Global climate

A planet has a very distinct global climate regardless of its
rotational inclination (tilt),what the degree of inclination does is
determine the variations in temperature fluctuations at different
latitudes over the course of an annual cycle,the Earth having a mainly
equatorial climate does not see such wide variations due to planetary
dynamics whereas Uranus will see wide swings over much of its surface
area.

For all the billions spent on research global climate and the almost
insane attempt to make carbon dioxide as the sole dictator for global
temperatures it is comforting to know that the same scientists cannot
explain the normal temperature fluctuations at different latitudes
which constitute the clear relationship between planetary dynamics and
global climate.The attempt to explain hemispherical weather patterns
directly through 'tilt' is a waste of a perfectly good planetary
feature for all planets express either equatorial or polar climates
with one dominating over the other depending on the planet's
inclination.

What a wonderfully complex thing to add the various terrestrial
factors that end up as local weather but none of this can be done
without first acknowledging the modification which splits global
climate from weather using planetary dynamics.This requires
astronomers that act like astronomers for a change and leave those
arguing over a minor atmospheric gas to their own devices.

On Jan 19, 11:16*am, oriel36 wrote:
A planet has a very distinct global climate regardless of its
rotational inclination (tilt),what the degree of inclination does is
determine the variations in temperature fluctuations at different
latitudes over the course of an annual cycle,the Earth having a mainly
equatorial climate does not see such wide variations due to planetary
dynamics whereas Uranus will see wide swings over much of its surface
area.

For all the billions spent on research global climate and the almost
insane attempt to make carbon dioxide as the sole dictator for global
temperatures it is comforting to know that the same scientists cannot
explain the normal temperature fluctuations at different latitudes
which constitute the clear relationship between planetary dynamics and
global climate.The attempt to explain hemispherical weather patterns
directly through 'tilt' is a waste of a perfectly good planetary
feature for all planets express either equatorial or polar climates
with one dominating over the other depending on the planet's
inclination.

What a wonderfully complex thing to add the various terrestrial
factors that end up as local weather but none of this can be done
without first acknowledging the modification which splits global
climate from weather using planetary dynamics.This requires
astronomers that act like astronomers for a change and leave those
arguing over a minor atmospheric gas to their own devices.

Inane...

http://xkcd.com/231/

On Jan 19, 8:16*pm, oriel36 wrote:
A planet has a very distinct global climate regardless of its
rotational inclination (tilt),what the degree of inclination does is
determine the variations in temperature fluctuations at different
latitudes over the course of an annual cycle,the Earth having a mainly
equatorial climate does not see such wide variations due to planetary
dynamics whereas Uranus will see wide swings over much of its surface
area.

For all the billions spent on research global climate and the almost
insane attempt to make carbon dioxide as the sole dictator for global
temperatures it is comforting to know that the same scientists cannot
explain the normal temperature fluctuations at different latitudes
which constitute the clear relationship between planetary dynamics and
global climate.The attempt to explain hemispherical weather patterns
directly through 'tilt' is a waste of a perfectly good planetary
feature for all planets express either equatorial or polar climates
with one dominating over the other depending on the planet's
inclination.

What a wonderfully complex thing to add the various terrestrial
factors that end up as local weather but none of this can be done
without first acknowledging the modification which splits global
climate from weather using planetary dynamics.This requires
astronomers that act like astronomers for a change and leave those
arguing over a minor atmospheric gas to their own devices.

There is very little way of a forum here,at least as a place for
discussion,more like graffiti or empirical mantra chanting and given
the important of climate or rather,the enjoyable topic the subject
actually is,it is unfortunate that I have not found people who can
determine the relevance of introducing an additional orbital component
thereby displacing 'tilt' as the cause for seasons while giving
inclination a more suitable role.

The other thread on climate has no real content in it,it is more or
less apologetics for the 'scientific method' where everything is
directed by speculation and not a shred of interpretation and
absolutely no astronomical content even though planetary
dynamics ,their characteristics and distance from the Sun dictates our
planet's global climate.

So, billions and billions spent and it would be nice to see somebody
comprehend and explore the details which causes latitudinal
temperature fluctuations that compromise the seasons as a subset of
global climate.

On Jan 20, 11:28*am, oriel36 wrote:

There is very little way of a forum here,at least as a place for
discussion...

In your case, there is very good reason for this, because you never
actually discuss anything, you only lecture everyone on your very own
"special" view of things, which only superficially resembles
astronomy, or geology, or whatever branch of the sciences you decide
to tackle on any given day.

We all know that you don't understand frames of reference, which stops
you dead in the water when it comes to many astronomical discussions.
We all know that most of the time you reference pretty pictures as
"proof" of your latest theory, we all know that your math skills are
essentially nonexistent, we all know that you often quote the ancient
astronomers but just as often misinterpret just what it is that they
are saying, and we all know that you have zero capacity to actually
learn anything from anyone here, so there is really little cause to
engage you.

Many very knowledgeable folks here have corrected you, over and over
again, on a wide variety of subjects, but to no avail, you simply
refuse to accept anything said by anyone, ever. Discussions are back-
and-forth affairs, but when asked even the simplest of questions, you
just refuse to answer. What kind of dialog is that? I get more
response from my dog than I ever get from you...

\Paul A