Hadley Cell Migration is PROOF of Climate Change since 1980s

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

You are ignoring the dynamics of Heaven and Earth.
You are ignoring gravity.

Inversion fallacy

Not in the sense of more clouds over Greenland having melted more ice than it had been in recent history.

Swan wrote:

If you tried to do jumping jacks your heart would give out under the strain of your belly full of kosher hot dogs

GasGuzzler wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

You are ignoring the dynamics of Heaven and Earth.
You are ignoring gravity.

Inversion fallacy

Not in the sense of more clouds over Greenland having melted more ice than it had been in recent history.

Clouds melt ice? Can you explain this phenomenon?

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

If you tried to do jumping jacks your heart would give out under the strain of your belly full of kosher hot dogs

The stomach is not the heart, moron.

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:

Spongy Iris wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
There is no shortage of irrefutable evidence that climate change is real.

The northern migration of the boundary between tundra and boreal forest, for example. We can see organisms on the ground responding to changing climate conditions. It's no longer too cold for forests at the southern edge of the tundra. Thawed permafrost enables penetration of the kind of deeper roots that trees need to grow.

This correlates in a very causal manner to the migration northward of HADLEY CELLS. The shifting geographic position of the hadley cells caused the geographic position of the taiga-tundra boundary to shift.

Here is a quote from Google and God:

"Hadley Cells are expanding poleward (northward in the Northern Hemisphere) due to global warming, causing subtropical dry zones and high-pressure belts to shift toward the poles, affecting weather patterns, rainfall, and potential crop productivity in mid latitudes. This expansion, observed since the 1980s is a significant climate signal, with rates estimated around 0.1(degree)-0.5(degree) latitude per decade, though regional shifts vary."

I just can't take anybody serious who says the north polar region hasn't warmed up significantly.

Do you think the Hadley Cells expanding northward is an effect of the pole North Pole warming up, or do you think it is the cause of the North Pole warming up?

The position of the Hadley Cells is a response to the temperature in convection currents of air, not a driver of it. You can see in a pot of water as it heats up, hot spots beneath create localized points where hot water rises up in convection currents. The position of those convection currents depends on the position of where heat enters the pot from below. If you move the pot more to one side of the burner, you'll see the position of the convection currents shift to one side.

Where Hadley Cell convection currents rise up from the surface is where you get the most rain. The rising warm air cools as it rises, with water condensing out. Hadley cells along the equator correspond to the wettest rainforests. Deserts are found at latitudes where Hadley Cell currents are moving DOWNWARD toward the surface. That air bears little water and only gets warmer when it approaches the surface.

The North Pole is in a region where the Hadley Cell brings relatively dry air down from high above toward the surface. Less than 12 inches annual snowfall there! In terms of precipitation, the North Pole is a desert. That air current at the North Pole flows south until it rises back up as a convection current with heavy rain and snow over the boreal forest. The latitude where that air rises up is moving closer to the North pole, reflected in the shifting boundary of the tundra.

The latitudes of these Hadley Cell boundaries are shifting closer to the poles. The equator is still smack dab in the middle, with warm wet air rising up off the surface and splitting equally north and south at higher elevation. The boundaries where that air comes back down toward the surface are moving 0.1-0.5 degrees latitude closer to the poles each decade since the 1980s.

There may be significantly more rain in the tropical latitudes, caused by more CO2, in my opinion. But I don't think that extra rain would cause global warming in the tropical latitudes. I think more water evaporating would have a cooling effect at those latitudes.

If it is more rain causing tropical Hadley Cells to rise a bit further north, that would not be a major factor in global warming of the north polar climate (say latitudes north of 60 degrees) in my opinion. Though perhaps a bit more rain could make its way up to the north polar region?

Perhaps accidentally, you are correct that there may be significantly more rain in the tropical latitudes, caused by more CO2. However, it is only indirectly caused by CO2, as it is directly caused by global warming. Warmer air holds more water. Period. Wetter air yields more precipitation. Period. Warmer sea surfaces emit more water vapor to the atmosphere. Period. Storms with more rain, because the warmer air holds so much more water, and the warmer sea surface drove so much more water into the warmer air, are going to dump more water as they move along. Ya gotta admit we've been getting some pretty impressive flooding in the last decade or two, compared to many decades before that.

Just going with my gut here, I doubt there is significant global warming in the tropical latitudes.

If I'm correct, then it wasn't warmer air that caused more rain.

Okay. Just going with my brain here... There is a vicious rumor going around about tropical coral reefs and surface water getting so hot that they "bleach".

So, tropics are certainly getting warmer. But the increases are more impressive at the highest latitudes. Damn... it was still the nineties as I recall when they noticed a 5 degree change at the poles versus a 1 degree change near the equator.

Im a BM wrote:
This thread is much less than two years old. Climate change gets discussed once in a while at this website.

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
This thread is much less than two years old. Climate change gets discussed once in a while at this website.

Climate cannot change, Robert.

Im a BM wrote:
For more than ten years, Into the Night has been repeating this absurd contrarian assertion: "Climate cannot change."

Im a BM wrote:
Trolls literally every attempt to discuss the issue with the same stupid sentence, over and over.
Buzzword fallacy. Go learn English.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Clearly, this individual has little of value to offer in any discussion of actual climate change,

Im a BM wrote:
as the concept is understood by virtually all actual scientists in the world.

Into the Night wrote:

Im a BM wrote:
For more than ten years, Into the Night has been repeating this absurd contrarian assertion: "Climate cannot change."

Because climate cannot change.

Im a BM wrote:
Trolls literally every attempt to discuss the issue with the same stupid sentence, over and over.
Buzzword fallacy. Go learn English.
[quote]Im a BM wrote:
Clearly, this individual has little of value to offer in any discussion of actual climate change,

Climate cannot change.

Im a BM wrote:
as the concept is understood by virtually all actual scientists in the world.

Magick Word. You don't get to quote everyone. Omniscience fallacy. It is not a 'concept'. Climate cannot change. There is no such thing as a 'global climate'. You only get to speak for you.

Im a BM wrote:
Even just within this one post, ITN repeats the phrase "climate cannot change" three times. I guess, because "Climate cannot change". We hold these truths to be self evident.

Im a BM wrote:
Yes, the geographic position of Hadley Cell boundaries is MOVING closer to the poles.

Im a BM wrote:
Along with it, the position of biome boundaries, such as the boundary between tundra and taiga (boreal forest) is also moving closer to the poles.

Im a BM wrote:
No credible scientist is claiming that "global climate" is even measurable,

Im a BM wrote:
let alone changing. But REGIONAL CLIMATE can be measured very accurately, and it is changing before our eyes within my lifetime.

Im a BM wrote:
People who wanted to discuss the scientific reality of this were constantly insulted by scientifically illiterate moron trolls whose "argument" consisted entirely of playing anti scientific word games.

Spongy Iris wrote:
When we see climate changing, such as the melting ice in Greenland collapsing the AMOC, it is cause for alarm, because as ITN says:

CLIMATE CANNOT CHANGE!