| 21-12-2019 21:14 |
Into the Night ★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: Please advise of any critical flaws. Thank you in advance.
Sure, do you agree or disagree?
I believe that you should see a correlation between colder air flowing into a region and a decrease in the average temperature for that region.
I believe that you should see a correlation between warmer air flowing into a region and an increase in the average temperature for that region.
I firmly believe that if colder air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and colder temperatures in that region.
I firmly believe that if warmer air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and warmer temperatures in that region.
Do you agree or disagree?
I already answered this deflection of a question you posed earlier.
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing. On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
No gas, vapor, liquid, or solid is capable of warming anything by itself. You can't create energy out of nothing.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 22-12-2019 01:54 |
IBdaMann ★★★★★
(14389) |
Spongy Iris wrote:Can satellites not get a sense of this?
Are you asking if satellites are human? Are you asking if satellites can get a "gut feel"?
Your question is stupid.
No, satellites CANNOT determine ice thickness.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 22-12-2019 06:21 |
Spongy Iris ★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
Liquid and/or ice water is not as opaque, nor as white and/or grey as clouds. Yes it is.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At 50 miles altitude, all around the world, it is cold enough freeze carbon dioxide into dry ice. Not enough CO2.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Are these not facts which negate much of what you have stated?
Not facts at all. Arguments.
Dude have you ever tried to take a picture of falling rain or snow?
I live in Seattle. People take pictures of rain (and snow) fairly often.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It can't be captured on camera. Yes it can.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It is spread too thin. It is certainly not opaque like clouds. It is opaque like clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is enough CO2 in the atmosphere to make clouds: No there isn't.
Spongy Iris wrote:
A quick fact check about the composition of the atmosphere:
0.04% CO2 ÷ 1% H2O vapor = 4% ratio.
0.04 divided by 1 is not 4. There is no global ratio in the atmosphere for water vapor. It varies from place to place. Observations have noted anywhere from just above 0% to 4% of the atmosphere. CO2 is also not distributed uniformly throughout the atmosphere. The global density of CO2 is unknown. You seem to be using the Mauna Loa data. That station doesn't measure global CO2 and has also been shown to be fudging the data. It's useless.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Sure sounds like enough CO2 to make clouds. No. Bad math and rash assumptions.
Spongy Iris wrote:
200 lbs of dry ice thrown into 12000 lbs of water is a lower ratio, 2%, and that made a thick cloud.
Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up numbers to satisfy a wrong explanation of what happened.
Clouds are more opaque than rain and snow.
Clouds are not just water.
This post continues to posit that H2O and CO2 in the atmosphere is the mixture that makes clouds.
And I said,
.04 ÷ 1 = .04
(a typical atmospheric ratio of H20 / CO2)
And
200 ÷ 12000 = .02
(Making clouds by dumping 200 lbs of dry ice into 12000 lbs of water)
Similar ratios. 2% and 4%.
Clouds in the experiment look like natural clouds.
Just look at a pot of boiling water and then put your head in the clouds. It's not even comparable. |
| 22-12-2019 06:28 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: Please advise of any critical flaws. Thank you in advance.
Sure, do you agree or disagree?
I believe that you should see a correlation between colder air flowing into a region and a decrease in the average temperature for that region.
I believe that you should see a correlation between warmer air flowing into a region and an increase in the average temperature for that region.
I firmly believe that if colder air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and colder temperatures in that region.
I firmly believe that if warmer air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and warmer temperatures in that region.
Do you agree or disagree?
I already answered this deflection of a question you posed earlier.
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing. On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
No gas, vapor, liquid, or solid is capable of warming anything by itself. You can't create energy out of nothing.
It is observed cloudy days winter days are warmer than clear winter days consistently.
If you're not going to address this observation, and keep parroting that same line, why bother dude. |
| 22-12-2019 06:33 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:Can satellites not get a sense of this?
Are you asking if satellites are human? Are you asking if satellites can get a "gut feel"?
Your question is stupid.
No, satellites CANNOT determine ice thickness.
.
Are you a grammar checker?
I was trying to ask if measurements gotten from satellites, such as the frequency of radiations, can give an estimate of ice thickness.
Most scientific journalists seem to think so! |
|
| 22-12-2019 18:19 |
GasGuzzler★★★★★
(2932) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan |
| 22-12-2019 19:04 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds. |
| 22-12-2019 19:22 |
GasGuzzler★★★★★
(2932) |
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
The low temp last night was 30F. I don't call that frigid since it is warmer than our recorded historical average high for the day. The sky was clear and winds were light.
Look it up yourself. Cedar Rapids Iowa. My numbers were recorded at the Eastern Iowa Airport.
Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Edited on 22-12-2019 19:23 |
| 22-12-2019 21:17 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
Liquid and/or ice water is not as opaque, nor as white and/or grey as clouds. Yes it is.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At 50 miles altitude, all around the world, it is cold enough freeze carbon dioxide into dry ice. Not enough CO2.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Are these not facts which negate much of what you have stated?
Not facts at all. Arguments.
Dude have you ever tried to take a picture of falling rain or snow?
I live in Seattle. People take pictures of rain (and snow) fairly often.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It can't be captured on camera. Yes it can.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It is spread too thin. It is certainly not opaque like clouds. It is opaque like clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is enough CO2 in the atmosphere to make clouds: No there isn't.
Spongy Iris wrote:
A quick fact check about the composition of the atmosphere:
0.04% CO2 ÷ 1% H2O vapor = 4% ratio.
0.04 divided by 1 is not 4. There is no global ratio in the atmosphere for water vapor. It varies from place to place. Observations have noted anywhere from just above 0% to 4% of the atmosphere. CO2 is also not distributed uniformly throughout the atmosphere. The global density of CO2 is unknown. You seem to be using the Mauna Loa data. That station doesn't measure global CO2 and has also been shown to be fudging the data. It's useless.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Sure sounds like enough CO2 to make clouds. No. Bad math and rash assumptions.
