Poor Debater
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2015
- Messages
- 961
- Reaction score
- 348
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Actually it is you who are misinterpreting what you're reading, even to the point that you contradict
yourself within the same post.
At the top of the post you claim the models predict the surface temperature,
and then you claim the models do not have the resolution to model micro climates.
Well which is it?
Both are true, and are not contradictory.
If they are modeling the surface temperature, that would be inclusive of all of the micro climates,
Yes, inclusive of, meaning an average of. But not necessarily modelling any particular microclimate.
but if they do not have that kind of resolution, then the models must be for the surface troposphere system,
Typical horizontal resolution for current models is 1 degree in latitude/longitude, which is about 70 miles on a side. Typical vertical resolution is 30 or 40 hPa. An area that large can contain hundreds of microclimates. But it is far, far smaller than the whole surface-troposphere system, which contains tens of thousands of such areas, each of which has over 20 atmospheric layers.
Everything is affected by changes in CO2. And the IPCC doesn't say otherwise.which is what the IPCC says is affected by the changes in CO2.
One only needs to look at the Radiosonde temperature near the ground.
http://texasstormchasers.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/2014-12-10_16-07-48.jpg
Notice the red temperature plot has a sharp warming to attitude, before it starts cooling as it rises.
This is because the air in the interfacial layer has several other sets of variables.
No, that's because this particular balloon was lofted at 6 AM in December, and therefore ascended through the nocturnal boundary layer: a surface temperature inversion layer that forms shortly before sunset, and dissipates soon after sunrise. If it had been lofted at noon, you wouldn't see that temperature inversion.
Last edited: