Hey I deleted all my cookies for this domain and I can post again
Greetings earthlings

Son of Mulder.

It doesn't make any difference how many people were killed in a heat-wave (though I'm sorry to acknowledge this) for the 'graph' to be valid, but I do have 'other' problems with this graph.

First of all, it seems to be overly complex. The 'land surface' and 'sea surface' temperature forcings have been integrated. This obscures the differences between the known land and sea hydrocycle anomalies. I say this because I can't find the algorithms that were used for this 'integration' with the graph generation and so I am naturally sceptical (was this graph intended for an 'otherwise informed' clique?).

There is a temperature forcing at about 20 degrees south in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean that seems equal to the forcing over Central Europe (was this an active volcano in the area?). How can this be so and what are the actual temperatures involved temporally?


This graph doesn't say much to me, but then again it seems hard to find good material to work with, doesn't it.

Have you any links to 'brown cloud' chemistry? I've a 'feeling' that this would include 'ozone', or the products of it.

Best regards, suricat.

Son of Mulder

data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

has maps, animations etc. Lots to keep one entertained when the Channel 4 forum server errors are kicking in.

Steve,Suricat,

quote:

data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

has maps, animations etc. Lots to keep one entertained when the Channel 4 forum server errors are kicking in.

Thanks Steve for this - it shows northern hemisphere warming greater than southern but does not show evidence I thought might be there for east / west (regional) variances due to aerosol moves. Either these are too small or non-existent.

I shall now bin my reply to Suricat's message above (previously stopped by the server errors)because it furthered the aerosol argument which this severely damages.

Son of Mulder.

quote:

Thanks Steve for this - it shows northern hemisphere warming greater than southern but does not show evidence I thought might be there for east / west (regional) variances due to aerosol moves. Either these are too small or non-existent.

After our hours of slogging on climate cells, I'd have thought you'd realise that after one circulation in a tropospheric climate cell any aerosol would either be neutralised, or could be almost on the other side of the globe. It makes sense to treat North and South hemispheres separately because the confluence of the two Hadley Cells also provides partial separation of the hemispheres. Thus, both East and West aerosols in the northern hemisphere would affect the northern hemisphere.

quote:

I shall now bin my reply to Suricat's message above (previously stopped by the server errors)because it furthered the aerosol argument which this severely damages.

Where is the damage to your argument?

Best regards, suricat.

quote:

mufcdiver.

What an odd question!

UV is 'line of sight' from the Sun, so one would expect no UV insolation at night. However there are a number of things to bear in mind.

1. It depends whether you are talking about UVa, UVb, or UVc. UVa, the most energetic with the shorter wave length, interacts with O2 and O3, so doesn't travel so deep into the atmosphere because of these interactions. UVb has a longer wavelength and only interacts with O3, so travels further into the atmosphere than UVa. UVc has the longest wavelength in the UV range and doesn't interact much with the 'normal' atmosphere at all and usually strikes the ground harmlessly, but I'm not sure if it reacts with nitrous aerosols and in particular PSCs (polar stratospheric clouds). More on PSCs later.

2. One needs to bear in mind that the Earth has a smaller diameter than Earth Atmosphere, so Solar Insolation to the Earth's atmosphere is greater than the Solar Insolation received by the Earth. Also, when the Sun has set on the Earth, it hasn't necessarily set on the Earth's atmosphere. After a natural sunset at ground level the Sun is still shining on the atmosphere until the atmosphere is shadowed by the Earth's rim. This is particularly apparent at high latitudes as a temporal dilation (it takes a lot more time for the Sun to set on the atmosphere here [especially during spring and autumn] ).

3. 'Atmospheric Lensing' is usually associated with the troposphere and clouds refracting insolation towards the ground, but it is also associated with a temperature inversion that effectively gives the appearance of a 'mirage'. I don't know if PSCs could also give this effect to cause insolation during total dark though. That's the best I can offer on night time insolation.

I need to think on this. Does anyone else have an input here?

