Do I understand much of this article? No, but I still reblog it as an example of a very comprehensive understanding by an expert.
There may be several reasons why warmists agree and support the AGW/Carbon Dioxide-Global Temperature relationship etc., none of which I agree with, but the one that is clearly a bogus reason is that “the science is settled”.
If this article does not make clear the complexity of our climate science – its range and variability of input factors, measurements, interactions, feedbacks, forcings and responses; its range of human assessments, scientific data compilation and computations; and finally the range of conclusions that can be reached, then I wonder what else might.
And yet, we have a world-wide political and financial mechanism in place, supported by the media and many corrupt organizations, which is based on a belief that the science is sufficiently understood and correct.
Your comments please!
- Scientific American Agrees With Nazi Thought Clone (stevengoddard.wordpress.com)
- Consensus Argument Proves Climate Science Is Political. (wattsupwiththat.com)
- AGW – How can this multi-dimensional, multi-parameter, multi-variate climate science be settled? (tgrule.com)
Change in the planetary winds (conceptually documented in the diagram above) is the least remarked but most influential dynamic affecting surface temperature. Wind is a response to pressure differentials. So, a change in the wind is due to a change in these pressure differentials.
The following post describes why pressure differentials and the the planetary winds change over time.
From Wikipedia we have: “the troposphere is the lowest portion of Earth’s atmosphere. It contains approximately 80% of the atmosphere’s mass and 99% of its water vapor and aerosols. The average depth of the troposphere is approximately 17 km (11 mi) in the middle latitudes. It is deeper in the tropical regions, up to 20 km (12 mi), and shallower near the poles, at 7 km (4.3 mi) in summer, and indistinct in winter.”
The notion that there is a tropopause in high latitudes or that it is somehow ‘indistinct…
View original post 6,259 more words