Carl's Climate Letters

Thoughts about temperature anomalies.  I have been studying Today’s Weather Maps virtually every day for the past several years and have become more and more fascinated by the kinds of information they provide.  As you may have noticed in yesterday’s letter I make a practice of comparing the information on any one chart with that found on others, to see if there is a relationship, and often there is, even when more than two maps are compared.  Many of these relationships have proved to be consistent, in the form of discoveries that should be of considerable interest to science if they were properly presented through regularly established channels. I cannot do this without some help, but can at least keep on building a case through this medium.

The most notable difference that could eventually show up begins with explaining the basic causes of the air temperature anomalies, both warm and cold, that we see every day. Every one of them exists for a reason, and that reason is not always easy to see, or to explain. I think scientists should be ready to admit that some current explanations are not really satisfactory and could stand some improvement. A case in point would be the major Siberian heatwave that recently occurred, but certainly there are many more like it. Where to begin? I think nothing could beat doing fundamental studies of the daily weather maps, the very same set that I have been looking at. These maps all represent well-tested snapshots of a particular slice of reality. They all contain a vast amount of information, easily absorbed because of the ingenious presentation, making them a great source for finding consistent relationships. As such anyone who makes the effort should find that they constitute a reasonable approach for uncovering deeper layers of reality. One particular relationship involves effects that are generated every day by high-altitude streams of water vapor. These effects are at times amazingly powerful as well as consistent in all kinds of different situations. They simply cannot be ignored, and yet that is what is happening. Unless you are reading these letters you just never hear about the regular way they are transforming surface air temperatures.

I have learned from studying the maps that temperature anomalies are always complicated. There are a half dozen or so different factors that always have to be checked for applicability. Scientists do in fact check them out, with one glaring exception, and often extend their investigations into possibilities of a more exotic nature, which is fine. Water vapor, the one exception, is commonly treated as nothing more than a simple amplifier of the effects of CO2, a substance that is very well-studied, and as such is considered to have no strictly independent effects of its own. I simply cannot agree with that attitude. I have been reporting many reasons behind this disagreement lately and I keep finding more evidence, which I will keep on showing, even though it is not always as easy a thing to do as I wish it were. Much of the evidence is not likely to take root unless the individuals who receive it are, to begin with, willing to spend a certain number of hours studying and comparing the clues found deeply buried in the Weather Maps. How many people are ready to do that?

Water vapor that flies around at a high level in the atmosphere behaves in a manner quite unlike that of vapor that lies close to the surface, or vapor in regions of maximum evaporation and continuous rainfall. It can travel to unexpected places in unexpected quantities, constantly releasing its immense power as a greenhouse gas while it does so. This simple fact, and I really do mean fact, is a critical component of nearly every warm anomaly. Moreover, when this kind of vapor is completely or nearly absent, as is often the case, cool anomalies are just as likely to appear. These things happen every day, in every corner of the globe. I hope more people, including scientists, will find this as interesting as I do, and can visualize the potential importance.

Carl

There is a nice piece of map study waiting for us today. I am going to turn it into a challenge that will make it kind of fun for anyone who has gotten familiar with how these relationships work and may thus have good ideas about what to expect. I’ve cheated a little this time, but have also begun to realize the potential for making solid predictions from a limited amount of information. This is a fairly simple setup for running a test, starting with nothing more than a regular image of high-altitude air pressure. Focus on the area in eastern Asia where you see a large island of dark red, and then, with the help of a few hints, see if you can turn all the associated features into a major weather story that is reasonably complete and largely accurate:

Here we go. That red circle must signify the presence of very warm air directly below, probably a strong anomaly in the 10C area. What else could make such an imprint? Just to the north of it, where the green zone is situated, you can see how the edge of that zone has taken on an indented shape that conforms quite well with the size and position of the red circle, suggesting a relationship. Each of the borders of the red and green zones should be home to its own jetstream pathway, and their winds should be reinforcing, so one might expect to see a strong current of jet wind to be active along the space that lies between them.