Right then, things change!As does my quest.
I asked you about UV lensing in the earths atmosphere and I now need to change that to "bouncing" much the same as we now bounce signals in the radio wavelength off the ionosphere to get round the curvature of the earth.
Are UV rays entering the southern ozone hole, bouncing off the whateversphere and interacting with our Northern low level ozone "clouds" or NOx "clouds" and with this interaction emitting heat in the northern winter IMP_B nights thus raising the average temp and thus giving false readings on the longscale Ave. mean TEMP maps?

I only ask 'cos I care

mufciver.

UV insolation is 'line of sight' unless it is defracted. That's all I can say for sure.

I'm knackerd now because it's late. I'll get back to you later (promise).

Best regards, suricat.

quote:

defracted

Therein may lay the answer

Water crystals in the upper atmosphere?

mufcdiver.

Thank you (not) for highlighting my 'stupid' mistake of swapping the wavelengths of UVa and UVc.
Another 'faux pas' on my part from my last post is I meant to type 'refraction', not 'defraction'. Though reflected 'back-scatter' should have also been included.

Other than the 'ping' that is associated with the Aurora I know of nothing more than LW radio signals that traverse the poles.

I really do think you would get more return from your invested time if you were to investigate atmospheric photo-chemistry. Not only is it so little understood, but the findings from discovery in this area of research can be 'so' beneficial to everyone (see 'Atmospheric chemistry' [I spent all my free time today looking for this. I now need to absorb what's there] ).

With regard to 'dark insolation' you can look at the photos of PSCs after sunset to realise that insolation can continue for longer than the sun shines on the planet (see 'Photos'). There are also some graphs on PSCs here (see 'Data').

Photos
http://www.nilu.no/projects/theseo2000/psc-over-oslo.html
Data
http://www.nilu.no/projects/theseo2000/eurosolve-wp2-report.html
Atmospheric chemistry
http://www.atmospheric-chemistry-and-physics.net/index.html

Best regards, suricat.

Suricat

quote:

'd have thought you'd realise that after one circulation in a tropospheric climate cell any aerosol would either be neutralised,

Yes but the point is that the actual distribution would be different to the days when most industry was in the west.

quote:

Where is the damage to your argument?

I was hoping to see that warming was faster in the west and slower in the east. Without that to point at, I see nothing that indicates that the relocation of aerosol production has an appreciable effect. Yet from the forcing charts it looks like it should. Maybe the affect does manifest itself but as climate change not as localised warming and cooling. I do remember the smogs in the UK of the 50/60's and they certainly kept the sun out.

Son of Mulder.

quote:

Yes but the point is that the actual distribution would be different to the days when most industry was in the west.

The 'distribution' only shows within the region that it was generated. When a pollutant leaves the boundary layer it is usually 'mixed' within the climate cell from beneath which it ascended and only adds to the other pollutants within that cell, and onwards. Thus, a pollutant can be assumed to be just an 'atmospheric constituent' (though tropospheric) after it has left the boundary layer. Following one cycle of the climate cell coriolis effect could place it at any longitude, or perhaps even in the stratosphere.

Because of this, any relevant radiative forcings at a particular longitude would only exist within the boundary layer. I don't know if you'll find any detail on this.

quote:

Without that to point at, I see nothing that indicates that the relocation of aerosol production has an appreciable effect. Yet from the forcing charts it looks like it should. Maybe the affect does manifest itself but as climate change not as localised warming and cooling.

Correct. These are the 'more stable' forcings that I've been trying to describe.

If the west's production adds to atmospheric pollutants (AP) and production transfers to the east, AP in the northern hemisphere (NH) stays constant. Whether it's in the west, or the east, AP from production is nevertheless in the NH. A comparison with SH (southern hemisphere) AP from production is more appropriate because of the 'degree of separation' afforded by the equatorial 'confluence' of the Hadley Cells.

quote:

I do remember the smogs in the UK of the 50/60's and they certainly kept the sun out.

And.

I was hoping to see that warming was faster in the west and slower in the east.

The 'smogs' in the UK are what the word suggests. Smoke and fog. The one thing 'smog' doesn't suggest is that sulphur was involved. Sulphur in the atmosphere reflects insolation, so everything below it in the boundary layer gets colder. This is strictly a local phenomenon and has nothing to do with climate at all (London became a 'smoke free zone' and you couldn't get coal delivered at all, there were only low sulphur cokes available to the consumer, but the practise worked though). I'm sure the same will be true for other 'locales'.

