Monthly Archives: October 2021

One thing I’ve been saying, as a minimum, is that all precipitable water (PW) has a greenhouse effect. This should be readily agreed to by every climate scientist for one simple reason: all PW is at least partially composed of … Continue reading →

I may be the only person on the face of our Earth who strongly believes that every bit of precipitable water (PW) in the atmosphere has a fairly uniform and very powerful greenhouse energy effect on surface temperatures. I don’t … Continue reading →

Why atmospheric river (AR) research is very concerning. I have been writing these letters for over eight years now, always looking for new information coming out of the many different fields of basic climate research. I must admit that AR … Continue reading →

I have gone back and reread the three study abstracts discussed in yesterday’s letter and need to revise one of my possible conclusions—these studies do not change the conventional definition of atmospheric rivers (ARs) to quite the extent that I … Continue reading →

“Atmospheric rivers”are suddenly making headlines in the daily news, thanks to a particularly colossal event happening on the US west coast. We can look forward to some interesting coverage all week as reporters begin pressing top scientists for more complete … Continue reading →

For readers who are not familiar with the map-reading research I have been doing for over a year, as fully described in the last 400 letters, here is a quick summary of the principle conclusions: first, every bit of precipitable … Continue reading →

I was not intending to write about water vapor today, but then had a few thoughts that made me change my mind.  This will take us back to the extensive research I did over the past year related to the … Continue reading →

I have been raising the question of why and how increasing the abundance of molecules of a particular greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is sufficient cause for an increase in surface temperatures—given the apparent fact that a smaller population can … Continue reading →

Yesterday I pointed out a good reason for believing that making a change in the atmospheric concentration of a greenhouse gas, either up or down, should not have the expected effect on surface temperatures. It’s because the “work load” of … Continue reading →

I have been grapling with an idea lately that is not commonly discussed but seems like it should be interesting as an important factor in the study of climate change. I am not sure about whether I am handling it … Continue reading →