Meanwhile, the warm air anomaly we expect to see at the surface would have no reason to be there unless it was produced by a large and powerful stream of high-altitude water vapor, so that is something else to look for. It should be coming in from sources farther south composed of one or more large bodies of warm water capable of producing an abundance of evaporation that could be lofted high up in the air without being blocked by heavy cloud cover. For this particular stream location out in the middle of nowhere that could represent a challenge. The Caspian Sea is nearby, but relatively small compared to the ocean bodies that usually produce these streams. The red shading on the map suggests that the best such choice might lie directly to the south, which would make the Arabian Sea a good candidate.

We’re still looking at only the one above map.  What else can it tell us?  There is one more thing. All of the vapor in the stream we are imagining will have to condense at some point and precipitate.  The deep red circle suggests that a considerable amount of vapor in this stream has moved well to the north without being lost to precipitation before everything stopped advancing. Once it did slow down and stop it would naturally “bunch up” and by that means be forcibly compressed enough to reach a saturation point.  The jetstream winds we have already pictured are positioned in a way that would cause the whole stream to be fully blocked from further movement, making that general location a good place to look for saturation to develop and produce steady rainfall. Now we can look at all the maps to see how good these guesses have been. First, the anomaly one, which was easy. Note how well it extends straight to the south, which helps to confirm our idea of where the vapor stream must have come from:

What about our guess of the big jetstream wind? Any chance of a disappointment there? Of course not, or I would never have started this exercise in the first place, so there it is, exactly as predicted:

The precipitable water stream is next on our list, and it is every bit as strong as it would need to for such a large anomaly to be created in the mid-latitudes. It has up to 40kg of water in the center, roughly double the amounts of vapor you see off to the sides in places where there is no sign of a high-altitude stream in progress. The Arabian Sea indeed looks like it must be the primary source of the stream, with added participation coming from the Caspian, and maybe even some input from off the side of the big mass of vapor emitted by waters of the Pacific.

Many water vapor streams drop off a good bit of their load as rain along the way, but not this one, except for a tiny bit. We don’t even see clouds until the very end, and then the rains finally appear. One may wonder about how far north the stream would have continued at full strength with no wind jets standing in the way. The utter lack of condensation over the actual lengthy journey to the north is something worth thinking about. Another thousand miles of travel would give that same load tremendous leverage over the increasingly arid lands closer to the Arctic, perhaps leading to another double and another 10C of anomalous warming.

Carl

An intensified study of high-altitude water vapor should provide new information that would deepen our understanding of how the planetary weather system works, and climate too.  Could this be of any help in a practical sense, for purposes of mitigation?  It may only be indirect, but the knowledge gained could have one unexpected benefit, by revealing the true importance of gaining control over sources of methane emissions!  Currently, nearly all of the emphasis is on our need to control CO2 emissions, which is fine except that it isn’t going anywhere.  The political action that is necessary is simply not responding.  For reasons I won’t get into today, it might be easier to gain the political traction needed for dealing effectively with methane than CO2, at lower economic cost and with better chances for gathering broad public support.

Cutting methane emissions has one great built-in advantage because of how quickly the result would be reflected in atmospheric content. Methane in the air decomposes naturally in a relatively short time. About one-twelfth of what is now in the air will be gone in one year, continuing on at the same rate of decline. Since airborne content hardly changes over each year this means nearly all of the gas newly emitted in that year simply goes toward replacement of those losses. Theoretically, if there were no new emissions at all of methane, anywhere, for twelve years (which of course is not possible) the air would soon be fully depleted. Realistically, we could set a truly ambitious goal of a 20-30% reduction in the airborne level over a couple of decades with some hope for accomplishment, which would be far beyond the wildest dreams for carbon dioxide, and nature would pick up much of the disposal cost.

But isn’t the CO2 level in the atmosphere much more important than that of methane in terms of its greenhouse-type of warming impact?  That’s what everyone has been led to believe, is it not?  Yes, but for all the wrong reasons, and the numbers make no sense. I would argue—and have done so before in these letters—that CO2 and CH4 have roughly equal responsibility for the global warming that has occurred since the beginning of the industrial revolution.  Water vapor has still done most of the actual work, but it couldn’t have done so without first being pushed along by other sources of warming, in the form of a feedback.  Those sources included a whole host of things, mostly positive but some negative, almost all due to extraordinary human activity.  CO2 and CH4 are both a big part of this group and both stand out as positives. Why do I think their effects up to this date are about equal?  It is only an estimate, but there is a simple way to get a more accurate answer, which will take a little help to acquire.  In fact science as we know it has the ability to provide that help, if it is willing to make the effort. 

