|
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
The Gaia theory of Earth is a fakery and a ludricous theory and any
scientist who claims themselves as a scientist should never accept the Gaia theory. And I should not be starting a discussion of serious science by starting it with the Gaia theory, but the reason I do so is because, if the Gaia theory had any truth to it-- it would now be saying that the planet Earth would be increasing in cloud formation all over the globe and thus decreasing Global-Warming. But reality shows us otherwise that as Global Warming increases that this planet cloud cover is decreasing. In a post several weeks past I remarked that I had lived in southeast South Dakota in 1986-1987 and I noticed that in the summers we had 2 or 3 days of hot humid temperature followed automatically and rhymically by a thunderstorm with rain. Now in 2001-2005 we have 3 weeks of hot humid weather, no clouds and no rainfall. And the years of 2004 and 2005 have been almost 3 months without any rain. I said in a post several weeks ago that freshwater on continents compared to sal****er in oceans and that the water cycle maybe a Zero Sum Game where the amount of fresh water compared to salt water is a somewhat fixed constant and so with Global Warming increasing that the fresh water dumped on coastlines due to hurricanes and monsoons is depriving the interior of those continents with fresh water rainfall. So if this pattern increases means that the interior states of the USA will become deserts and the coastal states such as Florida will be flooded every summer. But what I wanted to say most of all in this post is that Global Warming seems to destroy cloud formation in the interiors of continents. And I wonder what the mechanism for that cloud destruction is. Does it involve the altering of the Jet Stream? Does it involve the fact that the atmosphere where clouds are formed are heated up so much that it burns away clouds so that they cannot form. If you do not have clouds, it is pretty hard to have rainfall. Has any meteorological data base kept track of clouds for the past 30 years which could provide clues and answers as to the diminishing of cloud formation over the interior states of the USA. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
wrote in message
oups.com... The Gaia theory of Earth is a fakery and a ludricous theory and any scientist who claims themselves as a scientist should never accept the Gaia theory. The Gaia hypothesis is actually regarded as a series of hypotheses, best described by Kirchner's Spectrum of Gaian Hypotheses ... from Weak to Strong: These hypotheses are as follows, the comment at the end reflects an approximate indication of the measure of support from the scientific community. INFLUENTIAL The biota has a substantial influence over certain aspects of the abiotic world. This hypotheses is supported. CO-EVOLUTIONARY The biota influences the abiotic environment, and the latter influences the evolution of the biota by Darwinian processes. Debated HOMEOSTATIC The interplay between biota and environment is characterized by stabilizing negative feedback loops. Debated TELEOLOGICAL The atmosphere is kept in homeostasis not just by the biosphere, but in some sense _for_ the biosphere. See "Daisyworld" OPTIMIZING The biota manipulates its environment for the purpose of creating biologically favorable conditions for itself. Skeptical Further, with context, see: http://www.mountainman.com.au/gaia_jim.html And I should not be starting a discussion of serious science by starting it with the Gaia theory, but the reason I do so is because, if the Gaia theory had any truth to it-- it would now be saying that the planet Earth would be increasing in cloud formation all over the globe and thus decreasing Global-Warming. But reality shows us otherwise that as Global Warming increases that this planet cloud cover is decreasing. The Gaia hypotheses for example consider timespans such as the 2.5 billion years commencing from the very formation of the planet, during which the % of carbon dioxide was replaced by a % of oxygen by means of primitive photosynthetic plankton, allowing the subsequent evolution of aerobic life. Geological timescales. Our "reality" to which you refer above is less than the blink of an eye in the life of the planet. ....[trim]... Has any meteorological data base kept track of clouds for the past 30 years which could provide clues and answers as to the diminishing of cloud formation over the interior states of the USA. Your rainfall data should go back a fair way, but I'd hazard that it has already been extensively analysed to determine if there exists any signature and/or cycles of change evident in it. -- Pete Brown Falls Creek OZ www.mountainman.com.au |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
"Dennis M. Rodgers" wrote in message ... | Why don't you go play scientist somewhere else? Hey! He is in his sandbox playing nicely, not bothering your choir practice, why don't you go play censorship and policeman somewhere else and keep your stupid nose out of a newsgroup open to discussion? Androcles |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreasesand turning interior of continents into deserts
Androcles wrote:
"Dennis M. Rodgers" wrote in message ... | Why don't you go play scientist somewhere else? Hey! He is in his sandbox playing nicely, not bothering your choir practice, why don't you go play censorship and policeman somewhere else and keep your stupid nose out of a newsgroup open to discussion? Androcles Sure. Why not? The signal-to-noise ratio in SGM has deteriorated to the point where it doesn't matter anymore. Morons and idiots have taken over, like your buddy, Socrates Molybdenum. That clueless person actually thinks he (she) (it) is talking science. When they let him out of the assylum, he may find that his gross generalizations and misconceptions are exactly that. If SGM is a forum for discussing bizzare sci-fi concepts like air conditioning the earth, then I have absolutely nothing but nasty comments to contribute. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
In article . com,
"Attila the Bum" wrote: Katrina bashed New Orleans and is hailed as the "worst" natural disaster this country (USA) has suffered. But, the press also compares this event to one in the early 1900s, the storm that hit Galveston, Texas (?) and killed 10,000 (?). Yes, but there was no warning back then, and it was only a cat 3 storm (the storm surge is what killed so many). The point here, is, that the weather is _not_ worse than it was 100 years ago (a tenuous suggestion, given the change in building codes and probable lack of any order to evacuate; but ya gotta deal with the data dat ya got :-) Wasn't 'til after WWII or so that the human population curve started to "J" (maybe due to growth, or an artifact caused by better surveys?); there ought to be a plot available on the Web somewhere, like: http://www.prb.org/Content/Navigatio...opulation/Popu lation_Growth/Population_Growth.htm This growth and timing is supported by my personal research -- counting the number of articles in the New York TImes indices at the library related to "pollution" -- it plots out as a "J-curve" as well, beginning to rise dramatically in the 20s or 30s IIRC, maybe later. So ...? Global warming as a function of human activity has affected climate change? If ice is melting at the poles, then there's more water vapor in the air, and potentially more rainfall, or at the least, higher humidity. And that water should be widely distributed, even to the interiors of continents. Is the Gobi or Sahara growing or shrinking? Are water tables rising or dropping? Montana's been claiming drought conditions for years. like it's some sort of dramatic change from earlier times (dependency upon snow pack, measured, could get useful info there about increases or decreases in the annual snow- fall). Atty (The planet is falling, into the sun. More peanuts, for anyone? 17 :-) |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
"Dennis M. Rodgers" wrote in message ... | Androcles wrote: | "Dennis M. Rodgers" wrote in message | ... | | Why don't you go play scientist somewhere else? | | Hey! He is in his sandbox playing nicely, not bothering your choir | practice, why don't you go play censorship and policeman somewhere else | and keep your stupid nose out of a newsgroup open to discussion? | Androcles | | | | Sure. Why not? The signal-to-noise ratio in SGM has deteriorated to | the point where it doesn't matter anymore. Morons and idiots have taken | over, like your buddy, Socrates Molybdenum. | That clueless person | actually thinks he (she) (it) is talking science. When they let him | out of the assylum, he may find that his gross generalizations and | misconceptions are exactly that. If SGM is a forum for discussing | bizzare sci-fi concepts like air conditioning the earth, then I have | absolutely nothing but nasty comments to contribute. He's not my buddy, I'm only defending his right to free speech and my right not to read his crap by placing him in a kill-file. It is posts like yours that raise the noise-to-signal ratio, but you too have the right to be *plonked* as well. Since you seem to be somewhat sensible I haven't done that but it will only take a moment, so why not temper your frustration, raise the signal level instead of the noise level and not post impossible requests? Androcles. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
Katrina bashed New Orleans
and is hailed as the "worst" natural disaster this country (USA) has suffered. But, the press also compares this event to one in the early 1900s, the storm that hit Galveston, Texas (?) and killed 10,000 (?). The point here, is, that the weather is _not_ worse than it was 100 years ago (a tenuous suggestion, given the change in building codes and probable lack of any order to evacuate; but ya gotta deal with the data dat ya got :-) Wasn't 'til after WWII or so that the human population curve started to "J" (maybe due to growth, or an artifact caused by better surveys?); there ought to be a plot available on the Web somewhere, like: http://www.prb.org/Content/Navigatio...ion_Growth.htm This growth and timing is supported by my personal research -- counting the number of articles in the New York TImes indices at the library related to "pollution" -- it plots out as a "J-curve" as well, beginning to rise dramatically in the 20s or 30s IIRC, maybe later. So ...? Global warming as a function of human activity has affected climate change? If ice is melting at the poles, then there's more water vapor in the air, and potentially more rainfall, or at the least, higher humidity. And that water should be widely distributed, even to the interiors of continents. Is the Gobi or Sahara growing or shrinking? Are water tables rising or dropping? Montana's been claiming drought conditions for years. like it's some sort of dramatic change from earlier times (dependency upon snow pack, measured, could get useful info there about increases or decreases in the annual snow- fall). Atty (The planet is falling, into the sun. More peanuts, for anyone? 17 :-) |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
"cat3" in retrospect, of course.
