Posted by Tim_NC on 3/15/2009, 3:07 pm, in reply to "Re: Global ACE lowest level in 30 years."

Is it possible you over-analyze things? I don't have to remind you about the "scientific method" right? When I consider your ideas, I think about the relative size of rivers, dams/lakes, seas, etc. vs. the Gulf Stream and the size of the oceans (and the size of hurricanes themselves - much less the territory they cover as they move along.) Analysis is great - but beware tunnel vision! That said, I do enjoy your writing. Tim in Cape Fear, NC --Previous Message-- : I don't think the energy is necessarily going : to bigger storms, but rather to less : efficient electrical manners of organizing : clouds, which in turn could result in more : heat to the poles. : Do any of you really think that a lack of : tropical storms is a GOOD thing? If you go : back far enough in time to super storms, : there is a real issue here of the melting : Arctic--as if the tropics don't electrically : organize yet the Arctic does, that is your : start of putting ice on land, making the : storm region lose fresh water, become more : saline and boom, runnaway storm in a place : that gets 10 cms of percip a year. Not a : good thing. The 40s there were snow storms : in Europe following the heat of the 30s and : early 40s, but what is going on is something : different altogether in the Arctic now. : : It's a modulated, dampened system. Tropical : storms serve a huge thermodynamic purpose. : Kinetic energy stays in the tropics instead : of going to the poles. When the oceans in : the tropics get cold, they uptake CO2 : better, and at the same time have to compete : with temperate and polar zones for : impedences where the atmosphere is less : thick, and electrical couplings have smaller : distances to organize. And CO2 is a : DEPENDANT variable in all of this. : : Also, in terms of mechanism, while the : oceans are getting colder, we are at a solar : min. Plus there are reports of phytoplankton : relative low levels and dead zones. There : are a number of things going on aside from : the CO2 and the dams and the system is : dampened, modulated. The question is has : human activity created a defect in a living : earth feedback loop and if so, what can : policy do to rectify that defect? A : premature super storm will kill billions. : : As you all know from my posts here, I am not : a green house gas warmer, but at one time I : was. And I would certainly in retrospect say : that I was not very objective when I entered : the climate change debate. I have been in : the debate long enough to know 'both' sides : of the argument, and I have told the so : called skeptics before that I could : articulate THEIR position better than they : could. But as you know there are two sides : to this story, those who think that there : are two sides and those who know better. : : The way a 'so-called' skeptic frames it is : whether or not the drop in ACE was factual : support of his position of 'so-called : skepticism' counter to CO2 as a green house : gas, warming the oceans and causing more : tropical storms. The fact that they frame : the question the way they do leads to the : misrepresentation. Again, the idea is that : CO2 comes out of solution with tropical lows : and then redissolves in the water vapor : --and then has conductivity, impedence, and : induction meaning as it is moving in the : context of up and down static fields. This : then means CO2 has a DEPENDANT relationship : with tropical storms. : : The dams also get to this electrical : functioning of the storms, again, as : discussed before in th e California drought : thread below, for instance. : : The skeptics ignore where their points : actually go. For instance, they brought up : the fact that the warming occurs in the : Northern Hemisphere only per the MSU data on : the troposphere, which is what you would : expect from a uniform heat trapping a green : house gas theory, but they fail to take that : were it goes, which is that lightning : limited more to land is less in the southern : hemisphere. Or they ignore cosmic ray flux : (an electrical input) and glacial epochs. : They ignore the moon--and mechanism to the : moon which again is gravital but then by : motions and induction electrical. : : One of the interesting postulations here : with a living earth is if you assume as I do : that electrical inputs are met with : electrical modulations, and that the earth : delt in its deep past with a moon much : closer to the earth and a faster spin : (shorter day), the earth have had to deal : with constant and huge tides, so this is a : much bigger input to the biosphere than it : appears. : : The skeptics don't talk about where they go : with the LACK of warming as a sign of a : modulated system. The so called skeptics : won't take these studies where go. They just : don't. : : Skepticism isn't of ONE idea. Skepticism : comes from a scientific methodology, not : from countering one theory. Figuring this : out could be the difference between the end : of humanity or its golden age. : :