“Temperatures in the Arctic are astonishingly warmer than they should be” CBS News. This online article was written by a meteorologist and includes quotations from a climate scientist. It dovetails well with the work I have been doing recently, with one big exception: there is not one word about water vapor or precipitable water having anything at all to do with the unexpectedly high level of warming. The focus of explanation by these individuals is directed toward reductions in extent and volume of sea ice, as indicated in these words: “As a result, the lack of sea ice cover and open water is allowing heat to be transferred from the ocean into the overlying atmosphere very late into the season. That is amplifying temperatures to abnormal levels.” I certainly agree with that thought, up to a point, but only for air in proximity with the actual surfaces that have ice-free exposure, and only as a partial cause of the actual total warming in those areas.
Explanations of this type are common. The same kind of things were being said last summer when scientists were trying to explain the deep and extended heatwave across much of Siberia. There was never a mention of any influxes of high-altitude water vapor that I was illustrating at the time with help from the Weather Maps. All I can do is shake my head. These scientists are simply not studying the maps in their entirety and seeing the relationships that keep popping out in vivid imagery. Whatever they are looking at is not telling the story in the way the maps do it, which is simple, direct, no higher math needed, entirely visual, completely believable by having well-accepted sources, and totally accessible to anyone interested. Why not put it to best use? If you know any persons who are professionally engaged in science, whether it’s climate or something else, ask them for an opinion of what is proper in this case. These letters contain much evidence and should be useful even if my personal inputs are poorly worded.
There is still one big piece missing in the imagery puzzle. I would love to have a map available, just like the others, every day of the year, with details indicating the average amount of total precipitable water held by every spot on the globe for that day during the same baseline period as that of the temperature anomalies, or at least a near equivalent. One could take that number, compare it to the current number for the day, and refer this information to the current temperature anomaly along with all other current or historical data (like past sea ice extent) that could be affecting today’s anomalies. The lack of historical data for precipitable water details is a daily source of frustration, but not insurmountable, and absolute precision is not really necessary for purposes of drawing the best possible picture of causation for the actual phenomena we have in our hands.
Scientists have a number of reasons for disliking water vapor’s warming power, and for socking it away as nothing more than a linear feedback of the power of CO2. Global warming deniers once pestered them by using it as an argument diminishing the importance of CO2, which generally made no sense to begin with. Water vapor can only exercise its power, in a quantitative sense, after additional amounts are released as a feedback responding to the realization of other sources of warming. However, that is not where the story ends. There are complications of an unusual nature that scientists in the past were unable to anticipate. One of these involves the potential for certain amounts of water vapor to interact with yet another feedback of global warming, together with factors under its control, all of which has been poorly recognized. This other feedback has proceeded by transforming the structure of the high-altitude wind systems that cap each of the two hemispheres. The interaction between this feedback and the ordinary behavior of proximal water vapor at the same level is serving to magnify the power of that vapor, causing it to be extended well beyond the limits imposed on the majority of vapor that remains in the lower atmosphere.
As DHT is responsible for hair growth also in the face, increased occurrence of acne, enlargement of the prostate gland, problems like urinary tract infections and frequent urination buy cialis from canada are improved considerably. Fibroids grow in any part of the uterus: Pedunculated: attached to the uterine wall Subserosal: extend outward from the wall Submucosal: expand from the wall into the cialis sale online uterine cavity Intramural: develop within the wall. You have to practice the medicine one in a day or 24 hour * To get quick results, consume Kamagra Oral Jelly on an empty stomach or after consuming a low-fat meal Side Effect: Possible common side effects observed with the air conditioning machine is concerned with cooling, collection of water beneath the machine, weird sound at the time of turning off the unit, dysfunctional regulation of temperature etc. order generic viagra if. Night Fire capsule is developed cheapest cialis unica-web.com using powerful plant ingredients to produce more seminal fluids naturally.This other feedback effectively alters the structure of air pressure configuration in the upper part of the troposphere, thereby weakening the positioning and strength of the major jetstream winds that are demonstrably under its control. As a consequence significant amounts of water vapor are in position to gain greater freedom of motion, allowing them to be more readily transported within spaces above locations in the highest of latitudes, spaces that were previously not accessible in such high quantities. The greenhouse effect produced by this vapor has been having a manifest impact on surface air temperatures, further amplifying the warming that caused this remarkable process to begin in the first place. Now that we can see it all happening, day after day, and the dire extent of the damage being done, there is no longer any excuse for climate science not to follow up with studies of its own having higher intensity.
Questions are sure to arise concerning the apparent ability of relatively high concentrations of water vapor to survive without condensation in a layer of atmosphere that is very thin and exceedingly cold. All I can say from map observations is that the volume is real and the greenhouse powers of the vapor do not seem to be affected. Moreover, there are no consistent signs of a loss of these powers in places where there is evidence that a considerable amount of condensation has taken effect and transformed the vapor into a new state.
Carl