Planetary climate

Despite the large misnomer of 'climate change',a planet's climate is
fixed by the degree of axial inclination and there really isn't the
scale of change in inclination required to account for variations in
long term weather patterns that is wrongly called 'climate change'.

Should the Earth's inclination alter towards the ecliptic axis it
would result in more equatorial or temperate conditions while an
alteration of inclination away from the ecliptic axis would cause
greater seasonal fluctuations and a more polar climate.This spectrum
and this spectrum alone is what constitutes global climate and all
other inputs and fluctuations come after,they can be disputed as
regards to their relevance but fundamentally the Earth has a largely
equatorial climate that does not change.

This would be less of an appeal than it is a dictate insofar as the
political community may now have become so stuck in a rut ideology
that it plows ahead with models that are not real even though those
who create these models demand that they are real.It takes astronomers
to gently guide the wider community back towards a stable narrative
with something entirely new - the triumph of modern imaging brought to
bear on an unstable situation.

The replacement of the 'no tilt/no seasons' ideology with an
equatorial/temperate climate due to a zero inclination thereby
creating one end of a spectrum that is gauged against a polar climate
with 90 degree inclination is the first in a series of necessary
corrections.Far more important than any present 'climate change'
convention,the work that goes on here will turn this doom laden
situation around.

On 11/9/12 7:45 AM, oriel36 wrote:
Despite the large misnomer of 'climate change',a planet's climate is
fixed by the degree of axial inclination

That argument has little weight for planets like Venus and Jupiter.

Infrared Radiation and Planetary Temperature
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf
http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/publist.html

On Nov 9, 4:30*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/9/12 7:45 AM, oriel36 wrote:

Despite the large misnomer of 'climate change',a planet's climate is
fixed by the degree of axial inclination

* *That argument has little weight for planets like Venus and Jupiter..


The argument is straightforward enough,an equatorial climate with
zero inclination has residual fluctuations in conditions across
latitudes as a planet makes a circuit of the Sun whereas a planet with
a 90 degree inclination,a polar climate in other words,experiences
huge fluctuations in conditions.This is creating a primary spectrum
from scratch and secondary inputs follow including temperatures.

The misnomer of 'climate change' is really long term weather patterns
from unknown origins however the foundation for introducing inputs
rests on a clear understanding of planetary dynamics and especially
inclination which puts a planet's climate within that spectrum between
polar and equatorial.

You make the first mistake in associating equatorial conditions with
heat and polar conditions with cold but then again this is a fresh
look at climate and you are allowed that mistake.All planets have
different base temperatures and the hemispheres react to the degree of
inclination with the Earth's largely equatorial climate modified by
its polar component over smaller latitudinal areas - were the Earth's
inclination to increase towards the polar end of the spectrum from say
23 1/2 degrees to 45 degrees,there would be an impossible strain on
habitation or similar to that which exists present in Northern
latitudes.

It is the responsibility of astronomers to interpret the images of
Uranus properly or to the best of their abilities,recognize that axial
precession to the central Sun is an annual orbital trait and not a
long term axial trait and specifically a component of the orbital
behavior of the planet.This modification is crucial for defining
planetary or global climate,something which has not been done up to
now and it is as serious as it gets.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

The political community and the media are running with models which
are assumed to be real but they don't even address planetary climate
whereas this does.


* *Infrared Radiation and Planetary Temperature
* * *http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/pap...odayRT2011.pdf
* * *http://geosci.uchicago.edu/~rtp1/papers/publist.html

On Friday, November 9, 2012 12:53:48 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

...axial

precession to the central Sun is an annual orbital trait and not a

long term axial trait and specifically a component of the orbital

behavior of the planet.

NO, this is incorrect, right now the Earth's (north) axis points generally at Polaris, all day, every day. It IS true that our axis sometimes is inclined more towards the Sun and sometimes away from it, but this is NOT called axial precession. I do not know if there is a specific tern to describe this ever-changing inclination, but I know what it is NOT called.

This modification is crucial for defining

planetary or global climate,something which has not been done up to

now and it is as serious as it gets.

Modification? What modification? There is nothing new under the sun (pardon the pun) regarding the varying inclination wrt the Sun, nor is there anything new regarding this inclination being the cause of the seasons, neither here on Earth or on Uranus, where its extreme inclination results in extreme seasons. So what? You seem to think that you have discovered something that in reality (Reality: What a Concept!) has been well-known for a long, long time.

On Nov 9, 10:34*pm, palsing wrote:
On Friday, November 9, 2012 12:53:48 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:
...axial

precession to the central Sun is an annual orbital trait and not a

long term axial trait and specifically a component of the orbital

behavior of the planet.

