Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
an overwhelmingly obvious observation
174 views
Skip to first unread message
James McGinn
Feb 12, 2016, 1:39:54 PM2/12/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/2011/08/26/how-to-get-off-the-ground-with-nothing-but-water-almost/#comment-39029
Allow me to point out an overwhelmingly obvious observation that plainly demonstrates how absurd is the premise here and, by association, how absurd is meteorology's notion that moist air is lighter than dry air. Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the troposphere. Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the troposphere. If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis. The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
Allow me to point out an overwhelmingly obvious observation that plainly demonstrates how absurd is the premise here and, by association, how absurd is meteorology's notion that moist air is lighter than dry air. Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the troposphere. Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the troposphere. If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis. The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
Sergio
Feb 12, 2016, 2:08:12 PM2/12/16
to
On 2/12/2016 12:39 PM, James McGinn wrote:
<snip verbage>
> moist air is lighter than dry air.
what about temperature ?
if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
lighter, everyone knows that.
> Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere
> exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the
> troposphere.
what is the temperature of it ?
it is closer to the surface because it is denser.
the Troposphere is 11 to 12 miles thick, which is basically all of the
atmosphere.
> Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the
> troposphere.
what is the temperature of it ?
your hypothetical "cold dry air" is less dense, so it rises to the top.
> If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold
> dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant
> process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing
> exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis.
doesn't that happen anyway ? in spite of your personal "moist/dry" labels ?
> The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and
> storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods
> were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
you left out the dimension of temperature. How do you define
"convection" ? (hint: air moving)
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how
> absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
sure, troll. Go suck an egg.
<snip verbage>
> moist air is lighter than dry air.
if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
lighter, everyone knows that.
> Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere
> exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the
> troposphere.
it is closer to the surface because it is denser.
the Troposphere is 11 to 12 miles thick, which is basically all of the
atmosphere.
> Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the
> troposphere.
your hypothetical "cold dry air" is less dense, so it rises to the top.
> If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold
> dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant
> process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing
> exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis.
> The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and
> storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods
> were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
"convection" ? (hint: air moving)
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how
> absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
James McGinn
Feb 12, 2016, 7:00:37 PM2/12/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 11:08:12 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
> lighter, everyone knows that.
Uh, . . . er . . . uh. Yes. As I stated.
> if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
> lighter, everyone knows that.
> > Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere
> > exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the
> > troposphere.
>
> what is the temperature of it ?
> it is closer to the surface because it is denser.
> the Troposphere is 11 to 12 miles thick, which is basically all of the
> atmosphere.
>
>
> > Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the
> > troposphere.
>
> what is the temperature of it ?
>
> your hypothetical "cold dry air" is less dense, so it rises to the top.
> > If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold
> > dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant
> > process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing
> > exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis.
>
> doesn't that happen anyway?
in spite of your personal "moist/dry" labels ?
>
>
> > The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and
> > storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods
> > were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
>
> you left out the dimension of temperature. How do you define
> "convection" ? (hint: air moving)
>
>
> > The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how
> > absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
>
> sure, troll. Go suck an egg.
James McGinn
Feb 14, 2016, 8:29:33 PM2/14/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
James McGinn
Feb 27, 2016, 11:20:12 PM2/27/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
James McGinn
Mar 1, 2016, 2:33:29 AM3/1/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
James McGinn
Mar 21, 2016, 12:48:22 AM3/21/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
Sam Wormley
Mar 21, 2016, 10:11:24 AM3/21/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On 3/20/16 11:48 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it
Translation: The less James understands the atmosphere, the more
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it
he blames everybody else, but himself. :-o
--
sci.physics is an unmoderated newsgroup dedicated
to the discussion of physics, news from the physics
community, and physics-related social issues.
James McGinn
Apr 11, 2016, 1:48:18 AM4/11/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
>
James McGinn
Apr 27, 2016, 1:13:12 PM4/27/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
Solving Tornadoes
Apr 27, 2016, 2:40:00 PM4/27/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 11:08:12 AM UTC-8, Sergio wrote:
> On 2/12/2016 12:39 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>
> <snip verbage>
>
>
> > moist air is lighter than dry air.
