July 4, 2023 - Hottest day ever recorded

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

Swan wrote: Climate and weather are intertwined,

Stop. You are specifically equating the two, not simply "intertwining" the two.

You described a change of weather, and then called it climate change, not weather change.

I'll give you a do-over.

Yes, the New Jersey weather changed ... again ... like it has done constantly ever since there was a New Jersey, and I just verified that there still hasn't been any climate change anywhere whatsoever since Wednesday, I'm sorry.

Weather and climate are intertwined and cannot be separated, just as you and your delusions are intertwined and cannot be separated.

You may now resume being deluded and may continue telling people that there was never an ice age, because I was not there.

You are a complete waste of an education

False equivalence fallacy. Redefinition fallacy. Climate and weather are NOT the same thing.

Climate cannot change. Weather can. Climate has no values associated with it. Weather does.

I did nt say that climate and weather were the same thing,

Yes you did, Sock.

Swan wrote:
I said that climate and weather were intertwined like space and time.

They are not, Sock.

Swan wrote:
Something that is quite a bit ahead of your pay grade.

You don't know my pay grade, Sock.

Market...

Mantra 40a.

Is that ...

Mantra 40a.

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

Into the Night wrote:

Swan wrote:

I did nt say that climate and weather were the same thing,

Yes you did, Sock.

Swan wrote:
I said that climate and weather were intertwined like space and time.

They are not, Sock.

Swan wrote:
Something that is quite a bit ahead of your pay grade.

You don't know my pay grade, Sock.

Market...

Mantra 40a.

Is that ...

Mantra 40a.

Really,...

Im a BM wrote:
July 4, 2023, was NOT the hottest day ever recorded.

Within two days, the record was broken twice again.

July 2023 was the hottest July since thermometers were invented.

This was not a surprise to climate scientists.

August 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

This was not a surprise to climate scientists either.

And then came September 2023.

It was the hottest September ever recorded.

But this one DID surprise the climate scientists.

They expected it to be the warmest September so far.

But they did NOT expect it to be nearly a degree warmer than the previous record.

Something happened to defy the models and cause even more warming than expected.

It will be months or maybe even years before all the data is compiled and analyzed.

Right now the two biggest suspects are:

1. Less global dimming than expected. Particles that reflect or absorb light higher in the atmosphere prevent it from reaching the surface to cause warming. This September, there was less haze, soot, aerosols, etc., than usual in the atmosphere.

2. A BIG volcanic eruption. Usually, a volcano would emit a lot of aerosols into to the atmosphere. Many examples exist in history of significant and sometimes catastrophic cooling after a large volcanic eruption. We know the precise year that a volcano wiped out the Minoan civilization because it was the same year China recorded major crop failures and famine due to freezing.

But this time the big volcanic eruption was deep beneath the sea. Relatively few aerosols made it past the water to enter the atmosphere - instead dissolving into sea water.

Unlike a typical volcano erupting on land, this deep sea volcano caused a HUGE amount of water to vaporize. That massive plume of water vapor shot high into the atmosphere.

Usually the discussion of greenhouse gases is limited to carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide.

However, the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapor.

H2O has a much much shorter mean residence time in the atmosphere than CO2, CH4 or N2O, but it does behave as a weak greenhouse gas.

My guess is that when all the calculations are complete, they will find that it was the unusually high concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere that caused this September to be nearly a degree warmer than the previous record.

Never underestimate the power of water vapor.

James_ wrote:
p.s., Scientists do not understand that gravitational energy helps to excite atmospheric gasses. This is where pollution increases the mass and atmospheric pressure of the troposphere and then we're discussing PV = nRT. That would also increase the atmospheric temperature.

GasGuzzler wrote:

James_ wrote:
p.s., Scientists do not understand that gravitational energy helps to excite atmospheric gasses. This is where pollution increases the mass and atmospheric pressure of the troposphere and then we're discussing PV = nRT. That would also increase the atmospheric temperature.

Where does the increased thermal energy come from?

Im a BM wrote:
July 4, 2023, was NOT the hottest day ever recorded.

