|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 22, 2010 10:41:16 GMT 1
Just a thought!
We know the gravitational pull of the moon shifts vast volumes of water around the planet which we perceive as “tides”.
What about the moon’s shifting the atmosphere around, too?
If it can shift water it sure as hell can shift air!
Why do no climate models include lunar influences?
The moon’s revolution round the earth alters the Length of Day i.e earth’s rotational rate.
How can climate modelers claim to replicate the interaction of the earth’s variables if they do not consider influences like this?
|
|
|
Post by pumblechook on Sept 22, 2010 11:16:06 GMT 1
Water has vastly more mass than air and as gravity is proportional to the product of the two masses involved maybe the effect is negligible.
Air is about 1.3 gm per litre.
Water is 1kg per litre.
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Sept 22, 2010 12:16:56 GMT 1
How on Earth do you think that an increase of a fraction of a second in the length of the day could possibly have a significant effect on the climate? Or are you just grasping at straws, as usual?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 22, 2010 12:29:22 GMT 1
Why do YOU find it so convenient to dismiss ALL natural sources of variation and attach so much weight to fossil fuel emissions, Eamonn? That surely is what requires an explanation?
Here's something else to consider re climate.
If the moon influences our climate how about all the sun's satellites influencing its "climate" too?
Those of you who dismiss the sun's influence of earth's climate beyond a slight variation in TSI could consider the constantly changing influences on the sun due to the cycling of the planets' revolutions round it which then feed back to us here on earth perhaps?
People with no interest and no imagination amaze me.
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Sept 22, 2010 12:44:49 GMT 1
Why do YOU find it so convenient to dismiss ALL natural sources of variation and attach so much weight to fossil fuel emissions, Eamonn? Because it has been demonstrated that all other natural sources of variation do not explain the recent warming anomaly. CO2 emissions do - this is 19th century science, do keep up! It doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Sept 22, 2010 12:58:41 GMT 1
Alright, You two.....Pax! It was 'Just a thought!' and Eamonn, Your opinions are respected.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 22, 2010 13:44:18 GMT 1
"it has been demonstrated that all other natural sources of variation do not explain the recent warming anomaly"
On the contrary there is virtually nothing in the research work that finds its way into IPCC that even considers investigation of "natural" causes of climate variation. It is just not funded these days, Eamonn, thanks to the dead hand of the IPCC/government funding bureaucracies. They are only looking for the "anthropogenic" fingerprint. What sort of detectives does that make them - that they first identify the culprit from gut instinct, presumably, and then proceed to fit him up whilst ignoring other avenues of enquiry?
We KNOW the police do that! There have been umpteen cases. It is perfectly obvious that the IPCC's pet "scientists" do the same, too! Why? Because they can, because they are protected! Do you really believe government funded "science" is unbiassed, that funding comes without strings, Eamonn? Why has the government fallen over itself to whitewash its pet hacks at the CRU?
The only things the IPCC consider as worthy of consideration in the natural world are a small variation in Total Solar Irradiance and volcanic eruptions.
It is people outside the narrow IPCC clique who are now turning their attention to the constant internal variability of clouds and ocean currents etc.
We will have to see what impact they have upon AR5.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 23, 2010 13:02:43 GMT 1
Can anyone understand this comment from Eduardo Ferreya? “Warming during the 20th century was most probably caused by the ordered trefoil movement of the solar system barycenter between 1906-1956. The irregular, chaotic pattern began in 1985, and will last until 2040, as predicted by Rhodes Fairbridge, causing the present cooling, as is also proposed by Ivanka Chárvátova and Pavel Hedja (2008). The quiet volcanic period between 1915 and 1960 is an indication of the barycenter influence on Earth’s climate and geologic activity. The present chaotic pattern the barycenter is doing and the increase on volcanic and seismic activity is another strong indication. But don’t expect these people will look up and take a look at the sun. The sun is no-no for grant applications.” wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/22/ocean-cooling-contributed-to-mid-20th-century-global-warming-hiatus/#more-25208
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Sept 23, 2010 13:16:38 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 3, 2011 19:17:09 GMT 1
Here's someone who thinks the moon affects our weather - that it actually causes tornados. Richard Holle says: March 2, 2011 at 12:32 pm Tornado production is a result of Lunar declinational tides pulling air masses from more equatorial areas into the mid-latitudes, so the peak production times when they form can be predicted as the periods from Maximum North culmination to three days after, a couple of days when the moon crosses the equator headed North, and as the moon reaches maximum South declination and several days after. These effects are due to the production of the primary and secondary tidal bulges in the atmosphere, that arrive at the same time as the ion content of the air masses reaches a local maximum. Between the induced charge differential between the +ion concentrations riding on the more equatorial sourced air mass, established ahead of the dry line front of -ion concentrated more polar air mass, that sweeps in from the West, forcing the precipitation into the rapidly moving narrow band of severe weather from which the tornadoes form on the trailing edges.... Climate Etc judithcurry.com/2011/03/02/the-harry-potter-theory-of-climate/#more-2565
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 20, 2011 15:41:27 GMT 1
The Perigee Moon aka “Supermoon” Perigee Moon left, Apogee Moon, right. Picture Credit: Galileo Project, NASA courtesy WUWT
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 20, 2011 15:48:02 GMT 1
Can the increased gravitational effect of the Perigee Moon aggravate instabilities in the earth's crust and cause earthquakes?
|
|
|
Post by rsmith7 on Mar 20, 2011 19:22:27 GMT 1
I would say, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Mar 20, 2011 19:51:55 GMT 1
Good! Thanks, Mr Smith. We can now close the thread and go home.
Night-night!
|
|
|
Post by eamonnshute on Mar 20, 2011 20:25:06 GMT 1
Can the increased gravitational effect of the Perigee Moon aggravate instabilities in the earth's crust and cause earthquakes? I noticed one large quake in the past occurred at full moon and apogee (if I remember correctly), but when I look at other major quakes there seems to be little correlation with perigee/apogee or with the phase of the moon (when the moon is new or full the sun's tides will reinforce the moon's). I would not be surprised if there is a slight effect, but there is certainly no large effect. The Japanese quake occurred between perigee and apogee, and near first quarter, so you can't blame the moon this time.
|
|