Gerald Kelleher wrote:
On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 10:05:09 AM UTC+1, Mike Collins wrote:
Gerald Kelleher wrote:
The signs that astronomy is in recovery would include productive research
on the Earth's climate.


People who argue about ‘climate change’ using the current definition are
both sides of the same mediocre coin as they are too narrow in their
views . Not just the Earth but all planets in the solar system possess a
climate so it simply means that climate is defined on common traits that
do not involved distance from the Sun or planetary composition.

http://calgary.rasc.ca/images/planet_inclinations.gif



If the Earth had an inclination similar to the 3° of Jupiter there would
be little change across all latitudes over the course of a year and much
like the conditions at the Equator while if the Earth had the 82°
inclination of Uranus there would be huge swings across most latitudes
similar to conditions experienced within the Arctic/Antarctic circles .

In short, climate is determined by a spectrum between 0° (Equatorial) and
90° (Polar) so the Earth with its 23 1/2° inclination is within this
spectrum as having a largely Equatorial climate with a sizable but minor
Polar input. The Earth’s climate would change if inclination increased
towards 90° in which case it would become more Polar and a decrease of
inclination towards 0° would mean a climate change towards an Equatorial climate.

Trying to squeeze climate into long term weather patterns was always a
silly thing to do even if the success of short term weather modelling
provided the basis for that lamentable definition.


Like almost everything you write about the above is a mixture of simple
facts easy for a nine year old child to understand (but you took years to
take them in) and childish mistakes which would make the nine year old
child very embarrassed when they were pointed out.
Look at Venus. The day lasts 235 Earth days. The inclination is 3 degrees.
Yet the temperature (about 465C) is the same day and night and pole and
equator. If the planet had 90 degree inclination the temperature would
still be the same all over the planet because the main drivers of the Venus
climate are the thick atmosphere and the proximity to the sun. The thick
atmosphere is why Venus is hotter than Mercury even though it only receives
25 percent of the solar irradiation of Mercury. (Craters at Mercury's north
pole contain ice).

Coming from an unfortunate who can't manage to match one weekday rotation
with temperature spikes and troughs and not feel embarrassed about it,
you are hardly going to comprehend climate on an astronomical scale for all the planets -


Why do you lie so much. You could put Trump to shame! Nobody denies the
difference between average day or night temperature ( although I remember
some days when the high was warmer).
Apologise now for this lie which you have repeated so many times. Make sure
you speak about it at your next confession.

http://prairieecosystems.pbworks.com...0variation.jpg

” It is a fact not generally known that,owing to the difference between
solar and sidereal time,the Earth rotates upon its axis once more often
than there are days in the year” NASA /Harvard

Something the nine year olds would be embarrassed about when they were
shown the truth.

You all keep talking about pre-teen understanding but you yourselves
never made it to adulthood,at least in terms of reasoning and therefore
these threads are left as standalone insights that are there to be built on.


Now explain the lack of diurnal temperature changes on Venus. Of course a
backward nine year old child would just pretend they didn't hear.