Within two days, the record was broken twice again.

July 2023 was the hottest July since thermometers were invented.

This was not a surprise to climate scientists.

August 2023 was the hottest August ever recorded.

This was not a surprise to climate scientists either.

And then came September 2023.

It was the hottest September ever recorded.

But this one DID surprise the climate scientists.

They expected it to be the warmest September so far.

But they did NOT expect it to be nearly a degree warmer than the previous record.

Something happened to defy the models and cause even more warming than expected.

It will be months or maybe even years before all the data is compiled and analyzed.

Right now the two biggest suspects are:

1. Less global dimming than expected. Particles that reflect or absorb light higher in the atmosphere prevent it from reaching the surface to cause warming. This September, there was less haze, soot, aerosols, etc., than usual in the atmosphere.

2. A BIG volcanic eruption. Usually, a volcano would emit a lot of aerosols into to the atmosphere. Many examples exist in history of significant and sometimes catastrophic cooling after a large volcanic eruption. We know the precise year that a volcano wiped out the Minoan civilization because it was the same year China recorded major crop failures and famine due to freezing.

But this time the big volcanic eruption was deep beneath the sea. Relatively few aerosols made it past the water to enter the atmosphere - instead dissolving into sea water.

Unlike a typical volcano erupting on land, this deep sea volcano caused a HUGE amount of water to vaporize. That massive plume of water vapor shot high into the atmosphere.

Usually the discussion of greenhouse gases is limited to carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide.

However, the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is water vapor.

H2O has a much much shorter mean residence time in the atmosphere than CO2, CH4 or N2O, but it does behave as a weak greenhouse gas.

My guess is that when all the calculations are complete, they will find that it was the unusually high concentration of water vapor in the atmosphere that caused this September to be nearly a degree warmer than the previous record.

Never underestimate the power of water vapor.

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

That's it's surface temperature. The Moon will have "hot" temperatures as well. The material on the surface will determine how hot it is. That's an example of black body radiation.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

That's it's surface temperature. The Moon will have "hot" temperatures as well. The material on the surface will determine how hot it is. That's an example of black body radiation.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

Actually the temp of Mercury is determined from its distance from the sun

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

That's it's surface temperature. The Moon will have "hot" temperatures as well. The material on the surface will determine how hot it is. That's an example of black body radiation.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

Actually the temp of Mercury is determined from its distance from the sun

We'll need to discuss the inverse square law (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Forces/isq.html0 some. And this means that if we start at the center of the Sun then its surface (its radius is 432,450 miles or696,000 kilometers) is 1 which means 1 x 1 square.

Mercury is 29 million miles (47 million kilometers) and as far as 43 million miles (70 million kilometers) from the Sun + the radius of the Sun. This determines a relationship to the inverse square law.
Venus is 67 million miles or 108 million km from the Sun + the Sun's radius.
The Earth and Moon are 93 million miles (150 million kilometers. Since the Moon and the Earth share the same orbital path, to estimate temperatures and distance from the Sun it will be close enough.
The periods are to keep everything aligned. 1º kelvin = 1º C. above absolute 0

.....................distance from the Sun (miles/km)..............temperature............x^2
Mercury..........36,000,000 or 58,000,000.......................700 kelvins......... 83.42^2
Venus.............67,000,000 or 108,000,000.....................737 kelvins........154.93^2
Earth..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................288 kelvins........215.05^2
Moon..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................400 kelvins........215.05^2

I think everyone will see that the Moon can have a much higher temperature than the Earth has. With the inverse square law, it represents surface area or expansion of emitted energies.
With Mercury and the Moon, ever go to a barbecue where they bank a fire in the ground to cook some venison overnight? The heat's in the coals and those don't radiate much heat.
And if the surface of the Sun represents 1 square mile or kilometer, then the Earth has an exposure to the Sun's solar radiation at about 1/46246.5025th of the Sun's emitted solar radiation. And then this is where I say Van Allen radiation belts (magnetosphere) which is quite large and traps the Sun's solar radiation. Think of using a magnifying glass to catch a piece of paper on fire. I think it's pretty much the same think.
Einstein said gravitational lensing, the Earth might create a ground for the magnetosphere/Van Allen radiation belts. This would be a variation because it'd be an inverse function. The square area of the Van Allen radiation belts that is inline with the gravity of the Sun and the Earth might help with the amount of solar radiation the Earth receives from the Sun. And this gets into what Fourier and Tyndall discussed about what could allow the Earth to be so warm when it's so far from the Sun.