Spongy Iris wrote:
200 lbs of dry ice thrown into 12000 lbs of water is a lower ratio, 2%, and that made a thick cloud.
Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up numbers to satisfy a wrong explanation of what happened.
Clouds are more opaque than rain and snow.
True. Tinier droplets.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Clouds are not just water.
They are just liquid or solid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
This post continues to posit that H2O and CO2 in the atmosphere is the mixture that makes clouds.
Nope. CO2 doesn't form clouds in the skies of Earth. Not enough CO2.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And I said,
.04 ÷ 1 = .04
(a typical atmospheric ratio of H20 / CO2)
This is not a ratio at all.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And
200 ÷ 12000 = .02
(Making clouds by dumping 200 lbs of dry ice into 12000 lbs of water)
Not all 12000 lbs of water are consumed by the reaction. ALL of the dry ice is, and most of it goes into invisible CO2 gas. The clouds you see are liquid water, not CO2. Dumping CO2 in water causes rapid cooling of the air above the water, forming clouds of liquid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Similar ratios. 2% and 4%.
False equivalence of ratios. Counting ants and comparing them to elephants is entertaining, but equally meaningless.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Clouds in the experiment look like natural clouds.
The ARE natural clouds. They are liquid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Just look at a pot of boiling water and then put your head in the clouds.
I do both. I fly, you know.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It's not even comparable.
True. Most clouds are much cooler than steam or steam condensate. Most clouds are a lot bigger than a pot of water on the stove too.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 22-12-2019 21:17 |
| 22-12-2019 21:32 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: Please advise of any critical flaws. Thank you in advance.
Sure, do you agree or disagree?
I believe that you should see a correlation between colder air flowing into a region and a decrease in the average temperature for that region.
I believe that you should see a correlation between warmer air flowing into a region and an increase in the average temperature for that region.
I firmly believe that if colder air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and colder temperatures in that region.
I firmly believe that if warmer air brings clouds into a region then you will see a correlation between increased clouds and warmer temperatures in that region.
Do you agree or disagree?
I already answered this deflection of a question you posed earlier.
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing. On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
No gas, vapor, liquid, or solid is capable of warming anything by itself. You can't create energy out of nothing.
It is observed cloudy days winter days are warmer than clear winter days consistently.
No, it is not. A single falsification of this theory is all that is necessary. A cloudy day in the summer produces rain. A cloudy day in the winter quite probably may produce snow.
Snow is colder than rain. Your theory is falsified.
Observations are not a proof. All observations are subject to the problems of phenomenology. The data that any observation produces is similar subject to the same problems.
In brief, people conclude different things even observing the same event. They do so because observation itself requires interpreting what you see. That is done according to your own concept of how the universe works. That concept is as unique to each of us as a fingerprint.
Observations of optical illusions, magic shows, and even movies and television are part of this. What you think you observe may result in erroneous conclusions.
No observation proves anything. Science itself does not contain any proofs. Proofs only exist in a closed functional system like mathematics or logic. Science is a set of falsifiable theories, not proofs. No theory is ever proven True.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you're not going to address this observation, and keep parroting that same line, why bother dude.
I addressed the observation, and why it is quite possibly in error. I have also addressed the reasons it probably is an error. I have also just addressed the observation as an observation in and of itself, and why they are not a proof and may even result in erroneous conclusions.
Is the warmer temperature you observe due to the presence of the cloud, or due to the presence of a different air mass that moved in with the storm? Weather fronts typically occur where there is a difference of temperature, oft times quite dramatic.
It is not possible to create energy out of nothing. There is nothing in a cloud that would create energy out of nothing. A cloud simply is. To make something warmer, you need thermal energy. Only an increase of thermal energy will make something warmer. The flow of thermal energy is called 'heat'.
Since it is not possible to keep the same masses of air in place, and just move clouds around to see what effect they have, you are quite possibly reversing cause and effect, and probably are.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 22-12-2019 21:41 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:Can satellites not get a sense of this?
Are you asking if satellites are human? Are you asking if satellites can get a "gut feel"?
Your question is stupid.
No, satellites CANNOT determine ice thickness.
.
Are you a grammar checker?
I see no grammar checking going on here. I think the problem is that you are attaching intelligence to inanimate things.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was trying to ask if measurements gotten from satellites, such as the frequency of radiations, can give an estimate of ice thickness.
Radiation has no frequency.
Satellites cannot measure ice thickness today. There is no magick frequency of light that penetrates only ice. The only way to measure the thickness of ice today is to go out there and drill a hole. People do this, but that only gives you the thickness of the ice at that location and only at that point in time.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most scientific journalists seem to think so!
Science isn't a journal, book, or magazine. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
The theory that clouds warm the surface under them is falsified by the external consistency check. No theory of science can conflict with any other theory of science. The 1st law of thermodynamics says such a theory about clouds is wrong. You will have to falsify the 1st law of thermodynamics to allow a theory that clouds warm the land beneath them simply by being there.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 22-12-2019 21:43 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
Then why is a cloudy day in the summer warmer than a cloudy day in the winter? Hmmmm?
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 23-12-2019 00:00 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14389) |
Spongy Iris wrote: Are you a grammar checker?
Are you unable to say what you mean and mean what you say, and do you blame me for that?
Spongy Iris wrote: I was trying to ask if measurements gotten from satellites, such as the frequency of radiations, can give an estimate of ice thickness.
Then why didn't you use these words? Duhhhhh.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 23-12-2019 00:08 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
GasGuzzler wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
The low temp last night was 30F. I don't call that frigid since it is warmer than our recorded historical average high for the day. The sky was clear and winds were light.
Look it up yourself. Cedar Rapids Iowa. My numbers were recorded at the Eastern Iowa Airport.