Katty was cat4? Atty (cat0, AFAIK; nice-guy :-) |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
In sci.physics, Attila the Bum
wrote on 9 Sep 2005 13:02:47 -0700 .com: "cat3" in retrospect, of course. Katty was cat4? Katrina was a cat5 at one point -- not for very long, though. But it was a monster cat4 storm when it hit New Orleans. http://www.weathernet5.com/weatherblog/index.html claims it's the most destructive hurricane ever. This is debatable, but one might add the qualifier "since modern hurricanes were tracked in the 20th century" or some such and make it right. There are also issues of what might have been, had the levees been up to snuff -- but they weren't really designed for anything beyond a cat3. The odd thing was that it hit Florida as a cat1 -- and nobody says much about the damage there. (Perhaps there wasn't much there.) Atty (cat0, AFAIK; nice-guy :-) -- #191, It's still legal to go .sigless. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
.... drove my Chevy to the levee, but
the levee was dry ... whiskey and rye. "earthlink" is still tied to a Scientologist? Atty (Mother Nature tears herself a new one, but blames a man, again :-) |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
|
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
Uh. Yeh.
|
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
In sci.physics, Attila the Bum
wrote on 10 Sep 2005 11:42:46 -0700 . com: ... drove my Chevy to the levee, but the levee was dry ... whiskey and rye. "earthlink" is still tied to a Scientologist? I wouldn't know, offhand; the closest I personally am to Scientology is that I pass by one of their centers (church? instructional school?) on my way to a friend's place occasionally. :-P In any event, E-meters sound slightly fraudulent to me, though I should note that this is second-hand info, courtesy of Martin Gardner's _Fads and Fallacies In The Name Of Science_. I don't plan on learning firsthand. I can also tell you that Sky T. Dayton holds 5.6M shares of ELNK (out of 133.29M) and is a director thereof. Whether Sky T. Dayton is a Scientologist I for one have no idea. Google did cough up some articles suggesting such; one of them is at: http://slate.msn.com/id/2015/ Draw your own conclusions. I prefer independent thinking, when I have that option. :-) Followups to sci.skeptic. Atty (Mother Nature tears herself a new one, but blames a man, again :-) -- #191, It's still legal to go .sigless. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
Attila the Bum wrote:
Wasn't 'til after WWII or so that the human population curve started to "J" #1 The human population curve has been exponential since at least the 1300's. #2 It is NOT expoential, and not even concave up. It's curving down, it has been since 1989. In fact, it's an S curve, with an exact 180 degree symmetry about 1989 satisfying the equation P(1989-t)+P(1989+t)=10.39 billion within +/- 5 million; and an upper limit of 7.8 billion. #3 So ...? Global warming as a function of human activity has affected climate change? It doesn't matter. The only relevant fact is that it exists, and the predicted consequences of it are already past tense. If ice is melting at the poles, then there's more water vapor in the air, and potentially more rainfall, or at the least, higher humidity. Simplistic reasoning of a mere human is no substitute for detailed climatological models. Leave the extrapolation to the professionals. The net effects that are known a increased severity and frequency of storms (particularly with the greater heat in the oceans as a driving force). That's present, with 2004 and 2005 each being record years for hurricanes. It's probably also the case for tornadoes. In fact, just a month ago, the entire Milwaukee metro area barely missed being completely trashed by the simultaneous occurrence of 28 tornadoes. The devastation looked like a war zone, as bad as New Orleans; debris and other remains of personal belongings, property being found as far as 70 miles away. Had the storm kept on the ground for another 20 miles further to the East, instead of the destruction being of the sparsely distributed and populated rural regions, it would have been of the metro area and what happened in New Orleans wouldn't even be a blip on the radar. In recent times, there has even been tornadoes in the winter. The summertime Arctic ice cover has broken up for the first time in recorded history; and is no, for the first time, no longer traversible. A new Northwest passage has started opening up. Major chunks of the Antarctic ice sheet have split off (including one recent occurrence of a breakoff the size of Rhode Island). The continential glaciers on Greenland are in severe decline, to the point where this too has made the news in recent days; the glaciers in Alaska, likewise, are in severe decline. The snow cover on Mount Kilomonjaro is nearly gone for the first time. Is the Gobi or Sahara growing or shrinking? The Gobi and Sahara are growing, and have been for a very long time. I'm not aware of this having any connection with global warming as being a consequence of it -- though obviously, it has a connection in the other direction of being an exacerbation of it. The dust storms in the Gobi now reach all the way to Beijing, which is probably direct in the path of the growing desert. In some cases, the dust storms of both