descriptive analysis as theoretical explanation. I have spent a lot of time trying to explain this to climate people but they don't seem to get the concept of circular reasoning. This is why the science is bogged down and not making much progress. But it doesn't explain anything just to describe it, you need a more robust theory that can say why a polar vortex appeared over North America in 2014 and 2015 and not much since then (it tried to form early in the past winter and got obliterated after a few days before winter really got started, but managed to produce quite a cold November).

The problem with this pet AGW theory is that exactly the same weather patterns occurred in colder parts of the 19th century when various winters came in colder than the average back then. So that would tell you that the theory is not sound if it can explain weather patterns in both colder than normal climates and warmer than normal climates.
M.T. Cranium is offline  
(2) thanks from:
29-06-2020, 09:22   #2347
oriel36
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 405
One of the greatest genuine unresolved disputes in science is at the juncture where geocentricity became the reasoning for a moving Earth in a Sun centred system with cause and effect also entering the perceptions of humanity with the insight of Copernicus. This is why it remains such a big deal.

The prevailing view in the era of Galileo was that astronomers made future predictions of astronomical events like eclipses, moon phases and planetary positions so that interpreting the motions of the other planets and the Sun or 'saving the appearances' was secondary. The tension between predictions vs interpretations was never resolved and thereby left the door open for theorists who attempted to make experimental predictions look like astronomical predictions. The 'greenhouse earth' is an example of this academic indulgence.

The history of this important juncture in Western civilisation is as rich as it is deep, after all, the geocentric priority of observations-predictions won out over the heliocentric interpretations-conclusions and this failure influences our era to such an extent that people buy the idea that speculative conclusions can be passed off as inviolate facts.


The principle contributors in this thread operate out of experiments-predictions so would be entirely oblivious to interpretations-conclusions based on the motions of the Earth and climate. It certainly entertains these people and their modeling but their speculative conclusions have really nothing to do with climate and introduce heightened anxiety into the population. The covid experience has shown how heightened anxiety is damaging and especially for young people.

Irish people have generally an instinctive grasp of what is fair and what is mere hype so when they choose to use their interpretations-conclusions faculties once again, they will discover that climate is much like the other sciences of geology and biology and the limits of human influence. Modelers can be useful, in this case by comparing traits of the other planets with the Earth and the type of weather conditions which would result from different axial inclinations between a spectrum from 90 degrees to 0 degrees off the orbital plane ( blue line).

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

Last edited by oriel36; 29-06-2020 at 09:27.
oriel36 is offline  
29-06-2020, 12:21   #2348
Nabber
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by M.T. Cranium View Post
One could argue that this is a random variation that would occur somewhere in the hemisphere most years and just happened to pick Siberia this year. I don't take that approach but believing there would be a cause and effect is not enough to have the actual cause pop out of the shadows.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.


Joel Myers released an article on Throwing cold water on extreme heat hype

for balance
Jason Samenow wrote a counter argument AccuWeather misleads on global warming and heat waves, a throwback to its past climate denial
Nabber is offline  
09-07-2020, 04:30   #2349
oriel36
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 405
Long term weather is cyclical so weather enthusiasts who ignore the dynamical inputs which will change the weather over the next 6 months to colder and stormier in January have lost their interpretative faculties. Long term weather does not shade off into climate as the experimental theorists would wish in their attempt to bypass planetary dynamics.

No doubt those who imagine weather to be an entirely predictive exercise will continue to scar humanity with the belief that long term weather represents climate and into the monstrosity of 'climate change' modeling. These are the people who display the deer-caught-in-the-headlights reactions as their indulgences are both childish and overreaching.

Closed minds close threads but for those weather enthusiasts who are fair and prepared to let information flow in different directions rather than let information be railroaded into dull and dour conclusions, they will be rewarded a thousand times over by looking at cyclical weather events which defy the attempt to corral weather into something it is not.

In the end, the Earth still turns once and parallel to the orbital plane as a function of the orbital motion of the Earth hence the experience of a single day/night cycle at the North/South poles -

https://www.usap.gov/videoclipsandmaps/spwebcam.cfm
oriel36 is offline  
Advertisement
12-07-2020, 07:29   #2350
M.T. Cranium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,187
You seem to be unaware that you have simply hit upon a different way of describing a commonly understood phenomenon, what lawyers might call a difference without a distinction.

There's nothing wrong with your analysis but you are incorrect in saying that other scientists are in error and fail to recognize something you recognize.

I've read that this is some very specific form of trolling which cannot be perceived from source, but only from those receiving.

An analogy would be if I were to say that odd numbers were those that ended in 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9, which makes my understanding superior to those benighted mathematicians who say that an odd number is one that cannot be divided by 2 with an integer resulting.

While my "superior theory" is true, it is not actually superior or even different. However it is also not inferior. It is just different.

Google if you wish the subject of "scientific cranks" and look for the specific form that you are exhibiting. It is said to be quite rare, most of us have probably never encountered it before (a person who presents an alternate theory to orthodox science that is not contradictory but is maintained to be different although actually the same thing in different terminology).

Your circle of illumination is simply the result of how the Sun shines on a tilted earth at any given point. There's nothing wrong with it, but you are in error thinking that it is an alternative to orthodox science. It is not different in any way, just a different choice of paradigms.

I have no idea how anything would shake you out of this, but we can't waste our time trying to deal with it here.
M.T. Cranium is offline  
(2) thanks from:
12-07-2020, 09:24   #2351
oriel36
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by M.T. Cranium View Post
Your circle of illumination is simply the result of how the Sun shines on a tilted earth at any given point. There's nothing wrong with it, but you are in error thinking that it is an alternative to orthodox science. It is not different in any way, just a different choice of paradigms.
You are not among Irish sychophants now so spare me the pretense

The circle of illumination is a hemispherical property of the orbital motion of the Earth and always at right angles to the Sun's equatorial plane. The moon and the Earth share the same orientation to the Sun at all times -

https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA00134.jpg

This is what is called common sense, however, the childish modelers have managed to create a monstrosity to suit their RA/Dec idea of the Sun wandering across the Earth's equator by pivoting the circle of illumination annually off the equator on an Earth with a zero degree inclination -

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap170319.html

This is the feature of modelers who throw together outcomes with no discipline and no different when it comes to the Earth science of climate.

What I have done is isolate the North and South polar latitudes as surface positions where daily rotational velocity is zero and then explain the single polar day/night cycle separately by rotational cause, in this instance a surface rotation parallel to the orbital plane as a function of the specific way the Earth orbits the Sun. It is common to all planets and a 100% observational certainty ( about 50 seconds into the time lapse) so observational interpretation takes priority over weak 'tilted Earth' responses which are insipid due to the lack of logical development -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=612gSZsplpE&t=57s

I wouldn't expect mathematical modelers and their focus on predictive outcomes to comprehend the narrative no more than I would expect them to appreciate the reasons for the partitioning of perspectives between the faster and slower moving planets which rudely got ejected from a thread yesterday.

The weather modelers have scarred humanity for far too long with their 'climate change' fuss by ignoring cause and effect so rather than isolate these academic jokers, they are needed to actually model the relationship between planetary motions and Earth sciences.

Last edited by oriel36; 12-07-2020 at 09:48.
oriel36 is offline  
Post Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Remove Text Formatting
Bold
Italic
Underline

Insert Image
Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
 
Decrease Size
Increase Size
Please sign up or log in to join the discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



Share Tweet