I think your suggestion still has 'legs'.

Best regards, suricat.

Son of Mulder.

My last post didn't really deal with:-

quote:

I was hoping to see that warming was faster in the west and slower in the east.

It really depends what the pollutants are. Some aerosols heat and some aerosols cool. The internal combustion engine is both west and east, it also generates a lot of NOx which is a positive forcing to ozone generation in the tropo. Ozone directly converts UV into IR.

We are now at solar minimum, are we not? China has a cold winter, does it not?

Best regards, suricat.

suricat, I've followed up you links and I've also thought about your mention of UV refraction: I've coupled this with NORTHERN hemispherical average temps. and linked them to the rise in mean nighttime winter temp elevations.If I throw in the Sun, the ozone hole,scattering from nonspherical partials(ice) and low level ozone do I have a model that will get round the earth?

Hey, I hit 400 too!

Just a thought!
If you set you're browser to; confirm all cookies, the internet becomes almost impossible to use!!

mufcdiver.

quote:

I've followed up you links and I've also thought about your mention of UV refraction: I've coupled this with NORTHERN hemispherical average temps. and linked them to the rise in mean nighttime winter temp elevations.If I throw in the Sun, the ozone hole,scattering from nonspherical partials(ice) and low level ozone

Coupling UV and ozone in the NH low level troposphere should give an idea of temperature forcing to the NH due to UV insolation (its a 'close to boundary layer thing', regional, and can be averaged to 'global'), but the possible PSC refraction scenario is strictly polar and probably a weak source of 'dark insolation' (I thought that some sort of dark insolation was what you referred to). Black carbon (soot) provides the greatest temperature forcing to snow and ice. The reduced difference between day and night temperatures is attributed to higher specific humidity ("rise in nighttime winter temp elevations"?). In other words, a greater water vapour PPM to condense overnight and provide 'latent heat of condensation' to the atmosphere.

quote:

do I have a model that will get round the earth?

Not sure that I get your 'drift', or what you are trying to model.

quote:

Hey, I hit 400 too!

400 what? Dobson Units?


Can someone tell me 'please' the 'unilaterally accepted standard for Global Temperature definition' (this seems to be 'missing'!!)!!!! Please make any responding posts to 'The Great Green Debate' thread.

quote:

Just a thought!
If you set you're browser to; confirm all cookies, the internet becomes almost impossible to use!!

Of course! Don't 'confirm all cookies'. Get some half decent 'spy ware applications', 'accept all cookies' (offers best web interaction), then delete them when you've finished surfing ('spy ware' should protect until it helps you to 'delete' afterwards).

There are some fairly good free apps if cost is a problem. 'Spyware Terminator' from spywareterminator.com for example, which offers integration with 'Clam Antivirus' (though this slows your machine) and a number of extra gadgets from Web Crawler (Crawler toolbar with its toolbar apps). If I post any more than this I'll be way off thread. I think you will get a better response if you post in 'C4Forums/C4Support/WebSupport' on this subject. Posters in that forum are probably better informed than I am. I only have a 'general knowledge' of security apps.

BTW muf, your devotion to a task astounds me!

Best regards, suricat.

quote:

the possible PSC refraction scenario is strictly polar and probably a weak source of 'dark insolation

Sorry suricat, worms escape me lol
using a brief diagram I explained it to my wife in about a minute(very simple and she got it)but... transposing the diagram into words is proving very complex and the maths is astounding!
I was hoping that you could work it out from what I have posted but I have missed the point, I'll give it some more thought and try to come up with a better angle

suricat have a look at these and tell me what you see?
ozone hole (last two decades)

mufcdiver.

Keep taking the 'worming' tablets. LOL. Speak to you later.

Here's to the angle, lol.

Best regards, suricat.

mufcdiver

Our posts have 'overlapped'.

What do I see? I see detail that I don't understand at present! I need time to think on this. It's late and I'll post later. Lol.

suricat.

suricat,I also have found this sitebut it is also worth viewing because it is about one of nature most wonderful phenomenon(I actually saw one of these two weeks ago but didn't know what it was till tonight)

BTW this is