Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Warming Southern Oceans; Fleming's right hand rule/Fred

Expand Messages
  • pawnfart
    Fred, Per Fleming s right hand rule: First finger - movement of the conducter. SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S) ThuMb - direction of current
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 1 11:29 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Fred,

      Per Fleming's right hand rule:

      First finger - movement of the conducter.
      SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S)
      ThuMb - direction of current (positive to negative)


      Let's break it down. Hold out your right hand so that your thumb is
      touching the screen, your first finger is pointing to your right
      parallel to the top of the screen, and your second finger toward the
      middle of the CRT. Pretend the CRT is a map of the Southern Ocean
      with the top of the screen the top of a circle with the center of the
      CRT the magnetic S. Pole. Your first finger moves with the EASTWARD
      current of the Southern Ocean. Your second finger points to the
      magnetic north per Fleming's rule. In this case, magnetic north is
      the magnetic south pole. That is because a hand held magnet which
      has a magnetic north bar magnet will point its north pole toward the
      earth's magnetic north pole, meaning that the earth's magnetic north
      pole is like the magnetic south pole of a bar magnet, as opposits
      attract. Your thumb, then, is direction of current, positive to
      negitive, a vector INTO the ocean. Take you time to think it through.

      Now, that means that the current inducted by the movement of the
      Southern Oceans winds and currents, generally speaking is moving
      EASTWARD, as defined per Fleming's right hand rule as a movement of
      electrons INTO the OCEAN. (That eddy by where B-21 and 22 broke off
      and there is WESTWARD movements is an exception and explains the warm
      anomalies there). Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way
      from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus clouds
      and causes a cooling IN THE AIR. Likewise, currents moving WESTWARD
      by the glacial breakup enhance cirrus, enhance warmer conditions and
      it has been show that that area has been almost 5 degrees C warmer!
      Since warmer oceans mean that the oceans have greater specific
      conductivity, that means that what electrical current is inducted is
      EVEN stronger, and explains the regional melting of break of of
      glaciers and the colder interior that has made the news along with
      the reported warmer oceans there, and when I say warmer oceans, I
      include the idea that warmer isn't just SSTs or sea SURFACE
      temperatures, but ocean temperatures running to depths.


      --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > You said: "It also means that induction that generally occurs is
      > stronger, and in this case is against cirrus formation--which
      > explains the cold interior of Antarctica."
      >
      > You lost me here. How does this relate to cold interior of
      Antarctica?
      > Fred


      >
      >
      >
      >
      > -- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > > SCRIPPS SCIENTIST DISCOVERS WARMING TREND IN SOUTHERN OCEAN OVER
      > THE
      > > LAST 50 YEARS
      > >
      > > Decline in Antarctic sea ice, carbon dioxide storage, possible
      > > implications:
      > >
      > > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
      > >
      > > Comment:
      > >
      > > As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial ice, and
      > can
      > > put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means that
      > > induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this case is
      > > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior of
      > > Antarctica.
    • fredwx
      You said Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way from the ionosphere s ability to electrically enhance cirrus clouds and causes a cooling IN THE
      Message 2 of 7 , Apr 1 3:04 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        You said
        "Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way
        from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus clouds
        and causes a cooling IN THE AIR."

        I understand that the greatest cooling was during the December
        through February Antarctic summer so wouldn't reduced cirrus mean
        increasing temperatures?

        http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/cold-science/2002-
        01-13-antarctic-cooling.htm