Scientists have already used multiple experiments and related findings to show that a doubling of the CO2 level will, entirely on its own accord with no feedbacks included, create enough energy to raise global air temperatures by 1.2C.  (That is the most up-to-date figure.  Older estimates have been as low as 1.0C.)  Why not do the very same thing with methane, and all other greenhouse gases, and any other stuff that may be subject to the principle of logarithmic effectivity, before dealing separately with certain key feedback phenomena? Why should those feedbacks, including the strong water vapor effect, all be attributed to CO2 alone, when their actual cause arises in response to warmer temperatures in general, not just to CO2 inputs?

The principle of logarithmic effectivity is a matter of separate interest. Will it always hold true, up and down the scale, for all greenhouse gases, over long stretches of values?  According to my observations from reading the Weather Maps, as demonstrated many times, it certainly does work for water vapor.  Starting with about 15 grams, all the way up to about thirty kilograms, every double provides enough energy to temporarily create an extra 10C in the surface air temperature reading of the area exposed, net of any other factor that may have an associated effect.  New evidence is made available every day, and any person willing to make a proper effort can easily see how true this is.

On the same basis I think methane would pull about 0.5 to 0.6C per double, well below the CO2 figure of 1.2C, but I don’t have the best data to work with. On the other hand there is very good data showing how much each of these gases has actually increased over the years since 1750, and methane is far ahead on that score, perhaps enough to roughly equalize the two in terms of temperature results. Currently they are both increasing at about the same rate, near 1/2 of 1% oer year, which will give CO2 an advantage over time, but will not change the past history one bit. To conclude, methane really does offer great opportunities for temperature abatement and should get much more attention.

Carl

Today, a bit of map study about the critical role played by high-altitude streams of precipitable water in establishing surface air temperatures.  We are going to zero in on a specific portion of North America and use temperature anomaly readings for this date as our guide to the effect on temperatures.  This selected region offers a great working example because it contains a long series of alternating cold and warm anomalies, all of them on land and all at nearly the same latitude.  See how well the borders are sharply defined in several cases. Here is how they map out:

There are six anomalies that I want to call attention to.  The first is a strong warm one over eastern North America, with a well-squeezed view appearing on the far left edge.  Second, a cool one covering northern Europe and a bit of Asia. As an interesting detail, notice how the Asian part makes a  pronounced dip that takes if well to the south.  Third, a warm anomaly covering much of southern Europe.  Fourth, a strong warm one that stretches from the Caspian Sea to the Arctic Ocean.  This one was featured in a letter earlier this week.  Then up close to it we see a cool anomaly that is smaller but quite strong. Finally, a warm one near the right edge of the map that extends almost as far north as the Arctic Ocean much like number four.  Now for a map of corresponding vapor streams:  

In case of each anomaly you should be able to detect an almost perfect overlay of relative vapor stream strength.  The four warmest streams are all decked out in bright blue with a dark brown fringe.  Their total water content (to the top of the atmosphere) runs from 25 to 35 kilograms per square meter, which proves sufficient to effectively raise air temperatures by 5-10C over normal throughout each of the covered areas.  The two cool anomalies both get that way mainly because of a relatively low amount of overhead vapor, as viewed in totals ranging from at most around 18kg down to lows near ten.  Calculations based on averages for all overhead vapor relevant to these locations on this day, which are not available, would presumably be higher than those numbers. The result is observed anomalies ranging from just a degree or two below normal to as many as ten.  A mix of clouds and rain can be viewed on other maps in parts of both of these kinds of anomalies.  Their effect will always be on the cool side, but not necessarily uniform.

