Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 619 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#24024 10/23/07 12:20 PM
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
M
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
M
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
More Clouds tend to heat the Polar Regions, while less clouds
heat the tropics.

This should appear self evident? i.e -
A/. Fewer tropic clouds radiate more heat back into space.
B/. More clouds trap heat in the air.
Its this warmer air reaching the Polar regions, that is tending
to melt it.

Anyone disagree with this?
Since:
The slant angle of the Sun on all Polar regions, can hardly do as much melt damage, as incoming warmish cloud trapped Polar air.

I have had this thought after taking a quick look at 'Hadley Cells' plus the CERES data, averaged from 7 different Spacecraft.
However I must state, my *comment is not a direct result of any info contained below.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NasaNews/2002/200201317366.html

Various comments of mine in-"Its raining at The North Pole" in this Forum earlier. With attention to Artic windspeed, and that rain has to condense around something, before it falls, have helped in coming to my conclusion.
Plus the fact that there are so many unknowns within the 'Climate Equation' that we should use only the latest ten year old Datas, and wait and see.

Even Dr Bruce Wielicki suggests that "Since clouds were thought to be the weakest link in predicting future climate change from greenhouse gases, these new results are unsettling"

Last edited by Mike Kremer; 10/23/07 05:58 PM. Reason: added 'use'

.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.


.
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
J
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
J
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
I would go with a day/night thing instead. At night, if there are clouds, then heat is not allowed to rise, so dew and frost are not formed on the grass. During the day, if there are clouds, then the sun cannot warm the surface much. I am experiencing such a day right now. From midnight until now, under a cover of clouds, the temp has held steady around 6 degrees. There has been little wind from the south east during most of that time.

Look at how cold a desert like the Sahara,gets at night even though it gets so hot during the day.

The polar regions that have months of night would require clouds to retain heat and are only warmed by wind.

There is also the observation from Canadian Inuit near Rankin Inlet (62° 49.200' N) that they have been able feel the heat of the sun in December and January for the past 7 years. They have had to start to wear sunscreen because of this.

Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
I think the question is : how do we model whether clouds are net positive or net negative impact ? I would hazard a guess that more clouds in the tropics is net negative and more clouds at the poles is net positive. Also I would guess that there are major differnece stothe energy in / energy out balance dependent on wheter its over land or over sea ..... this must be very difficult to model ....

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
M
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
M
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,696
Originally Posted By: John M Reynolds
I would go with a day/night thing instead. At night, if there are clouds, then heat is not allowed to rise, so dew and frost are not formed on the grass. During the day, if there are clouds, then the sun cannot warm the surface much. I am experiencing such a day right now. From midnight until now, under a cover of clouds, the temp has held steady around 6 degrees. There has been little wind from the south east during most of that time.

Look at how cold a desert like the Sahara,gets at night even though it gets so hot during the day.

The polar regions that have months of night would require clouds to retain heat and are only warmed by wind.

There is also the observation from Canadian Inuit near Rankin Inlet (62° 49.200' N) that they have been able feel the heat of the sun in December and January for the past 7 years. They have had to start to wear sunscreen because of this.


Yes you are right, the day/night influx of polar wind, would have a greater heating effect than the same, during the long winters.
Point taken, regarding how cold it can get in the Sahara at night.
But I am amazed that the Inuit has taken to using a sunscreen?
Could it be that some of them have found it useful to protect their skin from the bitterly cold winter winds?
I mean the Artic ozone layer is not nearly as big, as down over Antartica, where the UV effects out to the Australians.

That difference in the size of both ozone holes is strange. Since we have more industry in our Northern Hemisphere, I would have thought our hole should be bigger. Is this another strange anomaly? Or is there a reason I am not aware of?


.

.
"You will never find a real Human being - Even in a mirror." ....Mike Kremer.


Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
I
Member
Offline
Member
I
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 94
Usage of sunscreen is hardly solid evidence of anything climactic ... maybe it just became fashionable not to look wrinkled and weatherbeaten ...

Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
J
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
J
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
The use of sunscreen was promoted when hunters suddenly started to get sunburned in the winter. According to their elders, the ability to feel the heat of the sun in January was new as were the incidents of sunburn cases. I had heard about this on a CBC One radio interview about 2 years ago.

Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
M
Max Offline
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 93
Quote:
That difference in the size of both ozone holes is strange. Since we have more industry in our Northern Hemisphere, I would have thought our hole should be bigger. Is this another strange anomaly? Or is there a reason I am not aware of?


(Not so new) - New clues to ozone depletion


http://reporter.leeds.ac.uk/press_releases/current/ozone.htm


Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5