|
Post by throttleup on May 11, 2010 13:41:16 GMT
goldbuster1: "Rounder ellipse will mean no more seasons..." Earth seasons are caused by the axial tilt. Unless Al Gore has decreed otherwise... Earth magnetic field tilt produce a repulse-attract magnetic phenomenon with the SUN magnetic field + pole in June - pole in December, Earth is Closer to the Sun in June (Attraction) , and Farther from the Sun in December (Repulsion) Less magnetic exposure (Tilt) means rounder ellipse around the sun, and less extreme seasons. Axial tilt and magnetic tilt is well exposed in the Milankovitch Theory en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cyclesSigh... I love magnetism. My wife has a lot of them on our refrigerator. However, I must try to dissuade you from thinking the earth is closest to the sun in June. It is not. It is closest to the sun in January. It is farthest from the sun in July. Even your wonderful wikipedia will tell you that. This is due to the slightly elliptical nature of earth's orbit. If the earth's orbit were perfectly circular we would have seasons due to the axial tilt of 23.5 degrees. Others on this board who are much smarter than I am can discuss whether or not the Southern Hemisphere summers and winters are more pronounced or extreme than those in the Northern Hemisphere due to the combination of perihelion during their summer and aphelion during the Southern Hemisphere winter. I'm not real smart, but I think it's more of a gravity - Newtonian/celestial mechanics thing.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on May 10, 2010 11:30:24 GMT
goldbuster1: "Rounder ellipse will mean no more seasons..."
Earth seasons are caused by the axial tilt.
Unless Al Gore has decreed otherwise...
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on May 9, 2010 17:18:49 GMT
The Problems with Al Gore American Thinker | May 09, 2010 | David Deming There are two problems with Al Gore. First, he's a demagogue who lacks an appreciation for the ethics and methods of science. Second, he's a not a scientist, but a celebrity and politician who does not understand the technical aspects of science. Put succinctly, the man simply doesn't know what he's talking about. But Gore is now advising the world on complex technical issues related to energy and climate. That's a problem for the human race. As described in my book, Science and Technology in World History, Vol. 1, what we know as modern science began in ancient Greece in the 6th century BC. The Greek philosophers embraced intellectual freedom, open discussion, and critical analysis. Pupils were not only allowed to question and criticize their teachers, but were encouraged to do so. Debate was elevated by Plato and his students to the science of dialectic. In the Platonic Dialogue, Timaeus, it is noted that anyone who can present a better plan "shall carry off the palm, not as an enemy, but as a friend." But Al Gore refuses to debate his critics. He has repeatedly dodged a debate with Christopher Monckton. Instead of engaging skeptics in reasoned discussions, Gore has relentlessly demonized those who disagree with him. In a series of infamous character assassinations, he has stated that people who are skeptical of the hysterical global warming scenario he has been promoting (and profiting from) are comparable to the lunatic fringe that believes the Apollo Moon landings were filmed on a movie stage. He has also compared global warming skeptics to people who believe the Earth is flat. Scientific issues like climate change are not morality plays. Scientists are objective and tentative. To be a scientist is to be skeptical. Science is never "settled," because there can be no finality in any empirical system of knowledge. Only God has all the data. Scientists employ multiple working hypotheses. They work together cooperatively, eager to have their mistakes pointed out to them, so as to advance a disinterested search for truth. One of the finest examples of this ethic is found in a letter written by Robert Hooke to Isaac Newton on January 20, 1676. Hooke told Newton, "I have a mind very desirous of and very ready to embrace any truth that shall be discovered though it may much thwart and contradict any opinions or notions I have formerly embraced." Why was Hooke eager to have his errors pointed out? Because, he explained, "my aim is the discovery of truth," therefore "I can endure to hear objections." But Al Gore can endure no objections. His aim is not to find truth, but to tendentiously assemble and present information so as to mislead. An example of Gore's dissembling is found in the film, An Inconvenient Truth. One of the most memorable scenes in An Inconvenient Truth is the unveiling of a startling graph that shows a strong correlation between carbon dioxide and temperature over the last several hundred thousand years. Gore then states "when there's more carbon dioxide the temperature gets warmer." Because the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is now relatively high, the audience is led to believe that a drastic rise in global temperature is imminent. But carbon dioxide does not determine temperature the way that Gore suggests. On the contrary, temperature controls carbon dioxide by modulating its release and absorption from the oceans. The temperature changes found in the ice core data cannot be caused by carbon dioxide changes, because the increases in atmospheric temperature precede increases in carbon dioxide by several hundred years. The Earth's oceans contain more than fifty times the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is more soluble in cold water. As the oceans warm, they release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. When the oceans cool, they absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The science is no more complex than noting that a warm coke has more fizz than a cold one. Temperature controls carbon dioxide, not the other way around. A film like An Inconvenient Truth is carefully scripted and checked for errors. Al Gore can be made to appear as if he knows the science. But a recent television interview
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on May 7, 2010 16:36:51 GMT
"Further away from the magnetic pole will experience ice melting and closer will get ice forming." Now I get it! Ice is at the poles because it's magnetic! And now graywolf doesn't have to worry about the ice either. It'll be there -- it's just following the magnetic pole! How could I have been so blind...
