Certainly the question is then over causal mechanism over
correlations--and to be sure initially I was incorrect in what I
thought were the mechanisms, and I am not even talking about hydrates
and phase change tempertures--but CO2 as a green house gas--the
dominate dogma of the left at this time. Yet, if you take a step back
from there the REAL question is whether or not human activity, by
burning fossil fuels, deforestation, hydrology changes and so forth,
is causing a problem with climate and if so what are the costs and
Here we certainly have said to you that we disagree with your causal
mechanism of the SE BUT that you have found correlative data that is
interesting and perhaps there is another mechanism?
Indeed, to reverse this, look at the reaction to Lindzen's 'iris'
paper by the warmers. Certainly Lindzen was wrong in his
extrapolations, BUT, his paper did indeed pick out the electrical
problem with cirrus behavior and a pure, thermodyanamic view of
things. The failure of cloud scientists to look at what was
correlated and opposed to merely what was speculated to be causal has
been the undoing of skeptical science on the side of the warmers.
Another example that is relevant here--that hurt my own thinking
until just recently, was the double dymino theory on the earth's EMF.
Tim Thompson, a NASA scientist, has a great online paper about it
Tim actually debated here and mostly at CNN. My view is he
subconsiously was looking at the same thing I eventually came up
with . . .
In any event, Tim holds for the double dymino theory of EMFs, DESPITE
the fact that it is not settled science, because much of thinker's
like Thomas Barnes work has been discredited or Barne's motivations
are religious. But let's just say there are a number who have failed
because they haven't followed the inferences and eliminated all
possible solutions. It really starts out with this 1992 research:
An abstract about measurable induction by ocean currents:
BUT, this is merely what ocean currents are like in the context of
the earth's EMF and ignores the "noise" of other EMFs--including the
huge EMFs by strikes that are short in duration and regional in
proximaty and scale.
The wrong headed assumption made was that the storm based EMFs
weren't the CAUSE of the earth's EMF and so were in line with it
qualitatively. This then is enough to explain the 'iris' from an EMF
induction standpoint in the context of the earth's EMF--because that
EMF is related to pulses of AC from the poles, particularly the south
one, which are amplified by convection and charge separation as EMF
cirrus enhancement works its magic. Eventually the wave grows strong
enough to have induction of its own and pass on its positive to
negative current movement--as in the source of the world's EMF.
This ties to yet another mistake--that being what amounts to small
current pulses from the sun in the solar wind don't have a climate
implication--because indeed the currents involved are small, BUT, in
regions of the poles where convection is weak, the start of a Doran
wave, where the solar pulse follows the tight isobars of the magnetic
poles--and commences it, can and does expand to the inducting AC
Doran waves which both create the earth's EMF and is the source of
larger induction fields that ocean currents move relative too.
BUT, if small pulses of solar wind can impact the earth's climate
perhaps a small force from the SE can be implicated as well. So far,
however, I am not satisfied with your reasoning.
Strike link is still down. It times somewhat with the Challenger
disaster. Wonder if NASA people are being relocated or something--if
there is a tie to it being down.
--- In email@example.com, foryeshua1@j... wrote:
> David, You say coronal holes are usually located at the poles?
> and South? Do they appear in both poles possibly at the same time
> both poles? If they appear there they could be pumping currents
> space into the center of the galaxy, and would indicate a possible
> source for the center of the galaxy It would not necessarily even
> a slower and possibly much less intense current generation that
> cause the SE I am talking about. If these holes on the poles are
> to outer Solar galaxy functions, they may be part of the system that
> keeps us in our rotating position in the galaxy. Walter
> On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 06:49:50 -0000 "David <b1blancer1@e...>"
> <b1blancer1@e...> writes:
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, foryeshua1@j... wrote:
> > It would occur to me that of all of the holes found in the South
> > some would not be capable of joining the SE because of their
> > direction of discharge, referring to the fact that coronal
> > have observed was expressed in large curling loops which if
> > might discharge their power in many different directions, (if I am
> > talking about the same phenomena you are referring to.)
> Loops and coronal holes are two different things. A coronal hole is
> basically where the sun's magnetic field lines open up. When viewed
> in certain UV ranges, they look like a dark area on the solar disk,
> can be seen here :
> http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/pickoftheweek/old/12sep2002/index.html .
> Coronal holes are usually located at the sun's poles, but sometimes
> they can be seen at other places on the sun as well.
> When they do appear not on the poles are they more obvious in their
> affects upon earth? Walter
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]