NO, this is incorrect, right now the Earth's (north) axis points generally at Polaris, all day, every day. It IS true that our axis sometimes is inclined more towards the Sun and sometimes away from it, but this is NOT called axial precession. I do not know if there is a specific tern to describe this ever-changing inclination, but I know what it is NOT called.

This modification is crucial for defining

planetary or global climate,something which has not been done up to

now and it is as serious as it gets.

Modification? What modification? There is nothing new under the sun (pardon the pun) regarding the varying inclination wrt the Sun, nor is there anything new regarding this inclination being the cause of the seasons, neither here on Earth or on Uranus, where its extreme inclination results in extreme seasons. So what? You seem to think that you have discovered something that in reality (Reality: What a Concept!) has been well-known for a long, long time.

Not right now son,you go out to the dessert and enjoy yourself.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A planet with zero inclination will experience equatorial conditions
rather than the old 'no tilt/no seasons' perspective so that a 90
degree inclination will result in huge fluctuations in hemispherical
conditions and similar to that which is found at the high planetary
latitudes.

It all hinges on who can interpret the images of Uranus in setting the
spectrum for planetary climate.

"palsing" wrote in message ...
On Friday, November 9, 2012 12:53:48 PM UTC-8, oriel36 wrote:

...axial

precession to the central Sun is an annual orbital trait and not a

long term axial trait and specifically a component of the orbital

behavior of the planet.

NO, this is incorrect, right now the Earth's (north) axis points generally at Polaris, all day, every day. It IS true that our axis sometimes is inclined more towards the Sun and sometimes away from it, but this is NOT called axial precession. I do not know if there is a specific tern to describe this ever-changing inclination, but I know what it is NOT called.

=============================================
Nutation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tr...m_27%2B800.jpg
There is half an inch error in the position of the blue markers
which can only be explained by General Relativity.
Nutation is totally overlooked by the Relativity nutters who
can find 43 arc seconds in
415 orbits*360*60*60 = 537840000 arc seconds
for the precession of Mercury’s aphelion, which they’d rather
measure at perihelion with Einstein’s trusty slide rule and
four-figure log tables, cause it makes him look like a great
mathematician.
(1 part in 12,507,907)
Relativity nutters are brilliant at minute differences when
they have their tin god Einstein to explain it for them, but they missed
nutation which is why you don’t know the word and why he doesn’t
get a mention. Don’t tell anyone about the half inch error, though,
you might start a riot.
-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway

The last time this type of situation happened where people refused to
interpret astronomical images led to the vicious strain of
homocentric empiricism we see today and the last two great astronomers
were all too familiar with that seething hatred of change -

"My dear Kepler, I wish that we might laugh at the remarkable
stupidity of the common herd. What do you have to say about the
principal philosophers of this academy who are filled with the
stubbornness of an asp and do not want to look at either the planets,
the moon or the telescope, even though I have freely and deliberately
offered them the opportunity a thousand times? Truly, just as the asp
stops its ears, so do these philosophers shut their eyes to the light
of truth." Galileo

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/...gs_changes.jpg

The world thinks it is discussing 'climate change' when it is really
looking at medium and long term weather fluctuations from unknown
causes,those images above define planetary climate by assigning axial
inclination its proper role and without this spectrum the people of
this era are inflicting huge damage on themselves.

The Earth has a largely equatorial climate due to its inclination.

On Nov 9, 4:58*pm, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway"
wrote:
"palsing" wrote in ...

It IS true that our axis sometimes is inclined more towards the Sun and sometimes away from it, but this is NOT called axial precession. I do not know if there is a specific tern to describe this ever-changing inclination, but I know what it is NOT called.

Nutation.

No, he was thinking of the seasons.

John Savard

On Nov 9, 3:48*pm, oriel36 wrote:

Not right now son,you go out to the dessert and enjoy yourself.

Perhaps he would dance the Lemon Merengue.

John Savard

"Quadibloc" wrote in message ...
On Nov 9, 4:58 pm, "Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway"
wrote:
"palsing" wrote in ...

It IS true that our axis sometimes is inclined more towards the Sun and sometimes away from it, but this is NOT called axial precession. I do not know if there is a specific tern to describe this ever-changing inclination, but I know what it is NOT called.

Nutation.

No, he was thinking of the seasons.

John Savard

=============================================
Seasons are not called terns, salt and pepper on terns are seasoned
water birds.
http://www.rothervalley.f9.co.uk/jpg...ommon_Tern.jpg
Still, if you want to say palsing doesn’t know the names of the
seasons that’s up to him to refute it.

-- This message is brought to you from the keyboard of
Lord Androcles, Zeroth Earl of Medway