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

That's it's surface temperature. The Moon will have "hot" temperatures as well. The material on the surface will determine how hot it is. That's an example of black body radiation.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

Actually the temp of Mercury is determined from its distance from the sun

We'll need to discuss the inverse square law (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Forces/isq.html0 some. And this means that if we start at the center of the Sun then its surface (its radius is 432,450 miles or696,000 kilometers) is 1 which means 1 x 1 square.

Mercury is 29 million miles (47 million kilometers) and as far as 43 million miles (70 million kilometers) from the Sun + the radius of the Sun. This determines a relationship to the inverse square law.
Venus is 67 million miles or 108 million km from the Sun + the Sun's radius.
The Earth and Moon are 93 million miles (150 million kilometers. Since the Moon and the Earth share the same orbital path, to estimate temperatures and distance from the Sun it will be close enough.
The periods are to keep everything aligned. 1º kelvin = 1º C. above absolute 0

.....................distance from the Sun (miles/km)..............temperature............x^2
Mercury..........36,000,000 or 58,000,000.......................700 kelvins......... 83.42^2
Venus.............67,000,000 or 108,000,000.....................737 kelvins........154.93^2
Earth..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................288 kelvins........215.05^2
Moon..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................400 kelvins........215.05^2

I think everyone will see that the Moon can have a much higher temperature than the Earth has. With the inverse square law, it represents surface area or expansion of emitted energies.
With Mercury and the Moon, ever go to a barbecue where they bank a fire in the ground to cook some venison overnight? The heat's in the coals and those don't radiate much heat.
And if the surface of the Sun represents 1 square mile or kilometer, then the Earth has an exposure to the Sun's solar radiation at about 1/46246.5025th of the Sun's emitted solar radiation. And then this is where I say Van Allen radiation belts (magnetosphere) which is quite large and traps the Sun's solar radiation. Think of using a magnifying glass to catch a piece of paper on fire. I think it's pretty much the same think.
Einstein said gravitational lensing, the Earth might create a ground for the magnetosphere/Van Allen radiation belts. This would be a variation because it'd be an inverse function. The square area of the Van Allen radiation belts that is inline with the gravity of the Sun and the Earth might help with the amount of solar radiation the Earth receives from the Sun. And this gets into what Fourier and Tyndall discussed about what could allow the Earth to be so warm when it's so far from the Sun.

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

That's it's surface temperature. The Moon will have "hot" temperatures as well. The material on the surface will determine how hot it is. That's an example of black body radiation.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvm4hurlock

Actually the temp of Mercury is determined from its distance from the sun

We'll need to discuss the inverse square law (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Forces/isq.html0 some. And this means that if we start at the center of the Sun then its surface (its radius is 432,450 miles or696,000 kilometers) is 1 which means 1 x 1 square.

Mercury is 29 million miles (47 million kilometers) and as far as 43 million miles (70 million kilometers) from the Sun + the radius of the Sun. This determines a relationship to the inverse square law.
Venus is 67 million miles or 108 million km from the Sun + the Sun's radius.
The Earth and Moon are 93 million miles (150 million kilometers. Since the Moon and the Earth share the same orbital path, to estimate temperatures and distance from the Sun it will be close enough.
The periods are to keep everything aligned. 1º kelvin = 1º C. above absolute 0

.....................distance from the Sun (miles/km)..............temperature............x^2
Mercury..........36,000,000 or 58,000,000.......................700 kelvins......... 83.42^2
Venus.............67,000,000 or 108,000,000.....................737 kelvins........154.93^2
Earth..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................288 kelvins........215.05^2
Moon..............93,000,000 or 150,000,000.....................400 kelvins........215.05^2