Are you that much of a simpleton? If you can only go by today or last night, you're on your own.
Edited on 23-12-2019 00:11 |
| 23-12-2019 05:09 |
GasGuzzler★★★★★
(2932) |
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
The low temp last night was 30F. I don't call that frigid since it is warmer than our recorded historical average high for the day. The sky was clear and winds were light.
Look it up yourself. Cedar Rapids Iowa. My numbers were recorded at the Eastern Iowa Airport.
Are you that much of a simpleton? If you can only go by today or last night, you're on your own.
Just blowing up your theory using today as a perfect example. You are the simpleton. You say clouds make winter warmer. I say that sometimes warmer makes clouds in the winter.
Radiation will not penetrate a perfect insulator, thus as I said space is not a perfect insulator.- Swan
Edited on 23-12-2019 05:10 |
|
| 23-12-2019 17:26 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
Iowa also gets lots of tornados. Must be windier than I'm used to seeing in the SF Bay Area.
I was reading a while back, something like the cool wind coming down the Rocky mountains meets up with the warm gulf stream leads to the tornado alley around Oklahoma and such. Iowa gets hit too but not as severe as Oklahoma.
Perhaps in your case the seasonally warm temperatures you guys felt this past weekend was warmer winds from the south reaching further north than usual...
Where I am , at night time, in the winter, if we get a clear night, we might see frost and temperatures could hit freezing maybe 32 to 39 F. But if we get a thick cloud cover or thick fog, the night time low won't hit freezing, and temps might be like 43 to 50. |
| 23-12-2019 21:00 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
The low temp last night was 30F. I don't call that frigid since it is warmer than our recorded historical average high for the day. The sky was clear and winds were light.
Look it up yourself. Cedar Rapids Iowa. My numbers were recorded at the Eastern Iowa Airport.
Are you that much of a simpleton? If you can only go by today or last night, you're on your own.
Okay. Let's compare two different times for the temperature readings at the weather station for Cedar Rapids (the one at the airport will do). Using the current temperature as one point in time, what other point in time shall we use? Why is that point in time significant, why is any other point in time NOT significant?
Define 'warming'.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 23-12-2019 21:02 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
Iowa also gets lots of tornados. Must be windier than I'm used to seeing in the SF Bay Area.
I was reading a while back, something like the cool wind coming down the Rocky mountains meets up with the warm gulf stream leads to the tornado alley around Oklahoma and such. Iowa gets hit too but not as severe as Oklahoma.
Perhaps in your case the seasonally warm temperatures you guys felt this past weekend was warmer winds from the south reaching further north than usual...
Where I am , at night time, in the winter, if we get a clear night, we might see frost and temperatures could hit freezing maybe 32 to 39 F. But if we get a thick cloud cover or thick fog, the night time low won't hit freezing, and temps might be like 43 to 50.
What about days where frost forms under an overcast sky? What about those warm and clear summer nights?
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 23-12-2019 22:53 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
Liquid and/or ice water is not as opaque, nor as white and/or grey as clouds. Yes it is.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At 50 miles altitude, all around the world, it is cold enough freeze carbon dioxide into dry ice. Not enough CO2.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Are these not facts which negate much of what you have stated?
Not facts at all. Arguments.
Dude have you ever tried to take a picture of falling rain or snow?
I live in Seattle. People take pictures of rain (and snow) fairly often.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It can't be captured on camera. Yes it can.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It is spread too thin. It is certainly not opaque like clouds. It is opaque like clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There is enough CO2 in the atmosphere to make clouds: No there isn't.
Spongy Iris wrote:
A quick fact check about the composition of the atmosphere:
0.04% CO2 ÷ 1% H2O vapor = 4% ratio.
0.04 divided by 1 is not 4. There is no global ratio in the atmosphere for water vapor. It varies from place to place. Observations have noted anywhere from just above 0% to 4% of the atmosphere. CO2 is also not distributed uniformly throughout the atmosphere. The global density of CO2 is unknown. You seem to be using the Mauna Loa data. That station doesn't measure global CO2 and has also been shown to be fudging the data. It's useless.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Sure sounds like enough CO2 to make clouds. No. Bad math and rash assumptions.
Spongy Iris wrote:
200 lbs of dry ice thrown into 12000 lbs of water is a lower ratio, 2%, and that made a thick cloud.
Argument from randU fallacy. You are making up numbers to satisfy a wrong explanation of what happened.
Clouds are more opaque than rain and snow.
True. Tinier droplets.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Clouds are not just water.
They are just liquid or solid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
This post continues to posit that H2O and CO2 in the atmosphere is the mixture that makes clouds.
Nope. CO2 doesn't form clouds in the skies of Earth. Not enough CO2.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And I said,
.04 ÷ 1 = .04
(a typical atmospheric ratio of H20 / CO2)
This is not a ratio at all.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And
200 ÷ 12000 = .02
(Making clouds by dumping 200 lbs of dry ice into 12000 lbs of water)
Not all 12000 lbs of water are consumed by the reaction. ALL of the dry ice is, and most of it goes into invisible CO2 gas. The clouds you see are liquid water, not CO2. Dumping CO2 in water causes rapid cooling of the air above the water, forming clouds of liquid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Similar ratios. 2% and 4%.
False equivalence of ratios. Counting ants and comparing them to elephants is entertaining, but equally meaningless.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Clouds in the experiment look like natural clouds.
The ARE natural clouds. They are liquid water.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Just look at a pot of boiling water and then put your head in the clouds.
I do both. I fly, you know.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It's not even comparable.
True. Most clouds are much cooler than steam or steam condensate. Most clouds are a lot bigger than a pot of water on the stove too.
A copy paste from Thought Co.
"Only a small amount of fog is visible in the air around a piece of dry ice. However, if you drop dry ice in water, especially hot water, the effect is magnified. The carbon dioxide forms bubbles of cold gas in the water. When the bubbles escape at the surface of the water, the warmer moist air condenses into lots of fog."