The purpose of making studies like this, which can be done every day with similar results, is simply to show broad evidence of a correlation that is rarely discussed anywhere else. It should properly begin with a reminder that a significant part of the total amount of precipitable water that we see measured within visible streams on the map will surely be located several miles high in the sky, but not all of it. There is a regular portion that will always be found lying close to the ground, attributed to local sources of evaporation, and that will be true whether or not there is anything coming in via overhead streams that originated in far-off places.  I do not know of any source of separate data that would tell us how to make a distinction between amounts of “high-water” and “low-water,” or just what is regular for low-water. We can only be confident that the average amount of low-water in any one place or time will always be lower than the average of the two combined. The latter is actually measurable, just like average daily temperatures everywhere are measurable, and all of the necessary data has in fact been gathered, but I don’t think anyone has been doing it. (It’s on my wish list.)

Carl

Arctic sea ice is disappearing at a record pace this summer.  Please open this interactive website for a clear picture that is easy to follow with day-by-day comparisons to other years:  https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent/&time=2019-04-01%2000:00:00   Until a week ago this year’s melting progress was keeping pace with the decline rate of the three previous record years, but not doing any worse.  In the past week, as you can see, this has all changed, in the form of a sharp plunge.  The normal period of greatest declines has only begun and will last another six weeks or so. I would have to bet on 2020 remaining well in the lead at that point.  In the following and final month of declines 2012 proceeded to set a record that has held ever since, aided by effects due to extreme winds, and will again be hard to overtake. This year’s finish for the top spot in September should be a tight one.

The “advantage” that 2020 will have in the near future starts with the fact that the entire ocean is now being overrun by an unusual influx of high-altitude water vapor.  This is happening and will continue to happen as long as there are practically no jetstream winds standing in the way.  They have been disappearing as a result of changes imposed on the configuration of high-altitude air pressure readings, where the normal pressure gradients that house these winds have been substantially weakened in recent weeks.  This image is illustrative:

Streams of air bearing relatively high volumes of water vapor can now easily gain access to the polar atmosphere from both the west and the east without serious interruption.  They have no doubt already begun to add substantial amounts of energy to the surface below by means of their potent greenhouse effect.  This extra energy is being employed to both hasten the melting of ice and add to the warming of newly exposed ocean water, with a pronounced effect on surface air temperature soon to follow. On this map you don’t see much of an air temperature anomaly at the present time since all temperatures—ice, meltwater and air—are stuck together in a heat exchange at right around the melting point, with ice in control.  It will all change as the ice disappears.

Once the air over the ocean starts warming the stage would be set for regular development of a temperature feedback loop, making it difficult for jetstreams to regain full strength after the summer season has ended. The key effect of the loop is such that a little extra water vapor is always allowed to slip through when jetstreams have been softened up, and as the vapor slips through, regardless of the time of year, whatever heating it can add will contribute to even further seasonal debasement of the jetstream winds. Such water vapor intrusions next winter will of course be a far cry from the level of those now in effect, but even a little bit more than normal must have considerable leverage at that time of year, as noted in recent letters describing current events in Anarctica.

Carl

The anomaly described in yesterday’s letter does not appear to have strengthened today. The whole thing has actually shifted toward the east by maybe fifty or a hundred miles, and so has the large but weaker cool anomaly that can be seen on its border to the west. There is still a minor heatwave in effect because of the size of the anomaly, but nothing like the recent one in Siberia that thankfully has ended. There is one more unusual thing connected to this anomaly that is showing up for the first time on today’s 500hPa Geopot map, and worth pointing out. It is pictured here in Eastern Russia as an island of deep red that is fully separated from the regular deep red zone farther to the south:

This small feature does not seem to reflect anything unusual about the air temperature at that spot, which is strange, but it does correspond closely to a small circular zone of relatively high surface air pressure, as seen on this map:

There must be a physical reason for this connection, which I have not been able to imagine, but there it is. Something else about the high-up pressure island is just as interesting, maybe not as a complete surprise, but this is the first time I have seen an actual occurrence.  In spite of its small size this figure exhibits enough of a pressure gradient between dark red and light red to create all the conditions that are required for the generation of jetstream velocity winds.  You can see the actual effect on this next map, in the shape of a little horseshoe:

I have previously described similar winds on small islands broken off from both the blue zone and the green zone, but not the big red one. More than ever before, we now know exactly where to look for the location of all jetstream wind pathways, every hour of every day. They certainly do not meander independently. Rather, they are all locked in to specific pressure gradients, no matter where those gradients have been created. We can see where by glancing at any 500hPaGeopot chart that is up to date. When something changes the gradients the pathways change with them, and if certain of these gradients are missing so are their streams. If we then can find out exactly what is causing gradients to change we should know a great deal about what to expect from the jet pathways that call them home. Armed with this key information I plan to continue with my project that seeks to explain and demonstrate the complete operation of a major temperature feedback loop, one that is conceivably not yet known to science. The positioning and strength of jetstream winds is a critical part of the operation because of the direct way by which their presence meditates the outcome.

I think this loop may have been overlooked by science because it has the general appearance of something that only Rube Goldberg could have invented, using Star Wars as an inspiration.  All of the details that have been gathered so far have been explained in these letters.  My focus now is to keep on searching for more examples to use as evidence and also on exposing potential weaknesses that would need to be resolved.  The bulk of evidence used to date has been derived by making observations of The Climate Weather Maps, which is perhaps not a scientifically orthodox way of doing things.  That said, if the material substance of the maps is accurate, and has a story to tell, and if the story offers a viable explanation of extreme events like the recent Siberian heatwave, I can think of no good reason to ignore it.  

Carl

An interesting warm anomaly of considerable size has emerged in eastern Asia, depicted below.  It may have the potential to develop into a major heatwave so we will need to keep a close eye on it. The anomaly stretches from Turkey all the way to the shores of the Arctic Ocean in one large block. More than half of its area is unclouded, mostly the part showing maximum temperature strength.

Warm anomalies of this size are normally generated by a major influx of high-altitude precipitable water carried within a stream, so that is the first thing we look for.  No problem, as we see next, except there is one curiosity.  Most of these big streams arise from warm tropical ocean waters, but not this one.  By all appearances, from looking at this map, the main source of these vapors is nothing other than the Mediterranean Sea, with a possible boost from the Black Sea and even the Caspian:

Next question, is the Mediterranean, without major assistance, actually big enough and warm enough to produce the amount of vapor we see moving in the stream?  The standard I always look for is a minimum surface temperature of around 25C for generating such a high volume of vapor and also the heat energy needed to loft the vapor stream more than three miles high in the atmosphere.  That qualification has been met, although not by much of a margin, with both the Black and Caspian Seas being similar. The warmer waters farther south could also be weakly connected to the stream and some vapor coming from a stream off the Atlantic may also be contributing.

If this anomaly is going to turn into a classic heatwave it will have to pass two more tests.  The first will be to keep the existing vapor stream flowing for many more days without significant depletion of the current sources of energy.  That could be a challenge because so many of them look marginal.  The other test is met when the anomaly throws off enough warm air to have a pronounced effect on the configuration of high-altitude air pressure directly above. Just holding the pattern in place will keep its associated jetstream winds from moving into new positions that could block the course of the main water vapor stream.  The current setup suggests that the vapor stream is in control with expanding influence and should have staying power, creating the potential for development of positive feedback effects that could lead to a durable and still greater temperature anomaly.  We’ll soon see.

This is from a recent study: “Heatwave trends accelerate worldwide”  (ARC Centre of Excellence for Climate Extremes).  “The first comprehensive worldwide assessment of heatwaves down to regional levels has revealed that in nearly every part of the world heatwaves have been increasing in frequency and duration since the 1950s…..Climate scientists have long forecast that a clear sign of global warming would be seen with a change in heatwaves…..The dramatic region-by-region change in heatwaves we have witnessed over the past 70 years and the rapid increase in the number of these events, are unequivocal indicators that global warming is now with us and accelerating.”  https://phys.org/news/2020-07-heatwave-trends-worldwide.html

Carl

Friday’s letter provided evidence that current temperature changes in Antarctica at this time of year are almost totally dependent on changes in the precipitable water content of the air directly above the surface.  The data displays also show the enormous power of leverage that is involved when the actual content of this greenhouse gas is capable of being doubled over and over again within a relatively brief period of time and shortness of distance. Temperatures can change by 10-20C in a matter of hours and then by another 10-20C within one hundred miles or so, followed by a trail of similar changes extending for many more hundreds of miles. That’s what happens when you start with a content value close to zero and then have the flexibility to raise that value by as much as fifty times or more in one big long swish. Precipitable water streams coursing at high altitude are the one form of greenhouse gas that has that capability, and mid-winter Antarctica is the perfect place to show it off.