I think everyone will see that the Moon can have a much higher temperature than the Earth has. With the inverse square law, it represents surface area or expansion of emitted energies.
With Mercury and the Moon, ever go to a barbecue where they bank a fire in the ground to cook some venison overnight? The heat's in the coals and those don't radiate much heat.
And if the surface of the Sun represents 1 square mile or kilometer, then the Earth has an exposure to the Sun's solar radiation at about 1/46246.5025th of the Sun's emitted solar radiation. And then this is where I say Van Allen radiation belts (magnetosphere) which is quite large and traps the Sun's solar radiation. Think of using a magnifying glass to catch a piece of paper on fire. I think it's pretty much the same think.
Einstein said gravitational lensing, the Earth might create a ground for the magnetosphere/Van Allen radiation belts. This would be a variation because it'd be an inverse function. The square area of the Van Allen radiation belts that is inline with the gravity of the Sun and the Earth might help with the amount of solar radiation the Earth receives from the Sun. And this gets into what Fourier and Tyndall discussed about what could allow the Earth to be so warm when it's so far from the Sun.

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

I'm not triggered. I've spent years on stuff like this. While I doubt you'll find it interesting or useful, people do visit this forum. I just thought I'd show you (and anyone who's interested) what math has to say about this.
I noticed you like saying triggered. Is that because you didn't know the Moon's surface temperate can be greater than the Earth's atmospheric temperature?
Not to make these guys feel good about themselves but they allow for freedom of speech in here. DO you know I would get me banned in a science forum if I tried to discuss science? And yet some people say this form is toxic and is to be avoided. I like being allowed to have my own opinion. And if I'm successful people will know these guys allowing me to have my own opinion didn't keep me from learning.

And back to the science. With Mercury and the Moon, can you say refracted solar radiation? There's a "HUGE" difference between black body radiation and refracted radiation. In a sense it's like ice refracting solar radiation. When the sea ice extent in the arctic is at its maximum then the arctic is at its coolest temperatures. The ice refracting solar radiation conserves very little energy that solar radiation is composed of.
When the sea ice extent decreases then arctic waters absorb all kinds of solar radiation beyond the UV spectrum and warms. Mercury and the Moon are the same way with surface temperature.

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

Xadoman wrote:

Swan wrote:

Xadoman wrote:
Temperature creates atmosphere. Atmoshpere does not create temperature. Cause and effect. Simple as that.

LOL you win the DUH award of the day as Mercury is 900F and has no atmosphere.

You may resume wanking at will

Atmosphere does not create temperature. Simple as that. Atmospheric pressure in not the cause of the surface temperature. The surface temperature is the cause that gives molecules an energy to rise against the gravity and form an atmosphere. Do not you agree?

An example. At -273 K all the atmosphere of the earth would fall down to earth. An anvil sitting on the desk pressurises the desk but that pressure does not cause the temperature of the desk. The desk could be at -273 and if you put an anvil on the desk, some molecules could rise up from the desk for a moment put they would fall down at the desk again. The temperature of the desk and anvil would still be -273.

Cause and effect is very simple with it. The temperature is the cause that gives molecules an energy to rise up from the earth to form an atmosphere. This energy comes from the sun and it comes from the inside of the earth. The atmospheric pressure that forms IS NOT THE CAUSE OF THE TEMPERATURE OF THE SURFACE OR SOMEHOW ADDS TO THE TEMPERATURE. Simple as that.

Wrong because if the Earth had no atmosphere, it would be the temp of space, and or the suns rays or hotter at hot spots caused by volcanic activity. Seriously how many years did you study in order to perfect your stupididity.

Xadoman wrote:

Wrong because if the Earth had no atmosphere, it would be the temp of space, and or the suns rays or hotter at hot spots caused by volcanic activity. Seriously how many years did you study in order to perfect your stupididity.

'
Nope. The earth has atmosphere because of the temperature. Without temperature the earth would be without atmosphere. You are so confused about the cause and effect.