The detail I'm noticing here:
the CO2 forms bubbles of gas; this magnifies the clouds; they become thicker, more opaque.
I think this bubbling reaction is called carbonation...
I'm still not backing off this position, that you need CO2 to react with H20 to get such a glorious cloud cover.
If you didn't have... carbonation... (if I can call it that without failing your spelling bee) the clouds would not be thick enough to block the sun from view.
You can see vapor if you open your freezer and let the cold air spill out into the room temperature. But you can hardly call this water vapor a cloud, because it can barely obscure your vision, unlike driving through thick fog, or flying through thick cloud cover.
And I don't see how you can claim false equivalency.
The experiment of dumping 200 lbs of dry ice into 12,000 lbs of water is comparable to a typical atmospheric composition of CO2 and H2O. |
| 23-12-2019 23:09 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
Iowa also gets lots of tornados. Must be windier than I'm used to seeing in the SF Bay Area.
I was reading a while back, something like the cool wind coming down the Rocky mountains meets up with the warm gulf stream leads to the tornado alley around Oklahoma and such. Iowa gets hit too but not as severe as Oklahoma.
Perhaps in your case the seasonally warm temperatures you guys felt this past weekend was warmer winds from the south reaching further north than usual...
Where I am , at night time, in the winter, if we get a clear night, we might see frost and temperatures could hit freezing maybe 32 to 39 F. But if we get a thick cloud cover or thick fog, the night time low won't hit freezing, and temps might be like 43 to 50.
What about days where frost forms under an overcast sky? What about those warm and clear summer nights?
I live in a climate that rarely sees frost.
The only time I've seen frost is after a clear night just before sunrise.
In SF, I haven't ever seen frost after night of thick clouds.
The closest spot to me where you might be able to catch an occurrence of such this winter would probably be near the peak of Mt Diablo. And that is because the elevation is 3800 feet and the air is thinner and thus it's colder. |
| 24-12-2019 00:17 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:Can satellites not get a sense of this?
Are you asking if satellites are human? Are you asking if satellites can get a "gut feel"?
Your question is stupid.
No, satellites CANNOT determine ice thickness.
.
Are you a grammar checker?
I see no grammar checking going on here. I think the problem is that you are attaching intelligence to inanimate things.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was trying to ask if measurements gotten from satellites, such as the frequency of radiations, can give an estimate of ice thickness.
Radiation has no frequency.
Satellites cannot measure ice thickness today. There is no magick frequency of light that penetrates only ice. The only way to measure the thickness of ice today is to go out there and drill a hole. People do this, but that only gives you the thickness of the ice at that location and only at that point in time.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most scientific journalists seem to think so!
Science isn't a journal, book, or magazine. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
The theory that clouds warm the surface under them is falsified by the external consistency check. No theory of science can conflict with any other theory of science. The 1st law of thermodynamics says such a theory about clouds is wrong. You will have to falsify the 1st law of thermodynamics to allow a theory that clouds warm the land beneath them simply by being there.
What do you mean radiation has no frequency?
It has a wavelength that goes up and down frequently, yes?
It can go up and down more frequently (shorter wave length) or less frequently (longer wavelength).
Isn't the rate of up and down its frequency? |
| 24-12-2019 00:23 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
Prevent heat loss in the night.
Or block the sun in the day.
(Oh also reflect some night light peaking around the earth from the bright side onto the dark side)
Edited on 24-12-2019 00:27 |
| 24-12-2019 02:54 |
James___★★★★★
(5513) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
Prevent heat loss in the night.
Or block the sun in the day.
(Oh also reflect some night light peaking around the earth from the bright side onto the dark side)
They might also do something else. I asked a German professor to consider something. How much kinetic energy does a cloud have? During the day, absorb or reflect solar radiation and at night create somewhat of a controlled climate below them. So basically same thing as what you said. I have a tendency to get into atmospheric chemistry and this happens to be a climate discussion forum. |
| 24-12-2019 09:47 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
"Only a small amount of fog is visible in the air around a piece of dry ice. However, if you drop dry ice in water, especially hot water, the effect is magnified.
The carbon dioxide forms bubbles of cold gas in the water. When the bubbles escape at the surface of the water, the warmer moist air condenses into lots of fog."
The detail I'm noticing here:
the CO2 forms bubbles of gas; this magnifies the clouds; they become thicker, more opaque.
I think this bubbling reaction is called carbonation...
I'm still not backing off this position, that you need CO2 to react with H20 to get such a glorious cloud cover.
Nope. Not at all.
Spongy Iris wrote:
If you didn't have... carbonation... (if I can call it that without failing your spelling bee) the clouds would not be thick enough to block the sun from view. Water alone can do it. CO2 not needed.
Spongy Iris wrote:
You can see vapor if you open your freezer and let the cold air spill out into the room temperature.
That is not a vapor. That is liquid water condensing out of the air.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But you can hardly call this water vapor a cloud, Sure you can. That's exactly what it is.
Spongy Iris wrote:
because it can barely obscure your vision, No matter. Clouds are not the same density.
Spongy Iris wrote:
unlike driving through thick fog, or flying through thick cloud cover. Same thing, just denser clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
And I don't see how you can claim false equivalency.
Obviously not. That doesn't change the false equivalency you claimed.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The experiment of dumping 200 lbs of dry ice into 12,000 lbs of water is comparable to a typical atmospheric composition of CO2 and H2O.
No, they are nothing like each other. False equivalence fallacy. RDCF
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 24-12-2019 09:48 |
| 24-12-2019 09:52 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
Iowa also gets lots of tornados. Must be windier than I'm used to seeing in the SF Bay Area.
I was reading a while back, something like the cool wind coming down the Rocky mountains meets up with the warm gulf stream leads to the tornado alley around Oklahoma and such. Iowa gets hit too but not as severe as Oklahoma.