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Apr 27, 2010 12:20:13 GMT
Thanks. It's modeled on my left arm, including the scars. Called "Hangin' on". Sold at auction for $600. Can you do a wood sculpture of "rotten ice?" I've always wondered what it looked like!
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Apr 26, 2010 22:17:16 GMT
While you Northfolk were enjoying your winter, back in NZ: Don't worry winter 2010-11 will be along soon ;D especially if Katla goes off! We eagerly await your "on the ground" descriptions of Katla's ashfall, byz! Hopefully, it won't be deeper than the snow you had this last winter!
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Apr 14, 2010 23:07:21 GMT
Makes one wonder if our warm-mongers drink their ice water quickly so that it doesn't overflow when the ice melts... ;D
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Apr 14, 2010 15:46:01 GMT
www.woksat.info/etcsc27/sc27-1119-c-grn-n.htmlHere's an image from March 27th this year. If a sub had come up in there what thickness would the ice have been? Are 'leads ' a thing of the 'new Arctic' or do they happen each year?. If you were a sub Capt. where would you fetch your tin can up? under 4m of ice or a mushed over lead? graywolf, I think you know that 'leads' are a common, everyday occurrence in the Arctic due to winds, currents, et al. It is a lovely picture, though. Remember, you can't have leads without ice.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Mar 30, 2010 11:46:39 GMT
Congratulations, Kiwi! That's great!
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Mar 29, 2010 18:24:46 GMT
Winter has returned to the north of the UK. Now how does that song go? Oh yes... I'm dreaming of a white Easter just like the ones we used to know (in the early 70's). Keep your eggs warm, byz!
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Mar 9, 2010 19:23:06 GMT
Adding to what nautonnier noted in his post above, looking at the graph without the "AGW Hysteria" goggles ( ), one would be dumbstruck by how extraordinarily normal the ice extent is -- at least in the context of recent years.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Feb 15, 2010 14:47:05 GMT
Likewise, Nautonnier, I just want to add my thanks for your effort to explain and enlighten. The whole effort to understand the climate pieces and relationships between them is difficult and time-consuming for the beginner and professional alike.
I appreciate the insight and information you and others bring to this board.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Feb 12, 2010 13:58:24 GMT
George, You are wise and wonderful. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Feb 2, 2010 19:24:43 GMT
I don't buy the foriegn country plot theory. If anything, the countries being mentioned, primarily Russia, India and China, would have no reason to undermine the march by the U.S. and Europe off an economic cliff. Those three countries and others have no intention of adhering to carbon limits and at the same time they want the western economies to artificially limit their economies and/or send money to the third world for credits. If the west were to handcuff its economies, it would create a void for less developed economies to fill. I concur.
|
|
|
Post by throttleup on Jan 29, 2010 3:00:13 GMT
And oxygen makes you rust, by oxidizing iron in your blood. I've had guys tell me I'm a little rusty but that's a whole nother subject. Obviously from too much time in the tub!
|
|