Again - atmosphere forms because the surface temperature of earth gives energy to molecules to outgas from the surface. The gravity wants to crush everything back to the surface again but the energy is enought to counterattack it. So the atmosphere forms and an atmospheric pressure forms. The atmospheric pressure does not cause any warming, it formed because of warm surface. Do not mix cause and effect.


Also, space is a perfect insulator. No conduction, no convection. So an object in space does not need an atmosphere to be over space temperature. That is very silly idea that an object in the space wihtout atmosphere has a surface temperature that is equal to space temperature. Do not you know that the earth has a giant 5000+ degree oven inside that is almost as big as the moon? Do not you agree that this oven inside the earth would rise the surface temperature of the earth over -273?

You know, it makes me feel quite good to know that even 130 IQ people can be so confused about simple physics

So in your universe space does not conduct light and or heat.

This is why you studied psych?

LOL

Xadoman wrote:

So in your universe space does not conduct light and or heat.

This is why you studied psych?

LOL

Space does not conduct heat. It is a perfect insulator. Zero conduction, zero convection. Are not you aware of that?

Xadoman wrote:
Space is a perfect insulator for conduction and convection. I am amazed that some people still do not know this.

They even make thermos flasks with vacuum between the walls. Of course there are inevitable cold bridges but vacuum in an of itself is a perfect insulator for conduction and convection.

This is also how vacuum tubes work. Those allow for the temperature to rise to 120 degrees celsius. If the vacuum fails, the temperature would never get so high. The absorbed energy would dissipate into surrounding via conduction and convection( air, containing co2, being a coolant).

Simple physics, nothing more.

"Think about what you are saying, if space was a perfect insulator, then clearly the 92 million miles of space between the Earth and the sun would clearly be enough to shield the Earth from all the heat and light from the Sun."

Wrong because if the Earth had no atmosphere, it would be the temp of space, and or the suns rays or hotter at hot spots caused by volcanic activity

Xadoman wrote:

"Think about what you are saying, if space was a perfect insulator, then clearly the 92 million miles of space between the Earth and the sun would clearly be enough to shield the Earth from all the heat and light from the Sun."

Space is a perfect insulator for conduction and convection. Do not you agree?

Also:

Wrong because if the Earth had no atmosphere, it would be the temp of space, and or the suns rays or hotter at hot spots caused by volcanic activity

The earth has a giant oven inside that is over 5000degree celsius. The size of that thing is almost as big as the moon( radius of the inner core is 70% of the radius of the moon)

Swanny thinks that without atmosphere the earth would be at the temp of the space. How is it possible? Swanny thinks that earth mantle is a perfect insulator and traps heat from the inner core reaching the surface

Swanny, start using your 130 IQ brain.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Nothing is perfect, which is a major flaw in theoretical/faith-based science. Also part of the reason why perpetual motion/free-energy schemes fail. Imperfections are hard to work into calculations on paper, never knowing just how much they are going to influence the results. Unpredictable, just easier to ignore as insignificant. Since there is no way to control.

Jews were 'gifted' Palestine in the 1940's. Hamas simply wants their land back...

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Nothing is perfect, which is a major flaw in theoretical/faith-based science. Also part of the reason why perpetual motion/free-energy schemes fail. Imperfections are hard to work into calculations on paper, never knowing just how much they are going to influence the results. Unpredictable, just easier to ignore as insignificant. Since there is no way to control.

Jews were 'gifted' Palestine in the 1940's. Hamas simply wants their land back...

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

HarveyH55 wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

He's apparently a self-trained pharmacist, mostly from practical, hands-on experience. Personally tests every prescription...

HarveyH55 wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

He's apparently a self-trained pharmacist, mostly from practical, hands-on experience. Personally tests every prescription...

James_ wrote:

HarveyH55 wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

He's apparently a self-trained pharmacist, mostly from practical, hands-on experience. Personally tests every prescription...

He sure seems to like it. Always possible that he likes to do quality control testing.

Swan wrote:

James_ wrote:

Swan wrote:

You will get less triggered if you take your Chlorpromazine.

Since I don't know what it is I wonder why you do.

LOL, so you are too dumb to do a Google search.

Precious