Perhaps in your case the seasonally warm temperatures you guys felt this past weekend was warmer winds from the south reaching further north than usual...
Where I am , at night time, in the winter, if we get a clear night, we might see frost and temperatures could hit freezing maybe 32 to 39 F. But if we get a thick cloud cover or thick fog, the night time low won't hit freezing, and temps might be like 43 to 50.
What about days where frost forms under an overcast sky? What about those warm and clear summer nights?
I live in a climate that rarely sees frost.
So?
Spongy Iris wrote:
The only time I've seen frost is after a clear night just before sunrise.
Obviously you aren't paying attention then. It can happen anytime it's cold enough, cloud cover or no.
Spongy Iris wrote:
In SF, I haven't ever seen frost after night of thick clouds.
I have...and in San Francisco...right there on Market Street. It happens in Seattle more often.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The closest spot to me where you might be able to catch an occurrence of such this winter would probably be near the peak of Mt Diablo.
Cherry picking fallacy.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 24-12-2019 09:54 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:Can satellites not get a sense of this?
Are you asking if satellites are human? Are you asking if satellites can get a "gut feel"?
Your question is stupid.
No, satellites CANNOT determine ice thickness.
.
Are you a grammar checker?
I see no grammar checking going on here. I think the problem is that you are attaching intelligence to inanimate things.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I was trying to ask if measurements gotten from satellites, such as the frequency of radiations, can give an estimate of ice thickness.
Radiation has no frequency.
Satellites cannot measure ice thickness today. There is no magick frequency of light that penetrates only ice. The only way to measure the thickness of ice today is to go out there and drill a hole. People do this, but that only gives you the thickness of the ice at that location and only at that point in time.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Most scientific journalists seem to think so!
Science isn't a journal, book, or magazine. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
The theory that clouds warm the surface under them is falsified by the external consistency check. No theory of science can conflict with any other theory of science. The 1st law of thermodynamics says such a theory about clouds is wrong. You will have to falsify the 1st law of thermodynamics to allow a theory that clouds warm the land beneath them simply by being there.
What do you mean radiation has no frequency?
Just exactly that.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It has a wavelength that goes up and down frequently, yes?
No.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 24-12-2019 09:56 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
Prevent heat loss in the night.
You cannot trap or slow heat. You cannot decrease entropy in any system.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Or block the sun in the day.
A different system. In this case, the Sun heats the clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote:
(Oh also reflect some night light peaking around the earth from the bright side onto the dark side)
Nope. Sunlight isn't reflected around the Earth by the atmosphere.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 24-12-2019 09:57 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
James___ wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Have you ever lived in a frigid climate where it snows in the winter time and lakes freeze over?
Yes, lived in Iowa most of my 48 years. 3-4 inches ice on areas lakes right now.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I once heard a farmer from Iowa say, you pray for snow in the winter.
A thick blanket of snow can mean good subsoil moisture in the spring. However it can work to keep the frost from going deep, and also ensure a good crop of yield eating insects.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why? Because when it snows, it's cloudy, and it almost gets to freezing.
Yes, a warm up ahead of a snowstorm is fairly common. A brutal cold period is just as common after a snow storm.
Spongy Iris wrote:
On a clear winter day it is way below freezing.
Looking outside my office window now and I can't find a cloud in the sky on
Dec. 22. Highs today will be in the low 50s. We had 3 bouts of snow and single digit highs in back in October. Recorded historical average high for today is around 28.
Spongy Iris wrote:
That is my point. A cloud cover will consistently warm up a frigid climate. It is observed by anyone who pays attention to weather.
So with your line of reasoning, if it were cloudy here today we could easily be in the 60s, instead of the 50s, which is extremely warm for this time of year.
Is it possible that clouds form because a frigid air mass is in place and warmer air has moved in, or is in the process of overtaking an area? It is very difficult for warm air to displace cold. It can take days. Ever noticed how the the temp can drop 20 degrees in hours or even minutes, but a warm up of 20 degrees usually takes days?
You're over simplifying cloud cover. It's well known that frigid temperatures at night occur with no cloud cover. Especially if snow is on the ground.
Yet in the summer clouds block the hot sun. So why do you think clouds keep the winter nighttime temperatures warmer and keep summer days cooler? Everyone knows that on a sunny day that it gets warmer when the Sun isn't blocked by clouds.
Prevent heat loss in the night.
Or block the sun in the day.
(Oh also reflect some night light peaking around the earth from the bright side onto the dark side)
They might also do something else. I asked a German professor to consider something. How much kinetic energy does a cloud have? During the day, absorb or reflect solar radiation and at night create somewhat of a controlled climate below them. So basically same thing as what you said. I have a tendency to get into atmospheric chemistry and this happens to be a climate discussion forum.
Buzzword fallacies. Void argument fallacy.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 25-12-2019 18:22 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night?
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
Edited on 25-12-2019 18:23 |
| 25-12-2019 20:15 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
|
| 25-12-2019 22:42 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The wind direction on 12/25 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from the southeast. It was cloudier and quite a bit warmer than 12/24.
The wind direction on 12/24 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from directly west and some southwest. It was clearer and quite a bit colder than 12/25.
I'm sure you can make the argument the wind from the southeast is warmer than the wind from the west in SF.
But looking ahead to 12/29 and 12/30 we may have a better data sample to observe.
The wind is forecast to blow from Northwest in the early morning hours on both those days.
12/29 is forecast as rain and cloudy with a low of 42.
12/30 is forecast as partially cloudy with low of 40.
Assuming the forecast is correct this would be an example where...
Time of year is same, thus heat from sun is same
Wind pattern is same.
But clouds are forecast to be thicker on 12/29 than 12/30.
Given only this as the 1 major difference, weather forecasters have estimated a higher low on the cloudier day.