>
> what about temperature ?
>
> if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
> lighter, everyone knows that.
LOL. Everything is so simple for a simpleton.
>
> <snip verbage>
>
>
> > moist air is lighter than dry air.
>
> what about temperature ?
>
> if your moist air is denser than dry air, then it is heavier, NOT
> lighter, everyone knows that.
>
>
>
> > Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere
> > exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the
> > troposphere.
>
> what is the temperature of it ?
>
> it is closer to the surface because it is denser.
>
> the Troposphere is 11 to 12 miles thick, which is basically all of the
> atmosphere.
>
>
> > Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the
> > troposphere.
>
> what is the temperature of it ?
>
> your hypothetical "cold dry air" is less dense, so it rises to the top.
>
>
>
> > If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold
> > dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant
> > process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing
> > exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis.
>
> doesn't that happen anyway ? in spite of your personal "moist/dry" labels ?
>
>
> > The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and
> > storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods
> > were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
>
> you left out the dimension of temperature. How do you define
> "convection" ? (hint: air moving)
>
>
> > The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how
> > absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
>
> sure, troll. Go suck an egg.
Sergio, you are the dumbest of the dumb.
James McGinn
May 19, 2016, 10:46:11 PM5/19/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
>
>
Mikkel Haaheim
May 22, 2016, 7:29:10 AM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
You are failing to comsider what is happening to the warm, moist air when it rises. Notably, you fail to take into account that it does not remain warm.
From the surface boundary layer to the tropopause (IOW, throughout the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses, and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating. Eventually, this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed and fallen that the highest levels of the troposphere are relatively dry.
Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the matter clearly enough. The cool dry air is only less dense because ALL air at this level is less dense. The little moist air that remains at this level is even less dense than the dry air.
From the surface boundary layer to the tropopause (IOW, throughout the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses, and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating. Eventually, this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed and fallen that the highest levels of the troposphere are relatively dry.
Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the matter clearly enough. The cool dry air is only less dense because ALL air at this level is less dense. The little moist air that remains at this level is even less dense than the dry air.
Poutnik
May 22, 2016, 10:08:36 AM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Dne 22/05/2016 v 13:29 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
.....
As the decrease of temperature with height ( aka lapse rate )
is generally true, it has frequent exceptions called inversions,
where rate is reversed. Main kinds of inversions are
Radiation inversion - cooled by surface during the night
Advective inversion - if coming air flow in height is warm,
causing frequent drizzling and a fody weather in hills.
Subsident inversion - happens in high air, slowly falling air in the
pressure highs, causing worse clarity of air during warm summer weather.
Frontal inversion - happens at frontal boundaries
of all atmospheric fronts
Furthermore, the primary reason of the thermal gradient of troposphere
is not heat flow from warmer surface to freezing lower stratosphere.
The primary reason is adiabatic behaviour of dry and wet air.
If you took -55 deg C cold air at 10 km and brought it to sea level,
its temperature would be +45 deg C.
If you had been changed the atmosphere by a magic wand by such a way,
that it would have had everywhere uniform temperature e.g. -20 deg C,
and than had mixed it properly by a giant fan,
it would have had -20 deg C near 5500 m height,
but otherwise it would maintain a dry adiabatic gradient
cca 1 K / 100 m. So sea level would have +35 deg C.
The heat exchange by vertical thermal or force convections
within troposphere is much stronger than by radiation
( as net radiation flow of air is near zero )
and conduction has sense for contact layers only.
The raising air is not cooling down because it is taken
from the heat source. It is cooling down because it expands.
If its expanding cooling rate is slower that the lapse rate,
its climbing even accelerates, what happens e.g. in Cumulonimbus.
The water drops, snow flocks or icy particles fall,
when their falling speed is not balanced
by upward drafts by vertical air flow.
They often evaporate even before they fall on the Earth,
if small enough.
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
.....
