Let’s talk about precipitable water (PW), the primary subject of Carl’s Theory. The features of PW were investigated in great depth and at great length for over a century, leading to conclusions that science knew all there was to know about it that really matters. Nothing of a controversial nature remains in open view on the table, leaving further investigation in limbo. Anything about PW that is “known to be unknown” is thereby considered inconsequential. In that respect, what can we say about “the greenhouse energy effect of PW?” I would classify it as a verified known unknown, also one that is impossible to call unimportant or to simply dismiss out of hand without good reason. Here’s why:
Scientists know for sure that the atmospheric content of PW, by weight, is relatively enormous, third in line behind nitrogen and oxygen, undeniably ahead of water vapor alone. The third spot is usually attributed to water vapor due to its purity, while PW has a mixture of ingredients by state—solid, liquid and gas—yet only one kind of molecule, H2O. It originates entirely as a gas, which condenses into liquid droplets while airborne. The droplets then evolve into larger liquid drops and a number of different kinds of solid icy particles. Throughout the troposphere the gas molecules are always present to some extent. The liquid and solid particles come and go in random fashion, in highly varying rates. The total weight of all the PW molecules in a vertical column is in fact accurately measured everywhere, several times a day, and reported as such, but only as an undifferentiated total. This act of measurement by itself should justify treating the mixed combination as a potentially unique single substance if a good purpose so warrants.
Scientists also know that the two largest components of PW by weight, first the vapor and second the droplets that largely assemble into cloud formations, are both major producers of greenhouse energy effects. The vapor’s total effect is known to be stronger than that of any other greenhouse gas, but much more difficult to measure with accuracy because of its highly uneven distribution. The total greenhouse effect of clouds is widely thought to be significantly large, based on the simplest kind of thermal testing, but is even more difficult to measure for reasons of uneven distribution, plus a complete shortage of useful radiation data. No direct comparison can therefore be made with water vapor or anything else that has a greenhouse effect. As an alternative, attempts are often made to compare cloud warming effects with offsetting cooling effects caused by whatever clouds are in position to reflect incoming solar radiation. No data has been gathered.
This medicine can buy cheap cialis http://greyandgrey.com/robert-grey/stock-photo-closeup-of-mallet-and-legal-book-with-justice-scale-on-table-in-courtroom-372828868/ instantly turn you on. His female partner usually fights him for not satisfying her purchasing this viagra 100 mg in bed. The other important point should be noticed is that every owner will note that this is very unusual behaviour and try to prescription viagra find help soon. 3. This is partially true generika cialis 20mg as many young men also having erectile dysfunction and it is also present in elderly men.So there we are. The two main components of PW are both major producers of greenhouse energy effects, both composed of one kind of molecule, H2O. One of them has effects that are impractical to measure because of erratic distribution when compared with other well-mixed greenhouse gases, like CO2 and methane. The other is simply impossible to measure, with even more erratic distribution, plus other lackings. Individually, measurement is a real problem for these two agencies. Carl’s Theory, part 1, is based on the idea, first of all, that these two components can be treated as one from a distribution point of view. That’s because of the accurate numbers we now have in hand with respect to how the total weight of PW is distributed over every corner of the globe, at practically any moment in time. By exquisitely good fortune we also have accurate data informing us of how average one-day air temperatures in every corner of the globe vary in a meaningful way from historical moving averages of those temperatures on each individual day of the year.
The information we have in hand still needs to be augmented with comparable moving averages of historical PW weight values for each day on each location. Working only with qualified estimates of these averages, as put together after making adjustments for a number of other temperature anomaly factors, Carl’s Theory predicts a calculated outcome revealing an extraordinarily close relationship between very real temperature anomalies and realistic but less certain changes in PW values. These values are seen by the theory as being only lightly affected by any of the always-unknown differences in PW componentry, something totally unexpected. The theory further predicts that, when all other factors are equalized, each double of PW values will effectively add about 10C to air temperatures for any location, fully reversible, peaking only in places inside the tropical belt. More complete data needed to validate these predictions should be well within reach of the sciences.
Carl