deserts are now reaching as far as North America: the Gobi had one in 2001 that got all the way to the Great Lakes in the midwest, the Sahara had one a few weeks ago that got to Florida (and has ones, now more frequently occurring, going across the Mediterranean into Europe). Solar intensity has been continually monitored at various stations throughout the planet. In recent years, the level of solar radiation has spiked at various points throughout the world. This is called the "solar brightening" problem and is also a predicted consequence of the whole global warming phenomenon. The continential glaciers (particularly those of Greenland), after being lost, will raise the ocean levels; the ocean levels are already known to be rising. But even without the glaciers, the ocean levels will rise simply due to thermal expansion, which is not insignificant either. And understand, when stuff goes under, it's not some kind of gradual thing of a few inches of lost land per year. Things tend to happen at once -- e.g. a bad storm hits, flooding an entire area, breaking levees, and the flood never fully goes away and the ongoing and increasingly futile effort of damming the water away is just abandoned, after the 20th breach or so. When a place goes under, it will tend to go under overnight and stay that way; nobody will go back to re-dam the water after event #20. New Orleans is just the beginning. Given what's to come, by the time even THIS year is over, it's quite possible nobody will even remember New Orleans, compared to what they will remember next. Maybe you'll luck out in 2005, and not have a repeat of the 1-2-3-4 punch of 2004, but then there's 2006... But 2005 is only 1/2 way through. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
|
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
Mark delivered a very sad green song in
oups.com... Attila the Bum wrote: Wasn't 'til after WWII or so that the human population curve started to "J" [Mark] #1 The human population curve has been exponential since at least the 1300's. #2 It is NOT expoential, and not even concave up. It's curving down, it has been since 1989. In fact, it's an S curve, with an exact 180 degree symmetry about 1989 satisfying the equation P(1989-t)+P(1989+t)=10.39 billion within +/- 5 million; and an upper limit of 7.8 billion. #3 ....[????.... what, what, what? Did you get ahead of yourself?] [Atty] So ...? Global warming as a function of human activity has affected climate change? [Mark] It doesn't matter. The only relevant fact is that it exists, and the predicted consequences of it are already past tense. [Atty] If ice is melting at the poles, then there's more water vapor in the air, and potentially more rainfall, or at the least, higher humidity. [Mark] Simplistic reasoning of a mere human is no substitute for detailed climatological models. Leave the extrapolation to the professionals. The net effects that are known a increased severity and frequency of storms (particularly with the greater heat in the oceans as a driving force). That's present, with 2004 and 2005 each being record years for hurricanes. It's probably also the case for tornadoes. In fact, just a month ago, the entire Milwaukee metro area barely missed being completely trashed by the simultaneous occurrence of 28 tornadoes. The devastation looked like a war zone, as bad as New Orleans; debris and other remains of personal belongings, property being found as far as 70 miles away. Had the storm kept on the ground for another 20 miles further to the East, instead of the destruction being of the sparsely distributed and populated rural regions, it would have been of the metro area and what happened in New Orleans wouldn't even be a blip on the radar. In recent times, there has even been tornadoes in the winter. The summertime Arctic ice cover has broken up for the first time in recorded history; and is no, for the first time, no longer traversible. A new Northwest passage has started opening up. Major chunks of the Antarctic ice sheet have split off (including one recent occurrence of a breakoff the size of Rhode Island). The continential glaciers on Greenland are in severe decline, to the point where this too has made the news in recent days; the glaciers in Alaska, likewise, are in severe decline. The snow cover on Mount Kilomonjaro is nearly gone for the first time. [Atty] Is the Gobi or Sahara growing or shrinking? [Mark] The Gobi and Sahara are growing, and have been for a very long time. I'm not aware of this having any connection with global warming as being a consequence of it -- though obviously, it has a connection in the other direction of being an exacerbation of it. The dust storms in the Gobi now reach all the way to Beijing, which is probably direct in the path of the growing desert. In some cases, the dust storms of both deserts are now reaching as far as North America: the Gobi had one in 2001 that got all the way to the Great Lakes in the midwest, the Sahara had one a few weeks ago that got to Florida (and has ones, now more frequently occurring, going across the Mediterranean into Europe). Solar intensity has been continually monitored at various stations throughout the planet. In recent years, the level of solar radiation has spiked at various points throughout the world. This is called the "solar brightening" problem and is also a predicted