> From the surface boundary layer to the tropopause (IOW, throughout
> the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with
> altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually
> going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant
> re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible
> for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
> This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water
> with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist
> air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses,
> and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its
> primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source
> of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary
> to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating. Eventually,
> this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed
> and fallen that the highest levels of the
> troposphere are relatively dry.
....
> the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with
> altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually
> going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant
> re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible
> for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
> This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water
> with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist
> air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses,
> and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its
> primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source
> of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary
> to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating. Eventually,
> this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed
> and fallen that the highest levels of the
> troposphere are relatively dry.
As the decrease of temperature with height ( aka lapse rate )
is generally true, it has frequent exceptions called inversions,
where rate is reversed. Main kinds of inversions are
Radiation inversion - cooled by surface during the night
Advective inversion - if coming air flow in height is warm,
causing frequent drizzling and a fody weather in hills.
Subsident inversion - happens in high air, slowly falling air in the
pressure highs, causing worse clarity of air during warm summer weather.
Frontal inversion - happens at frontal boundaries
of all atmospheric fronts
Furthermore, the primary reason of the thermal gradient of troposphere
is not heat flow from warmer surface to freezing lower stratosphere.
The primary reason is adiabatic behaviour of dry and wet air.
If you took -55 deg C cold air at 10 km and brought it to sea level,
its temperature would be +45 deg C.
If you had been changed the atmosphere by a magic wand by such a way,
that it would have had everywhere uniform temperature e.g. -20 deg C,
and than had mixed it properly by a giant fan,
it would have had -20 deg C near 5500 m height,
but otherwise it would maintain a dry adiabatic gradient
cca 1 K / 100 m. So sea level would have +35 deg C.
The heat exchange by vertical thermal or force convections
within troposphere is much stronger than by radiation
( as net radiation flow of air is near zero )
and conduction has sense for contact layers only.
The raising air is not cooling down because it is taken
from the heat source. It is cooling down because it expands.
If its expanding cooling rate is slower that the lapse rate,
its climbing even accelerates, what happens e.g. in Cumulonimbus.
The water drops, snow flocks or icy particles fall,
when their falling speed is not balanced
by upward drafts by vertical air flow.
They often evaporate even before they fall on the Earth,
if small enough.
--
Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer )
Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
James McGinn
May 22, 2016, 10:47:16 AM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 4:29:10 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> You are failing to consider what is happening to the warm, moist air when it rises. Notably, you fail to take into account that it does not remain warm.
You failed to support your accusation.
> From the surface boundary layer to the tropopause (IOW, throughout the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
It is also because as pressure drops so does temperature. Common knowledge.
> This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses, and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating.
.
Kinetic energy doesn't suspend. Electrostatic forces suspend.
Eventually, this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed and fallen that the highest levels of the troposphere are relatively dry.
>
> Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the matter clearly enough. The cool dry air is only less dense because ALL air at this level is less dense. The little moist air that remains at this level is even less dense than the dry air.
You have it wrong also. Moist air is always heavier than any dry air in its vicinity. Our atmosphere is a slight plasma. Where water is included in the mix it is a slightly stronger plasma. Wind shear (between moist and dry bodies of air) creates an even stronger plasma. It is this stronger plasma that is associated with storms producing the vortices that--connected to the jet streams as a source of low pressure energy--create the low pressure uplift that pulls heavier moist air into the upper part of the troposphere.
> You are failing to consider what is happening to the warm, moist air when it rises. Notably, you fail to take into account that it does not remain warm.
You failed to support your accusation.
> From the surface boundary layer to the tropopause (IOW, throughout the entirety of the troposphere), temperature decreases with altitude. This is because most of the solar energy is a tually going into heating the surface of the Earth, and it is the resultant re-radiation and direct conduction of this heat that is responsible for most of the atmospheric heating in the troposphere.
> This warm lower level air rises, and carries evaporated water with it. However, as this moist air rises, it cools. As the moist air cools, the water vapor condenses. As the wateer vapour condenses, and the air continues to cool (being further removed from its primary source of re-radiated heat, and far away from any source of direct conduction), it loses the kinetic energy necessary to suspend the condensed particles that are accumulating.
Kinetic energy doesn't suspend. Electrostatic forces suspend.
Eventually, this leads to rainfall. It is because the water has condensed and fallen that the highest levels of the troposphere are relatively dry.
>
> Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the matter clearly enough. The cool dry air is only less dense because ALL air at this level is less dense. The little moist air that remains at this level is even less dense than the dry air.
Sergio
May 22, 2016, 10:57:17 AM5/22/16
to
On 5/22/2016 6:29 AM, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the
> matter clearly enough.
no need for me to explain high school science, just google for it as it
> Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the
> matter clearly enough.
is everywhere.
> The cool dry air is only less dense because
> ALL air at this level is less dense.
> The little moist air that
> remains at this level is even less dense than the dry air.
N2, vs O2
....+ read Poutnik's responce.
James McGinn
May 22, 2016, 12:03:40 PM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Sunday, May 22, 2016 at 7:57:17 AM UTC-7, Sergio wrote:
> On 5/22/2016 6:29 AM, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
>
> > Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the
> > matter clearly enough.
>
> no need for me to explain high school science, just google for it as it
> is everywhere.
LOL. Google is for dunces that can't think.
> On 5/22/2016 6:29 AM, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
>
> > Sergio got this part wrong. Or, at least, he was not explaining the
> > matter clearly enough.
>
> no need for me to explain high school science, just google for it as it
> is everywhere.
Mikkel Haaheim
May 22, 2016, 5:41:35 PM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
James McGinn
May 22, 2016, 6:04:40 PM5/22/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Alternative to Spiritualistic Thinking in the Atmospheric Sciences
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dexlOvP7mPw
Poutnik
May 23, 2016, 6:34:01 PM5/23/16
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
>
> ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
>
Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
Lower stratosphere is an inversion.
Tropopause is not inversion in exact sense,
but it is a limiting layer for adiabatic climbing.
>
> ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
>
Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
Lower stratosphere is an inversion.
Tropopause is not inversion in exact sense,
but it is a limiting layer for adiabatic climbing.
James McGinn
May 23, 2016, 9:04:18 PM5/23/16
to
Thank U captain obvious.
Do U have anymore amazing insights.
Do U have anymore amazing insights.
James McGinn
May 23, 2016, 9:39:05 PM5/23/16
to
This has all been explained.
Long smooth boundary layers are necessary for the formation of vortex plasma. And V-plasma is the lubrication of the atmosphere as manifested in vortices.
Long smooth boundary layers are necessary for the formation of vortex plasma. And V-plasma is the lubrication of the atmosphere as manifested in vortices.
James McGinn
May 23, 2016, 9:43:02 PM5/23/16
to
Inversions form because moist air is heavier than dry air. It settles below dry air forming a flat surface like a lake.
James McGinn
May 25, 2016, 7:43:14 PM5/25/16
to
Prove me wrong
pnal...@gmail.com
May 25, 2016, 7:56:38 PM5/25/16
to
On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 4:43:14 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> Prove me wrong
No, the requirement would be that you prove yourself to be right. After all, it is YOU who has made the extraordinary claim...
> Prove me wrong
No, the requirement would be that you prove yourself to be right. After all, it is YOU who has made the extraordinary claim...
Sam Wormley
May 25, 2016, 9:37:45 PM5/25/16
to
On 5/25/16 6:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> Prove me wrong
>
You are already wrong -- there is nothing to prove. It would behoove
> Prove me wrong
>
you to take, study and learn from college courses in *basic*
chemistry, physics and meteorology, James.
James McGinn
May 25, 2016, 9:43:39 PM5/25/16
to
Sam Wormley
May 26, 2016, 10:31:24 AM5/26/16
to
On 5/25/16 8:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
James why are you opposed to the hard data of observation and
> So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
experiment?
It would behoove you. James, to take, study and learn from college
courses in *basic* chemistry, physics and meteorology.
Sergio
May 26, 2016, 11:12:10 AM5/26/16
to
On 5/26/2016 9:31 AM, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/25/16 8:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>> So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
>
>
> James why are you opposed to the hard data of observation and
> experiment?
>
> It would behoove you. James, to take, study and learn from college
> courses in *basic* chemistry, physics and meteorology.
>
>
High School books are would provide the fundimentals James needs to move
> On 5/25/16 8:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
>> So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
>
>
> James why are you opposed to the hard data of observation and
> experiment?
>
> It would behoove you. James, to take, study and learn from college
> courses in *basic* chemistry, physics and meteorology.
>
>
forward. An understanding of "density" "heat" "volume" "weight" "mass" ...
College level would only confuse him further.
Sam Wormley
May 26, 2016, 11:16:30 AM5/26/16
to
science). Middle school or early high school.
kqui...@yahoo.com
May 26, 2016, 11:16:35 AM5/26/16
to
James McGinn
May 26, 2016, 12:21:23 PM5/26/16
to
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 7:31:24 AM UTC-7, Sam Wormley wrote:
> On 5/25/16 8:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
>
>
> James why are you opposed to the hard data of observation and
> experiment?
Sam, you are too gullible for science. Observation is one part of scientific process. It is never hard data in and of itself.
> On 5/25/16 8:43 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> > So, Sam, are you morally opposed to thinking for yourself?
>
>
> James why are you opposed to the hard data of observation and
> experiment?
Mikkel Haaheim
May 26, 2016, 1:39:19 PM5/26/16
to
Le mardi 24 mai 2016 00:34:01 UTC+2, Poutnik Fornntp a écrit :
> Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
>
> >
> > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> >
> Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
I did not say otherwise. For clarification, then, the boundary is marked by the characteristic inversion of the next layer.
> Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
>
> >
> > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> >
> Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
James McGinn
May 26, 2016, 7:49:30 PM5/26/16
to
On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> Le mardi 24 mai 2016 00:34:01 UTC+2, Poutnik Fornntp a écrit :
> > Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
> >
> > >
> > > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> > >
> > Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
Same difference.
> Le mardi 24 mai 2016 00:34:01 UTC+2, Poutnik Fornntp a écrit :
> > Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
> >
> > >
> > > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> > >
> > Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
noTthaTguY
May 26, 2016, 10:12:47 PM5/26/16
to
because air-pressure is highest at the ground,
this is the best place to effect turbulence e.g
i.e from airports; this is my "new job specification
this is the best place to effect turbulence e.g
i.e from airports; this is my "new job specification
James McGinn
May 27, 2016, 12:15:01 AM5/27/16
to
Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
Go ahead.
Be explicit.
Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
Go ahead.
Be explicit.
Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
Mikkel Haaheim
May 27, 2016, 11:48:58 AM5/27/16
to
Again, I am not a meteorologist, so I don't know all of the inversion layers or what produces them. I do not know what defines the majority of atmospherice strata. However, I would suspect that the first temperature inversion is produced by (relatively) warm air continuing to rise. Throughout the troposphere, the warmest air is on the bottom and the cool air is on top. This is because the warm air on the bottom is being heated indirectly from sunlight warming the surface beneath. As this heated, high pressure, low density air rises, it pushes outward, losing pressure as it does so, and becoming even less dense... the energy from direct sunlight is insufficient to reheat it, and the indirect heat from the surface is also too far away, so the temperature drops as pressure regains equilibrium. However, there is a point at which pressure equilibrium is largely re-established. at this point, warmer air continues to rise, but it does so relatively homogenously. This means that air at the upper levelsof this next layer is slightly warmer at the top, and cooler below.
I do not know if there is a second temperature inversion above this point; however, if there is, then there is also a fourth inversion as the highest level, although very cold, will be slightly warmer from more direct radiative heating from the sun. Most of the heat of the sun passes through the atmosphere, but a little is intercepted, and the molecules at the outermost altitudes are the best placed to be able to absorb it. Anything solid at this level will get a nice dose of radiation, and will heat up fairly quickly. This is where you actually find a little bit of REAL plasma, mostly near the polar regions, due to influence from the magnetic fields.
The boundaries really are not all that flat. They just give the impression of being flat because the deviations in altitude are very small compared to the size of the strata themselves. Remember that the surface of the Earth, all mountains included, is smoother than a billiard ball if you consider the percentage alues of the deviations. The atmospheric strata are even more so.
