Re: [Methane Hydrate Club] The Cause of Tornadoes.
- I drove 2 1/2 hours that day just to visit Norman after that storm.
I was visiting my relatives in Tulsa for a week and heard stories all
day. There are other aspects to it, like the so called urban heat
isle effect, that I beleive has an EMF aspect to it.
Anyway, just a small tiny point. When a storm front advances, it
advances toward a fair weather area w/ a fair weather voltage applied
to it. For this reason alone, the ions on the ground should net
positive. This attracts electrons from the lower clouds and
seperates charges inside the cloud and makes the upper clouds more
positive. Those changes then vary IR levels in the upper clouds
because of the attractive/repulsive dynamic between upper cloud and
ionosphere. That day, the dynamic was even more "charged" because a
ripping jet stream was moving from Lawton OK north east. Yet, even
w/ the jet stream, in the largest cities in the region, OK City,
Tulsa and Wichita KS, the LARGEST tornadoes all struck the southern
most aspects of the urban centers! Coriolis and a UHI explains some
of this, but not all. Further, rainfall studies pre olympics for
Atlanta noted not only the UHI but much greater rainfall occurring in
the southern most aspect of the urban area!
A glass church and essentially a rock like parking lot would probably
NOT be a source of protons, despite the fair weather. Glass, if I
recall correctly, can loose electrons, but not protons. I might be
wrong, but, again, I suspect that Walt is right about positive
currents flowing easily through the neighborhood and then above in
the cloud dynamic you have cirrus rising toward the ionosphere. All
it would take is a good strike to the church top and that would be it-
-the whole thing shorts out because instead of protons rising to the
cloud electrons slam to the ground. The cirrus become extremely
positively charged and sprite and elve activity simultaniously occurs-
-and all of a sudden the cirrus are no longer IR players but fall to
the ground as rain, vacuum affect gone.
Again, it is my view this is extremely related to EMFs and without
them the storm would not have near as much pop.
> Now wait a minute. Something that is releasing energy that makes a
> nuclear weapon look like a peashooter is going to be
> deterred/deflected by a small positive charge? Nah, I ain't buyin'
> it. Sounds to me like God didn't want that church destroyed, so it
- I am no expert on the subject. However I have read the Lindzen, Fu
and Hartmann papers and think I know enough to apply EMFs to the
cloud dynamics via cirrus IR forcings in a meaningful manner.
Even if high clouds lead to relative heat stability heat loss leads
to cooling, more dense and falling air. RELATIVELY speaking, the
contrasts create instability.
--- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> All clouds block the escape of infrared radiation. Net warming of
> below cirrus clouds would tend to make the air more stable, not
> Cirrus clouds are not very effective at blocking sunlight so most
> the solar energy still reaches the ground allowing heating at low
> levels to occur and thus rising air (as in fair weather). However,
> that air rises it now will be moving into an environment that is
> as cold at higher levels than without the cirrus cover. (Cirrus
> blocking infrared radiation as you said allowing the air below the
> clouds to warm). I would submit that this might tend to inhibit
> vertical motion, not enhance it.
> --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "Mike Doran" <mike@u...> wrote:
> > Cirrus trap infra red radiation. Underneath that means warming
> > a rising air mass and to the surface a low.
> > Fair weather allows heat easily to escape to space. Without the
> > updraft, gravity pulls the air down, with no rising vacuum impact
> > high pressures form.
> > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
> > > <<The issue here is cirrus clouds, because they vary upper
> > > atmospheric heat values bigtime and create movements of that
> > or
> > > instability.>>
> > >
> > > Just how do the cirrus clouds vary upper atmospheric heat
> > big
> > > time or create movements of air or instability?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "Mike Doran" <mike@u...> wrote:
> > > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., "David" <b1blancer1@e...>
> > > > > Well said, Fred. To make a thunderstorm, you need three
> > things :
> > > > > heat, moisture, and an unstable atmosphere.
> > > >
> > > > The issue here is cirrus clouds, because they vary upper
> > > atmospheric
> > > > heat values bigtime and create movements of that air, or
> > > instability.
> > > >
> > > > Doran waves travel much faster then a frontal system. They
> > travel
> > > > faster then 'heat'.
> > > >
> > > > A thunderstorm in Texas has EMF implications for one in Iowa,
> > > > hence convective implications. Therefore the daily heating
> > > > cooling has timing implication feedbacks, re-enforcing time
> > day
> > > > activity.
> > > >
> > > > But if a hurricane landfalls during the night, the Doran
> > and
> > > > rain pay little attention to what the ionsphere is doing,
> > or
> > > > contracting.
> > > >
> > > > We see what we want to see, hear what we want to hear. The
> > > is
> > > > to be able to listen and observe without losing your state of
> > mind.