I'll try to check back on 12/30 |
| 25-12-2019 23:09 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14389) |
Spongy Iris wrote: I live in a climate that rarely sees frost.
Is that the global climate you are referencing? You live in the global climate, right?
Yeah, the global climate has lots of frost, every day. I don't want to appear like I'm telling you that you need to get out more and learn about the climate ... but you need to get out more and learn about the climate.
Spongy Iris wrote: The only time I've seen frost is after a clear night just before sunrise.
You need to get your ass out from your mother's basement and study the global climate. FROST - EVERY - DAY.
Spongy Iris wrote: In SF, I haven't ever seen frost after night of thick clouds.
Hello! San Francisco isn't the globe. Duh. Where did you learn geography?
Spongy Iris wrote: And that is because the elevation is 3800 feet and the air is thinner and thus it's colder.
I thought specifically lower temperatures made air colder, regardless of its pressure. What am I missing?
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 26-12-2019 21:55 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The wind direction on 12/25 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from the southeast. It was cloudier and quite a bit warmer than 12/24.
Sounds like you picked up a weak Pineapple express. Those are more common up here in Seattle, and can bring a LOT of rain at times.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The wind direction on 12/24 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from directly west and some southwest. It was clearer and quite a bit colder than 12/25.
Fairly typical. That is a colder part of the ocean in general.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm sure you can make the argument the wind from the southeast is warmer than the wind from the west in SF.
Not necessarily. Winds are not temperature.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But looking ahead to 12/29 and 12/30 we may have a better data sample to observe.
The wind is forecast to blow from Northwest in the early morning hours on both those days.
12/29 is forecast as rain and cloudy with a low of 42.
12/30 is forecast as partially cloudy with low of 40.
Sound again pretty typical of your area.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Assuming the forecast is correct this would be an example where...
Time of year is same, thus heat from sun is same
Wind pattern is same.
But clouds are forecast to be thicker on 12/29 than 12/30.
Given only this as the 1 major difference, weather forecasters have estimated a higher low on the cloudier day.
It is not the only major difference. The air mass that wind moves into your town may be almost any temperature, even when the wind is from the same direction.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'll try to check back on 12/30
Have fun.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 29-12-2019 17:44 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The wind direction on 12/25 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from the southeast. It was cloudier and quite a bit warmer than 12/24.
Sounds like you picked up a weak Pineapple express. Those are more common up here in Seattle, and can bring a LOT of rain at times.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The wind direction on 12/24 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from directly west and some southwest. It was clearer and quite a bit colder than 12/25.
Fairly typical. That is a colder part of the ocean in general.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm sure you can make the argument the wind from the southeast is warmer than the wind from the west in SF.
Not necessarily. Winds are not temperature.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But looking ahead to 12/29 and 12/30 we may have a better data sample to observe.
The wind is forecast to blow from Northwest in the early morning hours on both those days.
12/29 is forecast as rain and cloudy with a low of 42.
12/30 is forecast as partially cloudy with low of 40.
Sound again pretty typical of your area.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Assuming the forecast is correct this would be an example where...
Time of year is same, thus heat from sun is same
Wind pattern is same.
But clouds are forecast to be thicker on 12/29 than 12/30.
Given only this as the 1 major difference, weather forecasters have estimated a higher low on the cloudier day.
It is not the only major difference. The air mass that wind moves into your town may be almost any temperature, even when the wind is from the same direction.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'll try to check back on 12/30
Have fun.
Just amazing how you can't acknowledge that a thick cloud cover will prevent heat loss during cold times.
Hey guess what? The 27th and 28th were clear nights here by the base of Mt Diablo. I got up before sunrise and saw frost. I check my local temperatures, 32 and 33 F. Wind was blowing from southwest on the 27th. Beautiful morning sunrises.
This morning of the 29th I wake up before sunrise. A thick cloud cover has rolled in. Wind is blowing from the southwest. I check my local temperature and it's 45 F. The sky is dim and I can't see the sunrise.
Go figure! Freezing on a clear morning. 45 F the very next cloudy morning.
Now if this next fact doesn't change your knuckle headed argument nothing will.
Frost and barely freezing temperatures are somewhat common in winters in the Bay Area, when we get clear nights. You can usually come across them every winter. But apart from the highest hills in the area, like Mt Diablo, there hasn't been a measurable snow fall here since 1976.
Every time it's cloudy enough to rain, it's never cold enough to snow. Even though it sometimes is cold enough to snow its never cloudy enough at the same time it's cold enough
That's not a random fact. It's an obvious trend. Air parcels moving around the world is much more random. |
| 29-12-2019 21:50 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The wind direction on 12/25 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from the southeast. It was cloudier and quite a bit warmer than 12/24.
Sounds like you picked up a weak Pineapple express. Those are more common up here in Seattle, and can bring a LOT of rain at times.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The wind direction on 12/24 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from directly west and some southwest. It was clearer and quite a bit colder than 12/25.
Fairly typical. That is a colder part of the ocean in general.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm sure you can make the argument the wind from the southeast is warmer than the wind from the west in SF.
Not necessarily. Winds are not temperature.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But looking ahead to 12/29 and 12/30 we may have a better data sample to observe.
The wind is forecast to blow from Northwest in the early morning hours on both those days.
12/29 is forecast as rain and cloudy with a low of 42.
12/30 is forecast as partially cloudy with low of 40.
Sound again pretty typical of your area.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Assuming the forecast is correct this would be an example where...
Time of year is same, thus heat from sun is same
Wind pattern is same.
But clouds are forecast to be thicker on 12/29 than 12/30.
Given only this as the 1 major difference, weather forecasters have estimated a higher low on the cloudier day.
It is not the only major difference. The air mass that wind moves into your town may be almost any temperature, even when the wind is from the same direction.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'll try to check back on 12/30
Have fun.
Just amazing how you can't acknowledge that a thick cloud cover will prevent heat loss during cold times.