Mikkel Haaheim
May 27, 2016, 11:50:14 AM5/27/16
to
Le vendredi 27 mai 2016 01:49:30 UTC+2, James McGinn a écrit :
> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> > Le mardi 24 mai 2016 00:34:01 UTC+2, Poutnik Fornntp a écrit :
> > > Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
> > >
> > > >
> > > > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> > > >
> > > Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
>
> Same difference.
>
No. He is correct. A boundary is the separation between layers.
> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:39:19 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> > Le mardi 24 mai 2016 00:34:01 UTC+2, Poutnik Fornntp a écrit :
> > > Dne 22/05/2016 v 23:41 Mikkel Haaheim napsal(a):
> > >
> > > >
> > > > ....... as I recall, there is such an inversion on a large scale marking the boundary between the troposphere and the tropopause.
> > > >
> > > Note that inversion is not a boundary. It is a layer.
>
> Same difference.
>
James McGinn
May 27, 2016, 6:39:19 PM5/27/16
to
James McGinn
May 27, 2016, 6:51:15 PM5/27/16
to
James McGinn
May 28, 2016, 10:01:59 AM5/28/16
to
On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:48:58 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 mai 2016 06:15:01 UTC+2, James McGinn a écrit :
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom.
Your explanation is inane. Inversion layers happen under calm weather conditions when the heavier moist air has time to settle below the lighter dry air as a result of gravity.
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom.
By the time the evaporated water rises to the upper troposphere, most of it will have cooled and condensed, and have subsequently fallen as rain, snow, sleet, or hail, returning to the original low level source. Some water, however, actually makes it into the tropopause and the stratosphere... and even higher, if I recall correctly (and have my physics correct). So long as the H2O remains gaseous, it will continue to rise throughout the atmosphere.
>
> Again, I am not a meteorologist,
James McGinn
May 28, 2016, 3:26:40 PM5/28/16
to
James McGinn
May 28, 2016, 3:27:42 PM5/28/16
to
On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:48:58 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 mai 2016 06:15:01 UTC+2, James McGinn a écrit :
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom.
You are an inane liar. This is a plainly stupid explanation.
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom.
James McGinn
May 28, 2016, 5:37:28 PM5/28/16
to
On Friday, May 27, 2016 at 8:48:58 AM UTC-7, Mikkel Haaheim wrote:
> Le vendredi 27 mai 2016 06:15:01 UTC+2, James McGinn a écrit :
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom. By the time the evaporated water rises to the upper troposphere, most of it will have cooled and condensed, and have subsequently fallen as rain, snow, sleet, or hail, returning to the original low level source. Some water, however, actually makes it into the tropopause and the stratosphere... and even higher, if I recall correctly (and have my physics correct). So long as the H2O remains gaseous,
Science is about facts. Not your imagination. There is zero evidence of gaseous H2O in the atmosphere. This is a fact.
> > Tell us your theory on inversion layers Mikkel.
> >
> > Go ahead.
> >
> > Be explicit.
> >
> > Address the real issue, you evasive twit: why is the moist layer on the bottom? What causes the to be so flat.
> >
> > Put up or shut up you pretentious twit.
>
> The moist layer is on the bottom because the majority of water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc) are found on the bottom. By the time the evaporated water rises to the upper troposphere, most of it will have cooled and condensed, and have subsequently fallen as rain, snow, sleet, or hail, returning to the original low level source. Some water, however, actually makes it into the tropopause and the stratosphere... and even higher, if I recall correctly (and have my physics correct). So long as the H2O remains gaseous,
> it will continue to rise throughout the atmosphere.
>
> Again, I am not a meteorologist, so I don't know all of the inversion layers or what produces them.
I do not know what defines the majority of atmospherice strata. However, I would suspect that the first temperature inversion is produced by (relatively) warm air continuing to rise. Throughout the troposphere, the warmest air is on the bottom and the cool air is on top. This is because the warm air on the bottom is being heated indirectly from sunlight warming the surface beneath. As this heated, high pressure, low density air rises, it pushes outward, losing pressure as it does so, and becoming even less dense... the energy from direct sunlight is insufficient to reheat it, and the indirect heat from the surface is also too far away, so the temperature drops as pressure regains equilibrium. However, there is a point at which pressure equilibrium is largely re-established. at this point, warmer air continues to rise, but it does so relatively homogenously. This means that air at the upper levelsof this next layer is slightly warmer at the top, and cooler below.
