 | Phoenix44 on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
 | saighdear on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
| saighdear on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
 | energywise on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
 | brianrlcatt on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
| saighdear on Swiss parliament snubs Europea… |
| saighdear on Suggestions-50 |
 | oldbrew on Exploding nova alert |
| oldbrew on Suggestions-50 |
| Phoenix44 on Exploding nova alert |
| oldbrew on Why is June so cold and when w… |
| oldbrew on Why is June so cold and when w… |
 | liardetg on Why is June so cold and when w… |
 | stpaulchuck on New discovery reveals that oce… |
| brianrlcatt on Suggestions-50 |
This looks self-explanatory, so here’s the graphic…
[click on image to enlarge]
Tallbloke's Talkshop
My first impressions are that it is probably the moisture in the air. As the air moves from equator to pole it losses moisture and becomes a better thermal insulator.
Interesting observation though, I await other responses.
Outgoing long wave is greatest over the mid latitudes where high pressure cells are cloud free. Heating of the air is due to compression. in a descending air column. That heating and the associated OLR should theoretically raise temperatures in the mid latitudes due to a ‘greenhouse effect’.
In the tropics latent heat release drives convection and decompression that is associated with diminished outgoing long wave radiation. The heat and humidity in the tropics is due to the energy sink in the warm ocean, that warmth being acquired directly due to absorption of solar radiation. Might be interesting to compare the rate of increase in sea surface temperature per ten degrees of latitude moving from pole to equator.
Plain fact of the matter is that air moves. Its temperature is that of the place from whence it came.
by direct measurement there is NO mid tropospheric hot spot. Thus ‘greenhouse effect’ is moot. If you don’t have a ‘roof’ you can’t have a heat trap at some measurable altitude and thus you do NOT have a greenhouse.
Can we see figure at top right plotted to a single scale?
erl – see here:
Increases in CO2 can also be due to the carbon cycle e.g. from warmer seas.
No, DWLWIR cannot add to an atmospheric “Greenhouse effect” that doesn’t exist.
Simple empirical experiments demonstrate that DWLWIR cannot heat nor slow the cooling rate of water free to evaporatively cool. That’s 71% of the planet’s surface ruled out of this fictional mechanism from the start.
Second, the LWIR flux back to the surface is wildly exaggerated. Measuring within the radiative atmosphere is subject to “cavity effect” where apparent emissivity is far greater than true emission. (This is also true for emission from the ocean surface. Apparent emissivity ~0.98, true emissivity ~0.67).
Finally, never compare Lunar surface temperatures to Earth surface temperatures. When it comes to solar thermal gain, surface properties are everything. The sun heats the surface of our planet from below the surface. The sun heats the moon at the surface. Nothing meaningful can be gained by comparing solar heating of these wildly disparate surfaces.