        --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > Fred,
        >
        > Per Fleming's right hand rule:
        >
        > First finger - movement of the conducter.
        > SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S)
        > ThuMb - direction of current (positive to negative)
        >
        >
        > Let's break it down. Hold out your right hand so that your thumb
        is
        > touching the screen, your first finger is pointing to your right
        > parallel to the top of the screen, and your second finger toward
        the
        > middle of the CRT. Pretend the CRT is a map of the Southern Ocean
        > with the top of the screen the top of a circle with the center of
        the
        > CRT the magnetic S. Pole. Your first finger moves with the
        EASTWARD
        > current of the Southern Ocean. Your second finger points to the
        > magnetic north per Fleming's rule. In this case, magnetic north is
        > the magnetic south pole. That is because a hand held magnet which
        > has a magnetic north bar magnet will point its north pole toward
        the
        > earth's magnetic north pole, meaning that the earth's magnetic
        north
        > pole is like the magnetic south pole of a bar magnet, as opposits
        > attract. Your thumb, then, is direction of current, positive to
        > negitive, a vector INTO the ocean. Take you time to think it
        through.
        >
        > Now, that means that the current inducted by the movement of the
        > Southern Oceans winds and currents, generally speaking is moving
        > EASTWARD, as defined per Fleming's right hand rule as a movement of
        > electrons INTO the OCEAN. (That eddy by where B-21 and 22 broke off
        > and there is WESTWARD movements is an exception and explains the
        warm
        > anomalies there). Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take
        way
        > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus clouds
        > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR. Likewise, currents moving
        WESTWARD
        > by the glacial breakup enhance cirrus, enhance warmer conditions
        and
        > it has been show that that area has been almost 5 degrees C warmer!
        > Since warmer oceans mean that the oceans have greater specific
        > conductivity, that means that what electrical current is inducted
        is
        > EVEN stronger, and explains the regional melting of break of of
        > glaciers and the colder interior that has made the news along with
        > the reported warmer oceans there, and when I say warmer oceans, I
        > include the idea that warmer isn't just SSTs or sea SURFACE
        > temperatures, but ocean temperatures running to depths.
        >
        >
        > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > You said: "It also means that induction that generally occurs is
        > > stronger, and in this case is against cirrus formation--which
        > > explains the cold interior of Antarctica."
        > >
        > > You lost me here. How does this relate to cold interior of
        > Antarctica?
        > > Fred
        >
        >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > -- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > > SCRIPPS SCIENTIST DISCOVERS WARMING TREND IN SOUTHERN OCEAN
        OVER
        > > THE
        > > > LAST 50 YEARS
        > > >
        > > > Decline in Antarctic sea ice, carbon dioxide storage, possible
        > > > implications:
        > > >
        > > >
        http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
        > > >
        > > > Comment:
        > > >
        > > > As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial ice,
        and
        > > can
        > > > put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means that
        > > > induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this case
        is
        > > > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior of
        > > > Antarctica.
      • pawnfart
        Fred: Again, what we are talking about is surface lows contrasting HP areas. Lows tend to have your fronts, your lightning, your places where there is
        Message 3 of 7 , Apr 1 6:13 PM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Fred:

          Again, what we are talking about is surface lows contrasting HP
          areas. Lows tend to have your fronts, your lightning, your places
          where there is negitive ionosphere to ground charges. In high
          presure areas the ionosphere delivers about 250 volts per meter
          squared from the ionosphere to ground. INBETWEEN are the cirrus
          clouds, and they have a VERY powerful GHG impact. Some of the papers
          I have read on cirrus clouds and the forcing involved are talking
          about differences over over 100 watts per meter squared between the
          area with the cirrus and high clouds and the low clouds. So if a
          forcing is consistant over a period of time it matters to SSTs (with
          emphisis on SURFACE) and to temperatures like the interior.

          Now, in response to your article, look at this figure from Keeling
          Whorf. Note that the period 1,200 years ago was a low period in
          tidal activity, meaning less hydrate depressurization. That means
          warmer oceans:

          http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/8/3814/F2

          Warmer ocean then and now mean that there is more induction against
          cirrus being sustained electrially in this middle area between storm
          and fair weather, and it amounts to a substantial forcing on the
          surface.

          Note that after the warming from the northern hemisphere,
          particularly where there isn't EASTWARD currents as much as w/ the
          Southern Ocean, the oceans at depths have warmed:

          http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html

          This causes greater induction and while it may mean cooler SSTs or
          cold interior, overall it has proven to melt these big glaciers.



          "We thought the ocean between 700 and 1,100 meters depth was pretty
          well insulated from what's happening at the surface and that it
          should respond more slowly than the shallow depths," said Gille, of
          the Physical Oceanography Research Division at Scripps. "But these
          results suggest that the mid-depth Southern Ocean is responding and
          warming more rapidly than global ocean temperatures."


          --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > You said
          > "Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way
          > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus clouds
          > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR."
          >
          > I understand that the greatest cooling was during the December
          > through February Antarctic summer so wouldn't reduced cirrus mean
          > increasing temperatures?
          >
          > http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/cold-
          science/2002-
          > 01-13-antarctic-cooling.htm
          >
          >
          > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > > Fred,
          > >
          > > Per Fleming's right hand rule:
          > >
          > > First finger - movement of the conducter.
          > > SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S)
          > > ThuMb - direction of current (positive to negative)
          > >
          > >
          > > Let's break it down. Hold out your right hand so that your thumb
          > is
          > > touching the screen, your first finger is pointing to your right
          > > parallel to the top of the screen, and your second finger toward
          > the
          > > middle of the CRT. Pretend the CRT is a map of the Southern Ocean
          > > with the top of the screen the top of a circle with the center of
          > the
          > > CRT the magnetic S. Pole. Your first finger moves with the
          > EASTWARD
          > > current of the Southern Ocean. Your second finger points to the
          > > magnetic north per Fleming's rule. In this case, magnetic north
          is
          > > the magnetic south pole. That is because a hand held magnet
          which
          > > has a magnetic north bar magnet will point its north pole toward
          > the
          > > earth's magnetic north pole, meaning that the earth's magnetic
          > north
          > > pole is like the magnetic south pole of a bar magnet, as opposits
          > > attract. Your thumb, then, is direction of current, positive to
          > > negitive, a vector INTO the ocean. Take you time to think it
          > through.
          > >
          > > Now, that means that the current inducted by the movement of the
          > > Southern Oceans winds and currents, generally speaking is moving
          > > EASTWARD, as defined per Fleming's right hand rule as a movement
          of
          > > electrons INTO the OCEAN. (That eddy by where B-21 and 22 broke
          off
          > > and there is WESTWARD movements is an exception and explains the
          > warm
          > > anomalies there). Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take
          > way
          > > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus
          clouds
          > > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR. Likewise, currents moving
          > WESTWARD
          > > by the glacial breakup enhance cirrus, enhance warmer conditions
          > and
          > > it has been show that that area has been almost 5 degrees C
          warmer!
          > > Since warmer oceans mean that the oceans have greater specific
          > > conductivity, that means that what electrical current is inducted
          > is
          > > EVEN stronger, and explains the regional melting of break of of
          > > glaciers and the colder interior that has made the news along
          with
          > > the reported warmer oceans there, and when I say warmer oceans, I
          > > include the idea that warmer isn't just SSTs or sea SURFACE
          > > temperatures, but ocean temperatures running to depths.
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > > > You said: "It also means that induction that generally occurs
          is
          > > > stronger, and in this case is against cirrus formation--which
          > > > explains the cold interior of Antarctica."
          > > >
          > > > You lost me here. How does this relate to cold interior of
          > > Antarctica?
          > > > Fred
          > >
          > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > -- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > > > > SCRIPPS SCIENTIST DISCOVERS WARMING TREND IN SOUTHERN OCEAN
          > OVER
          > > > THE
          > > > > LAST 50 YEARS
          > > > >
          > > > > Decline in Antarctic sea ice, carbon dioxide storage,
          possible
          > > > > implications:
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
          > > > >
          > > > > Comment:
          > > > >
          > > > > As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial ice,
          > and
          > > > can
          > > > > put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means
          that
          > > > > induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this case
          > is
          > > > > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior of
          > > > > Antarctica.
        • fredwx
          pawnfart said INBETWEEN are the cirrus clouds, and they have a VERY powerful GHG impact. Some of the papers I have read on cirrus clouds and the forcing
          Message 4 of 7 , Apr 2 5:16 AM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            pawnfart said "INBETWEEN are the cirrus clouds, and they have a VERY
            powerful GHG impact. Some of the papers I have read on cirrus clouds
            and the forcing involved are talking about differences over over 100
            watts per meter squared between the area with the cirrus and high
            clouds and the low clouds"

            1. If the cirrus clouds are decreasing over Antarctica then it stands
            to reason that more solar energy is reaching the surface and
            therefore surface temperatures should be increasing over the interior
            not decreasing since the cooling reported is occuring mostly during
            the summer months when the sun is out 24/7.

            More clouds = less solar energy reaching the surface during summer.
            Less clouds = more solar energy reaching the surface during summer.

            you said "As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial
            ice, and can put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means
            that induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this case is
            against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior of
            Antarctica."

            I say the opposite is true!





            --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > Fred:
            >
            > Again, what we are talking about is surface lows contrasting HP
            > areas. Lows tend to have your fronts, your lightning, your places
            > where there is negitive ionosphere to ground charges. In high
            > presure areas the ionosphere delivers about 250 volts per meter
            > squared from the ionosphere to ground. INBETWEEN are the cirrus
            > clouds, and they have a VERY powerful GHG impact. Some of the
            papers
            > I have read on cirrus clouds and the forcing involved are talking
            > about differences over over 100 watts per meter squared between the
            > area with the cirrus and high clouds and the low clouds. So if a
            > forcing is consistant over a period of time it matters to SSTs
            (with
            > emphisis on SURFACE) and to temperatures like the interior.
            >
            > Now, in response to your article, look at this figure from Keeling
            > Whorf. Note that the period 1,200 years ago was a low period in
            > tidal activity, meaning less hydrate depressurization. That means
            > warmer oceans:
            >
            > http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/8/3814/F2
            >
            > Warmer ocean then and now mean that there is more induction against
            > cirrus being sustained electrially in this middle area between
            storm
            > and fair weather, and it amounts to a substantial forcing on the
            > surface.
            >
            > Note that after the warming from the northern hemisphere,
            > particularly where there isn't EASTWARD currents as much as w/ the
            > Southern Ocean, the oceans at depths have warmed:
            >
            > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
            >
            > This causes greater induction and while it may mean cooler SSTs or
            > cold interior, overall it has proven to melt these big glaciers.
            >
            >
            >
            > "We thought the ocean between 700 and 1,100 meters depth was pretty
            > well insulated from what's happening at the surface and that it
            > should respond more slowly than the shallow depths," said Gille, of
            > the Physical Oceanography Research Division at Scripps. "But these
            > results suggest that the mid-depth Southern Ocean is responding and
            > warming more rapidly than global ocean temperatures."
            >
            >
            > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > You said
            > > "Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way
            > > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus
            clouds
            > > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR."
            > >
            > > I understand that the greatest cooling was during the December
            > > through February Antarctic summer so wouldn't reduced cirrus mean
            > > increasing temperatures?
            > >
            > > http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/cold-
            > science/2002-
            > > 01-13-antarctic-cooling.htm
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > > Fred,
            > > >
            > > > Per Fleming's right hand rule:
            > > >
            > > > First finger - movement of the conducter.
            > > > SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S)
            > > > ThuMb - direction of current (positive to negative)
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Let's break it down. Hold out your right hand so that your
            thumb
            > > is
            > > > touching the screen, your first finger is pointing to your
            right
            > > > parallel to the top of the screen, and your second finger
            toward
            > > the
            > > > middle of the CRT. Pretend the CRT is a map of the Southern
            Ocean
            > > > with the top of the screen the top of a circle with the center
            of
            > > the
            > > > CRT the magnetic S. Pole. Your first finger moves with the
            > > EASTWARD
            > > > current of the Southern Ocean. Your second finger points to
            the
            > > > magnetic north per Fleming's rule. In this case, magnetic
            north
            > is
            > > > the magnetic south pole. That is because a hand held magnet
            > which
            > > > has a magnetic north bar magnet will point its north pole
            toward
            > > the
            > > > earth's magnetic north pole, meaning that the earth's magnetic
            > > north
            > > > pole is like the magnetic south pole of a bar magnet, as
            opposits
            > > > attract. Your thumb, then, is direction of current, positive to
            > > > negitive, a vector INTO the ocean. Take you time to think it
            > > through.
            > > >
            > > > Now, that means that the current inducted by the movement of
            the
            > > > Southern Oceans winds and currents, generally speaking is
            moving
            > > > EASTWARD, as defined per Fleming's right hand rule as a
            movement
            > of
            > > > electrons INTO the OCEAN. (That eddy by where B-21 and 22 broke
            > off
            > > > and there is WESTWARD movements is an exception and explains
            the
            > > warm
            > > > anomalies there). Those electrons that move INTO the oceans
            take
            > > way
            > > > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus
            > clouds
            > > > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR. Likewise, currents moving
            > > WESTWARD
            > > > by the glacial breakup enhance cirrus, enhance warmer
            conditions
            > > and
            > > > it has been show that that area has been almost 5 degrees C
            > warmer!
            > > > Since warmer oceans mean that the oceans have greater specific
            > > > conductivity, that means that what electrical current is
            inducted
            > > is
            > > > EVEN stronger, and explains the regional melting of break of of
            > > > glaciers and the colder interior that has made the news along
            > with
            > > > the reported warmer oceans there, and when I say warmer oceans,
            I
            > > > include the idea that warmer isn't just SSTs or sea SURFACE
            > > > temperatures, but ocean temperatures running to depths.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > > > You said: "It also means that induction that generally occurs
            > is
            > > > > stronger, and in this case is against cirrus formation--which
            > > > > explains the cold interior of Antarctica."
            > > > >
            > > > > You lost me here. How does this relate to cold interior of
            > > > Antarctica?
            > > > > Fred
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > >
            > > > > -- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > > > > SCRIPPS SCIENTIST DISCOVERS WARMING TREND IN SOUTHERN OCEAN
            > > OVER
            > > > > THE
            > > > > > LAST 50 YEARS
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Decline in Antarctic sea ice, carbon dioxide storage,
            > possible
            > > > > > implications:
            > > > > >
            > > > > >
            > > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
            > > > > >
            > > > > > Comment:
            > > > > >
            > > > > > As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial
            ice,
            > > and
            > > > > can
            > > > > > put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means
            > that
            > > > > > induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this
            case
            > > is
            > > > > > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior
            of
            > > > > > Antarctica.
          • pawnfart
            In addition to what Daddy notes, here is a link you might like: http://www.copernicus.org/EGS/acp/acpd/1/221/ ... VERY ... clouds ... 100 ... stands ...
            Message 5 of 7 , Apr 2 8:46 AM
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              In addition to what Daddy notes, here is a link you might like:

              http://www.copernicus.org/EGS/acp/acpd/1/221/

              --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > pawnfart said "INBETWEEN are the cirrus clouds, and they have a
              VERY
              > powerful GHG impact. Some of the papers I have read on cirrus
              clouds
              > and the forcing involved are talking about differences over over
              100
              > watts per meter squared between the area with the cirrus and high
              > clouds and the low clouds"
              >
              > 1. If the cirrus clouds are decreasing over Antarctica then it
              stands
              > to reason that more solar energy is reaching the surface and
              > therefore surface temperatures should be increasing over the
              interior
              > not decreasing since the cooling reported is occuring mostly during
              > the summer months when the sun is out 24/7.
              >
              > More clouds = less solar energy reaching the surface during summer.
              > Less clouds = more solar energy reaching the surface during summer.
              >
              > you said "As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial
              > ice, and can put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also
              means
              > that induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this case
              is
              > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold interior of
              > Antarctica."
              >
              > I say the opposite is true!
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > > Fred:
              > >
              > > Again, what we are talking about is surface lows contrasting HP
              > > areas. Lows tend to have your fronts, your lightning, your
              places
              > > where there is negitive ionosphere to ground charges. In high
              > > presure areas the ionosphere delivers about 250 volts per meter
              > > squared from the ionosphere to ground. INBETWEEN are the cirrus
              > > clouds, and they have a VERY powerful GHG impact. Some of the
              > papers
              > > I have read on cirrus clouds and the forcing involved are talking
              > > about differences over over 100 watts per meter squared between
              the
              > > area with the cirrus and high clouds and the low clouds. So if a
              > > forcing is consistant over a period of time it matters to SSTs
              > (with
              > > emphisis on SURFACE) and to temperatures like the interior.
              > >
              > > Now, in response to your article, look at this figure from
              Keeling
              > > Whorf. Note that the period 1,200 years ago was a low period in
              > > tidal activity, meaning less hydrate depressurization. That
              means
              > > warmer oceans:
              > >
              > > http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/97/8/3814/F2
              > >
              > > Warmer ocean then and now mean that there is more induction
              against
              > > cirrus being sustained electrially in this middle area between
              > storm
              > > and fair weather, and it amounts to a substantial forcing on the
              > > surface.
              > >
              > > Note that after the warming from the northern hemisphere,
              > > particularly where there isn't EASTWARD currents as much as w/
              the
              > > Southern Ocean, the oceans at depths have warmed:
              > >
              > > http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
              > >
              > > This causes greater induction and while it may mean cooler SSTs
              or
              > > cold interior, overall it has proven to melt these big glaciers.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > "We thought the ocean between 700 and 1,100 meters depth was
              pretty
              > > well insulated from what's happening at the surface and that it
              > > should respond more slowly than the shallow depths," said Gille,
              of
              > > the Physical Oceanography Research Division at Scripps. "But
              these
              > > results suggest that the mid-depth Southern Ocean is responding
              and
              > > warming more rapidly than global ocean temperatures."
              > >
              > >
              > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > > > You said
              > > > "Those electrons that move INTO the oceans take way
              > > > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus
              > clouds
              > > > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR."
              > > >
              > > > I understand that the greatest cooling was during the December
              > > > through February Antarctic summer so wouldn't reduced cirrus
              mean
              > > > increasing temperatures?
              > > >
              > > > http://www.usatoday.com/news/healthscience/science/cold-
              > > science/2002-
              > > > 01-13-antarctic-cooling.htm
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > > > > Fred,
              > > > >
              > > > > Per Fleming's right hand rule:
              > > > >
              > > > > First finger - movement of the conducter.
              > > > > SeCond finger - direction of magnetic field (N-S)
              > > > > ThuMb - direction of current (positive to negative)
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > Let's break it down. Hold out your right hand so that your
              > thumb
              > > > is
              > > > > touching the screen, your first finger is pointing to your
              > right
              > > > > parallel to the top of the screen, and your second finger
              > toward
              > > > the
              > > > > middle of the CRT. Pretend the CRT is a map of the Southern
              > Ocean
              > > > > with the top of the screen the top of a circle with the
              center
              > of
              > > > the
              > > > > CRT the magnetic S. Pole. Your first finger moves with the
              > > > EASTWARD
              > > > > current of the Southern Ocean. Your second finger points to
              > the
              > > > > magnetic north per Fleming's rule. In this case, magnetic
              > north
              > > is
              > > > > the magnetic south pole. That is because a hand held magnet
              > > which
              > > > > has a magnetic north bar magnet will point its north pole
              > toward
              > > > the
              > > > > earth's magnetic north pole, meaning that the earth's
              magnetic
              > > > north
              > > > > pole is like the magnetic south pole of a bar magnet, as
              > opposits
              > > > > attract. Your thumb, then, is direction of current, positive
              to
              > > > > negitive, a vector INTO the ocean. Take you time to think it
              > > > through.
              > > > >
              > > > > Now, that means that the current inducted by the movement of
              > the
              > > > > Southern Oceans winds and currents, generally speaking is
              > moving
              > > > > EASTWARD, as defined per Fleming's right hand rule as a
              > movement
              > > of
              > > > > electrons INTO the OCEAN. (That eddy by where B-21 and 22
              broke
              > > off
              > > > > and there is WESTWARD movements is an exception and explains
              > the
              > > > warm
              > > > > anomalies there). Those electrons that move INTO the oceans
              > take
              > > > way
              > > > > from the ionosphere's ability to electrically enhance cirrus
              > > clouds
              > > > > and causes a cooling IN THE AIR. Likewise, currents moving
              > > > WESTWARD
              > > > > by the glacial breakup enhance cirrus, enhance warmer
              > conditions
              > > > and
              > > > > it has been show that that area has been almost 5 degrees C
              > > warmer!
              > > > > Since warmer oceans mean that the oceans have greater
              specific
              > > > > conductivity, that means that what electrical current is
              > inducted
              > > > is
              > > > > EVEN stronger, and explains the regional melting of break of
              of
              > > > > glaciers and the colder interior that has made the news along
              > > with
              > > > > the reported warmer oceans there, and when I say warmer
              oceans,
              > I
              > > > > include the idea that warmer isn't just SSTs or sea SURFACE
              > > > > temperatures, but ocean temperatures running to depths.
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > --- In methanehydrateclub@y..., fredwx <no_reply@y...> wrote:
              > > > > > You said: "It also means that induction that generally
              occurs
              > > is
              > > > > > stronger, and in this case is against cirrus formation--
              which
              > > > > > explains the cold interior of Antarctica."
              > > > > >
              > > > > > You lost me here. How does this relate to cold interior of
              > > > > Antarctica?
              > > > > > Fred
              > > > >
              > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > >
              > > > > > -- In methanehydrateclub@y..., pawnfart <no_reply@y...>
              wrote:
              > > > > > > SCRIPPS SCIENTIST DISCOVERS WARMING TREND IN SOUTHERN
              OCEAN
              > > > OVER
              > > > > > THE
              > > > > > > LAST 50 YEARS
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Decline in Antarctic sea ice, carbon dioxide storage,
              > > possible
              > > > > > > implications:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > >
              > > >
              http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/pressreleases/gille_science_warm.html
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > Comment:
              > > > > > >
              > > > > > > As I have been mentioning here, warmer melts the glacial
              > ice,
              > > > and
              > > > > > can
              > > > > > > put cold capping waters to the ENSO cycle. It also means
              > > that
              > > > > > > induction that generally occurs is stronger, and in this
              > case
              > > > is
              > > > > > > against cirrus formation--which explains the cold
              interior
              > of
              > > > > > > Antarctica.
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.