sorry; Fermat gave a justification
for Snell's law & the brachistochrone,
of Least Time; Least Action is Liebniz's generalization
of that. yeah, Liebniz,
the guy who you defeated with F=ma=mv=KE=exp(i*pi) --
and Coriolis!
> anwyay, "what Nature does,"
> is what was given voice by Fermat,
http://wlym.com/~animations/fermat/index.html
thus:
so, why can't they say, what the angle of total reflection
off Arctic waters are, given the sun angles & a measure
of choppiness?
y'know, folks watch so much TV, they probably believe that
the arctic & antarctic are always as Sunny as a Club MedTM. but,
when it *is* clear, that is when there is no waveguide by clouds
from the subarctic, and when the angle of total reflection is
of the greatest import, or export.
or, given that jets fly on great-circle bearings,
what does the heat of the exhaust -- the heat
of the jets & wings dissipating & radiating -- do to the N. pole?
or, what do all of the icebreakers' horsepower do,
to the angular momentum of the floating ice?
things that make y'go, Hm.
thus:
jet exhaust is presumably carrying an excess of heat,
beyond the heat of condensation of the water-of-combustion,
although the presence of chemtrails (!?) depends only
upon relative humidity & temperature.
thus:
there is just no historical data for most glaciers. yes,
the ones close to civilization with some data,
do tend to "retreat," although it is really very cyclical
with very little comprehension of the cause ... or,
even if it means that any glacier is actually diminishing,
overall.
on the very hour that I heard from the Man from NOAA,
Swiss affiliate, that the hieghths of GrIS and AnIS had
*only* increased, since measurement began,
I drew the obvious conclusion. at the second catered event,
I asked him about this, and he disagreed, although
he couldn't think of a reason, at the momentbeing.
anyway, til *either* a Confirmerist or a Denierist will
actually read Morner's overview paper in the magazine,
I am probably not going to believe in putative sealevel rise,
especially, if they are not going to even bother
with erosion, loss of soil-water & so on.
I would like to say, though, in hearing about subglacial volcanos
on Iceland, that it is possible for this to incease,
especially in Antarctica at Mt. Erebus, which could lead
to significant transients of sealevel rise ... because
vulcanism actually increases by an order of magnitude,
during the glacial phases of the Quaternary Period.
> "surface mass balance (net accumulation)"
thus:
the Kyoto Protocol is a huge, voluntary carbon emmissions scheme,
which follows the market of the larger EU mandatory scheme,
following the launching of CCX in 2003 with the 2nd Gulf War, and
of ICE in 2005.
presumbaly, the primary "players" in these hedge-funds,
are the oilcos ... perhaps even the Koch bros.,
whether or not they erroneously call it a "tax."
thus:
my source on this is _A Vast Machine_, MIT Press 2011,
which is a blow-by-blow acount of the history
of these glocal circulation models.
-- the Kyoto Protocol is *nothing* but cap & trade,
which I prefer to call "free-er trade," as a large vehicle
for hedge funds, such as CCX, that Sen. Obama started
in 2003 with the 2nd Gulf War. and, you probably thought that
only Sen. Gore had his own hedgie!