consequence of the whole global warming phenomenon. The continential glaciers (particularly those of Greenland), after being lost, will raise the ocean levels; the ocean levels are already known to be rising. But even without the glaciers, the ocean levels will rise simply due to thermal expansion, which is not insignificant either. And understand, when stuff goes under, it's not some kind of gradual thing of a few inches of lost land per year. Things tend to happen at once -- e.g. a bad storm hits, flooding an entire area, breaking levees, and the flood never fully goes away and the ongoing and increasingly futile effort of damming the water away is just abandoned, after the 20th breach or so. When a place goes under, it will tend to go under overnight and stay that way; nobody will go back to re-dam the water after event #20. New Orleans is just the beginning. Given what's to come, by the time even THIS year is over, it's quite possible nobody will even remember New Orleans, compared to what they will remember next. Maybe you'll luck out in 2005, and not have a repeat of the 1-2-3-4 punch of 2004, but then there's 2006... But 2005 is only 1/2 way through. [hanson] ..... ahahahaha... AHAHAHA... and what are all those green crocodile tears supposed to do, Mark?... The name of the game is simply to ADAPT... because CHANGES will occur whether you like it or not. Actually-1: The only thing that never changes is change itself, and Actually-2: The ones that have elegantly adapted to these changes are interestingly enough the enviros, class 1 and 2 by sponging and leaching off the rest of us and class 3 using it as their cult/religion to ameliorate their anxieties.... as can bee seen here by/in: == Modern, attributal definitions of enviro classifications: = Class (1) = Green ****(s): ...are the ones who advocate, promote, = support, legalize, institute and extort the permit charges, = the user fees, the enviro surtaxes and the CO2/Carbon tax, = all reflected in HIGHER PRICES of goods and services!, = and being responsible for much of the OUT-SOURCING! = Class (2) = Green turd(s): ...are the ones who are recipients and = beneficiaries from the lootings of (1), directly or indirectly. = Class (3) = Little green idiot(s): .... are the unpaid, well-meaning ones = who think they do something for the "environment", when in = fact they are only the enablers and facilitators for (2) who = are harvesting the green $$$ that (1) has extorted. ahahaha... ahahanson PS: For added green intellectual input/entertainment I have added sci. enviro with its tainted speculists, the hordes of class 3 enviros. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
Once again, some deep thoughts from ahahahahahanson. True enough,
Native Americans were managing their environment (and were killing off the mastadons) since the last Ice Age and when they first came to North America from China. In fact, as pointed out in the non-fictional footnotes of M. Crichton's thriller "State of Fear", the entire Great Plains were in some ways a giant open-range farm, 'managed' by the Plains Indians. The same thing happened (mass extinctions) when North and South America 'came together' (they were seperated) when the isthmus of Panama was formed (allowing sabre tooth cats from North America to wipe out the marsupials of South America). And even today the Gobi and Sahara deserts are getting bigger--and Africa is moving into Europe and will soon displace the Mediterranean sea. Life goes on though... The only change is change itself. RL hanson wrote: Mark delivered a very sad green song in oups.com... Attila the Bum wrote: [hanson] .... ahahahaha... AHAHAHA... and what are all those green crocodile tears supposed to do, Mark?... The name of the game is simply to ADAPT... because CHANGES will occur whether you like it or not. Actually-1: The only thing that never changes is change itself, and Actually-2: The ones that have elegantly adapted to these changes are interestingly enough the enviros, class 1 and 2 by sponging and leaching off the rest of us and class 3 using it as their cult/religion to ameliorate their anxieties.... as can bee seen here by/in: == Modern, attributal definitions of enviro classifications: = Class (1) = Green ****(s): ...are the ones who advocate, promote, = support, legalize, institute and extort the permit charges, = the user fees, the enviro surtaxes and the CO2/Carbon tax, = all reflected in HIGHER PRICES of goods and services!, = and being responsible for much of the OUT-SOURCING! = Class (2) = Green turd(s): ...are the ones who are recipients and = beneficiaries from the lootings of (1), directly or indirectly. = Class (3) = Little green idiot(s): .... are the unpaid, well-meaning ones = who think they do something for the "environment", when in = fact they are only the enablers and facilitators for (2) who = are harvesting the green $$$ that (1) has extorted. ahahaha... ahahanson PS: For added green intellectual input/entertainment I have added sci. enviro with its tainted speculists, the hordes of class 3 enviros. |
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreasesand turning interior of continents into deserts
|
As Global Warming increases, cloud cover on continents decreases and turning interior of continents into deserts
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 WeatherBanter.co.uk