It is not possible to trap heat. Heat is not contained in anything.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey guess what? The 27th and 28th were clear nights here by the base of Mt Diablo. I got up before sunrise and saw frost. I check my local temperatures, 32 and 33 F. Wind was blowing from southwest on the 27th. Beautiful morning sunrises. Hope you enjoyed your sunrise.
Spongy Iris wrote:
This morning of the 29th I wake up before sunrise. A thick cloud cover has rolled in. Wind is blowing from the southwest. I check my local temperature and it's 45 F. The sky is dim and I can't see the sunrise. But you did. The day got brighter, didn't it?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Go figure! Freezing on a clear morning. 45 F the very next cloudy morning.
What's to figure? Different weather on different days. Meh.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Now if this next fact doesn't change your knuckle headed argument nothing will.
YALIF
Spongy Iris wrote:
Frost and barely freezing temperatures are somewhat common in winters in the Bay Area, when we get clear nights. You can usually come across them every winter. But apart from the highest hills in the area, like Mt Diablo, there hasn't been a measurable snow fall here since 1976. But it did snow there in 1976?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Every time it's cloudy enough to rain, it's never cold enough to snow.
Then where do you suppose snow comes from??? Clear skies?????
Spongy Iris wrote:
Even though it sometimes is cold enough to snow its never cloudy enough at the same time it's cold enough Sure works everywhere else!
Spongy Iris wrote:
That's not a random fact. There is no such thing as a 'random fact'. Learn what 'fact' means.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It's an obvious trend.
Trends are not a proof or a fact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Air parcels moving around the world is much more random.
Not really.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan |
| 29-12-2019 22:44 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey ITN,
It was cloudy last night. I checked the temperature Christmas morning at sunrise. 45 F.
The night before last it was clear. I checked the temperature the morning of Christmas Eve at sunrise. 39 F.
For this purpose, I'll accept your data.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Why was the clear night colder than the cloudy night? Cooler air moved in and displaced the warmer air. The clouds were quite probably the point where the two air masses came into contact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Also, a cloudy night is brighter than a clear night. Do you notice this?
You live in the city. Your city lights reflect off the cloud layer. Visible light bounces off water, you know.
The wind direction on 12/25 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from the southeast. It was cloudier and quite a bit warmer than 12/24.
Sounds like you picked up a weak Pineapple express. Those are more common up here in Seattle, and can bring a LOT of rain at times.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The wind direction on 12/24 from 12 a.m. to 7 a.m. was mostly from directly west and some southwest. It was clearer and quite a bit colder than 12/25.
Fairly typical. That is a colder part of the ocean in general.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'm sure you can make the argument the wind from the southeast is warmer than the wind from the west in SF.
Not necessarily. Winds are not temperature.
Spongy Iris wrote:
But looking ahead to 12/29 and 12/30 we may have a better data sample to observe.
The wind is forecast to blow from Northwest in the early morning hours on both those days.
12/29 is forecast as rain and cloudy with a low of 42.
12/30 is forecast as partially cloudy with low of 40.
Sound again pretty typical of your area.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Assuming the forecast is correct this would be an example where...
Time of year is same, thus heat from sun is same
Wind pattern is same.
But clouds are forecast to be thicker on 12/29 than 12/30.
Given only this as the 1 major difference, weather forecasters have estimated a higher low on the cloudier day.
It is not the only major difference. The air mass that wind moves into your town may be almost any temperature, even when the wind is from the same direction.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I'll try to check back on 12/30
Have fun.
Just amazing how you can't acknowledge that a thick cloud cover will prevent heat loss during cold times.
It is not possible to trap heat. Heat is not contained in anything.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Hey guess what? The 27th and 28th were clear nights here by the base of Mt Diablo. I got up before sunrise and saw frost. I check my local temperatures, 32 and 33 F. Wind was blowing from southwest on the 27th. Beautiful morning sunrises. Hope you enjoyed your sunrise.
Spongy Iris wrote:
This morning of the 29th I wake up before sunrise. A thick cloud cover has rolled in. Wind is blowing from the southwest. I check my local temperature and it's 45 F. The sky is dim and I can't see the sunrise. But you did. The day got brighter, didn't it?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Go figure! Freezing on a clear morning. 45 F the very next cloudy morning.
What's to figure? Different weather on different days. Meh.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Now if this next fact doesn't change your knuckle headed argument nothing will.
YALIF
Spongy Iris wrote:
Frost and barely freezing temperatures are somewhat common in winters in the Bay Area, when we get clear nights. You can usually come across them every winter. But apart from the highest hills in the area, like Mt Diablo, there hasn't been a measurable snow fall here since 1976. But it did snow there in 1976?
Spongy Iris wrote:
Every time it's cloudy enough to rain, it's never cold enough to snow.
Then where do you suppose snow comes from??? Clear skies?????
Spongy Iris wrote:
Even though it sometimes is cold enough to snow its never cloudy enough at the same time it's cold enough Sure works everywhere else!
Spongy Iris wrote:
That's not a random fact. There is no such thing as a 'random fact'. Learn what 'fact' means.
Spongy Iris wrote:
It's an obvious trend.
Trends are not a proof or a fact.
Spongy Iris wrote:
Air parcels moving around the world is much more random.
Not really.
I suppose radiation heat can pass through material and heat up the material in that process.
If the heat is great and the material is thin it will pass right through and obliterate the thin material.
The atmosphere seems like the freezer and the sun seems like the heater. At the poles the sun has little power and the atmosphere has great power. The sun barely passes through.
The north pole might get 58 inches of snow per year and it is much warmer than the south pole where it might get 3 inches of snow year.
There are things that are pretty predictable like the sun and atmosphere, and things that are pretty random like wind.
I have no idea what YALIF means. Is that numerology or something? |
| 29-12-2019 22:59 |
Into the Night★★★★★
(21586) |
Spongy Iris wrote:
I suppose radiation heat can pass through material and heat up the material in that process.