> I do not know if there is a second temperature inversion above this point; however, if there is, then there is also a fourth inversion as the highest level, although very cold, will be slightly warmer from more direct radiative heating from the sun. Most of the heat of the sun passes through the atmosphere, but a little is intercepted, and the molecules at the outermost altitudes are the best placed to be able to absorb it. Anything solid at this level will get a nice dose of radiation, and will heat up fairly quickly. This is where you actually find a little bit of REAL plasma, mostly near the polar regions, due to influence from the magnetic fields.
noTthaTguY
May 28, 2016, 6:26:47 PM5/28/16
to
that is just the observed feature of HOH;
you have no basis in denying the effectiveness of adiabats (also,
bats.
obviously, the tensile property of water gets less,
the smaller the drops, in hte course of evaporation
according to the adiabat
you have no basis in denying the effectiveness of adiabats (also,
bats.
obviously, the tensile property of water gets less,
the smaller the drops, in hte course of evaporation
according to the adiabat
noTthaTguY
May 29, 2016, 3:29:19 PM5/29/16
to
important, because planes are effected by turbulence,
esps. om take-off & land-ing
esps. om take-off & land-ing
James McGinn
Aug 12, 2016, 12:49:06 PM8/12/16
to
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 10:39:54 AM UTC-8, James McGinn wrote:
> http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/2011/08/26/how-to-get-off-the-ground-with-nothing-but-water-almost/#comment-39029
>
> Allow me to point out an overwhelmingly obvious observation that plainly demonstrates how absurd is the premise here and, by association, how absurd is meteorology's notion that moist air is lighter than dry air. Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the troposphere. Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the troposphere. If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis. The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
>
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
> http://scottishsceptic.co.uk/2011/08/26/how-to-get-off-the-ground-with-nothing-but-water-almost/#comment-39029
>
> Allow me to point out an overwhelmingly obvious observation that plainly demonstrates how absurd is the premise here and, by association, how absurd is meteorology's notion that moist air is lighter than dry air. Most of the warm moist air in the troposphere exists very close to the surface at the lowest part of the troposphere. Most of the cold dry air exists toward the top of the troposphere. If it was true that warm moist air is lighter than cold dry air and if it was true that convection was the predominant process for air movement then there could only be a constant ongoing exchange of air at all parts of the troposphere on an ongoing basis. The reality is that warm moist air is heavier than cold dry air and storms have nothing to do with convection because if these falsehoods were true then storms would happen everywhere constantly.
>
> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
James McGinn
Aug 12, 2016, 12:49:31 PM8/12/16
to
noTthaTguY
Aug 12, 2016, 3:25:24 PM8/12/16
to
I have ne'er noticed that they acually explicate this fact, although
it is the most important datum of meteorology, other than a)
OCO is heavier than air, and 0)
meteors are heavier than HOH
it is the most important datum of meteorology, other than a)
OCO is heavier than air, and 0)
meteors are heavier than HOH
Sergio
Aug 12, 2016, 4:55:22 PM8/12/16
to
On 8/12/2016 2:25 PM, noTthaTguY wrote:
> I have ne'er noticed that they acually explicate this fact, although
> it is the most important datum of meteorology, other than a) OCO is
> heavier than air, and 0) meteors are heavier than HOH
>
> I have ne'er noticed that they acually explicate this fact, although
> it is the most important datum of meteorology, other than a) OCO is
> heavier than air, and 0) meteors are heavier than HOH
>
>>> The more I come to understand the atmosphere the more I realize
>>> how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
classic projection
>>> how absurdly incompetent humans are at comprehending it.
"the more McGinn "comprehends" the atmosphere, the more absurdly
incompetent he gets."
noTthaTguY
Aug 13, 2016, 1:54:29 PM8/13/16
to
he never mete a hygrometer, that he didn't a)
break
break
0 new messages