Sure. Why not?
Spongy Iris wrote:
If the heat is great and the material is thin it will pass right through and obliterate the thin material.
Heating a thin material (or even a gas) does not obliterate it (unless you burn it!).
Spongy Iris wrote:
The atmosphere seems like the freezer and the sun seems like the heater.
Nope. The atmosphere is not capable of destroying energy into nothing.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At the poles the sun has little power and the atmosphere has great power.
The atmosphere is not energy. It is mass. The Sun puts out energy.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The sun barely passes through.
It lights up the poles just fine. Weather at the poles is usually pretty clear as well.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The north pole might get 58 inches of snow per year and it is much warmer than the south pole where it might get 3 inches of snow year.
The north pole is ocean. The south pole is land. There is also more humidity at the north pole.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There are things that are pretty predictable like the sun and atmosphere, and things that are pretty random like wind.
Even the wind is pretty predictable.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I have no idea what YALIF means. Is that numerology or something?
It's an acronym. Common ones I use here are:
YALIF: Yet Another Lame Insult Fallacy.
YALIFNAP: Yet Another Lame Insult Fallacy, No Argument Presented.
NAP: No Argument Presented.
RDCF: Repetitive Distortion and Contextomy Fallacy.
RQAA: Repetitious Question Already Answered.
These occur so commonly that I just use the acronym now.
The Parrot Killer
Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles
Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 29-12-2019 23:00 |
| 29-12-2019 23:47 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
Into the Night wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote:
I suppose radiation heat can pass through material and heat up the material in that process.
Sure. Why not?
Spongy Iris wrote:
If the heat is great and the material is thin it will pass right through and obliterate the thin material.
Heating a thin material (or even a gas) does not obliterate it (unless you burn it!).
Spongy Iris wrote:
The atmosphere seems like the freezer and the sun seems like the heater.
Nope. The atmosphere is not capable of destroying energy into nothing.
Spongy Iris wrote:
At the poles the sun has little power and the atmosphere has great power.
The atmosphere is not energy. It is mass. The Sun puts out energy.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The sun barely passes through.
It lights up the poles just fine. Weather at the poles is usually pretty clear as well.
Spongy Iris wrote:
The north pole might get 58 inches of snow per year and it is much warmer than the south pole where it might get 3 inches of snow year.
The north pole is ocean. The south pole is land. There is also more humidity at the north pole.
Spongy Iris wrote:
There are things that are pretty predictable like the sun and atmosphere, and things that are pretty random like wind.
Even the wind is pretty predictable.
Spongy Iris wrote:
I have no idea what YALIF means. Is that numerology or something?
It's an acronym. Common ones I use here are:
YALIF: Yet Another Lame Insult Fallacy.
YALIFNAP: Yet Another Lame Insult Fallacy, No Argument Presented.
NAP: No Argument Presented.
RDCF: Repetitive Distortion and Contextomy Fallacy.
RQAA: Repetitious Question Already Answered.
These occur so commonly that I just use the acronym now.
Idk, ITN... seems like the sun's heat can burn off clouds into nothing..
I don't think I meant to say the atmosphere can destroy energy into nothing.
But the atmosphere is everywhere, and the sun is more concentrated to local areas, relatively so. So it's heat can't extend as far as the atmosphere.
Duh dude, more clouds form over oceans than land. It is irrefutable.
And Sorry for the insult. the wind gust forecasts change on a dime. The sun rise / set times, absolutely predictable. The GPS coordinates are always the same. And the humidity seems more predictable than not. |
| 30-12-2019 04:31 |
IBdaMann★★★★★
(14389) |
Spongy Iris wrote: Idk, ITN... seems like the sun's heat can burn off clouds into nothing..
Do you really think the water vanishes into nothing? Tell me more.
Spongy Iris wrote: I don't think I meant to say the atmosphere can destroy energy into nothing.
... but the sun can, right? ... directly into nothing ... like clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote: But the atmosphere is everywhere, and the sun is more concentrated to local areas, relatively so.
What?
@ GasGuzzler - if you are looking to beef up your signature, I recommend this one above. I'm just looking out for you.
Spongy Iris wrote: So it's heat can't extend as far as the atmosphere.
Heat "extends"? Does it stretch out or does it reach or what? Is heat collapsible?
Spongy Iris wrote: Duh dude, more clouds form over oceans than land. It is irrefutable.
Duh dude, there's more ocean than land. It is irrefutable.
.
I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit
A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles
Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris
Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit
If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles
Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles
Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn
You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.
The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank
:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude
IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist |
| 30-12-2019 19:13 |
Spongy Iris★★★★☆
(1643) |
IBdaMann wrote:
Spongy Iris wrote: Idk, ITN... seems like the sun's heat can burn off clouds into nothing..
Do you really think the water vanishes into nothing? Tell me more.
Spongy Iris wrote: I don't think I meant to say the atmosphere can destroy energy into nothing.
... but the sun can, right? ... directly into nothing ... like clouds.
Spongy Iris wrote: But the atmosphere is everywhere, and the sun is more concentrated to local areas, relatively so.
What?
@ GasGuzzler - if you are looking to beef up your signature, I recommend this one above. I'm just looking out for you.
Spongy Iris wrote: So it's heat can't extend as far as the atmosphere.
Heat "extends"? Does it stretch out or does it reach or what? Is heat collapsible?
Spongy Iris wrote: Duh dude, more clouds form over oceans than land. It is irrefutable.
Duh dude, there's more ocean than land. It is irrefutable.
.
Hey IBDM, you never heard mass can be converted to energy? Although I doubt the H2O and CO2 gases rising from earth ever make it high enough to go through that.
You and ITN really like to enforce this debate forum like a spelling bee huh?
Maybe I will visit again in the new year to start a new thread, called, Is The Atmosphere A Freezer? |