Water vapor is different from all other greenhouse gases mainly because of the extremely short lifetime of each molecule following its birth by evaporation, and also because its birth is so dependent on how warm that water may be. When the birth rate is high the molecules quickly start looking for less crowded conditions, the same thing all other gases are prone to do, but those made of water only have a few hours or days to get somewhere before condensing and falling back to the surface.  Other gases have more time to expand and can thus spread out across the entire atmosphere, which becomes their durable legacy.  As such no place remains where a doubling is ordinarily possible except over a time period of probably hundreds or thousands of years.  Carbon dioxide, all by itself, has added about six tenths of one degree to the everyday temperature of Antarctica, and everywhere else as well, which took 250 years to accomplish while making half a double. Methane has done about as well in this time by more than doubling.  They both are adding a tiny, tiny bit to those increases over the course of each year.  Down in Antarctica water vapor can add a full 10-20 degrees to a particular local temperature in just one day and then, solely by reducing the rate of infusion, cause all of that to be lost plus another 20 degrees in the very same place over just the next few days.  Here is a picture of the result:

Notice how there are either warm or cold anomalies of five to ten degrees or more over practically every corner of the continent.  It is like that almost every day now, with locations constantly shifting around. Every spot gets an infusion of either no vapor at all or just a small dose every day, thereby creating a running average against which each new day will be compared, sometimes one way and then the other.  If you go to the animated website from the U of Wisconsin at http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/mtpw2/product.php you can watch it all happening in nearly real time.  You will also see how utterly different the water vapor infusion rate is in the other polar region, where things have really gotten out of hand this summer.  Winter will soon be back and then we can make a whole new set of comparisons between these two special regions. 

What makes Antarctica so especially interesting right now is that nothing else is available to cause temperature anomalies from one day to the next. As mentioned before, all other greenhouse gases do not change. There is no sunlight at all and thus no clouds or anything else can exercise an albedo effect. There is no cold rain at all coming down, and not much snow either when it’s this cold. Surface winds have no visible effect on temperature here. The regular flux of radiation coming off this surface of pure ice is at an absolute low, never replenished or altered like all other surfaces are every day everywhere else. Water vapor is the only effective force of change that remains, so measuring its effectiveness is not too complicated. What I keep seeing is 10 degrees for each double, locally only, and only for as long as the increase may last.

There is one other matter of interest, where the Windy website https://www.windy.com/   proves to be quite helpful. Clouds are widely recognized for having their own greenhouse effect, but one that is very difficult to measure.  How might it differ from the greenhouse effect of the water vapor that all clouds are composed from?  In Antarctica some places are clouded over and some are not.  As far as I can see it makes no difference at all on the air temperatures below, for whatever that information is worth.

Carl

Antarctica is always a fun place to visit, especially at this time of year when there is no sunlight at all for months on end. It does get pretty cold, and in fact the record is around minus 89C, or -139F. .At this time of year there are places at high elevation near the center of the continent where the normal temperature around the clock is well into the minus-eighties for C. After many weeks of complete darkness and more to come what could possibly cause those places to become any warmer than that? Where would the heat energy itself come from? Let’s do some probing, starting with today”s temperature anomaly chart for this region:

What you are actually seeing is more than half of the entire continent engulfed by an anomaly ranging from 5C at the edges up to 20C in a few small spots.  I have checked out the Windy website, which always has current temperature readings everywhere, and found that one of those spots was in a place of very high elevation.  It read -65C, meaning normal had to be minus 85.  So where did all the extra heat come from, considering the absence of sunlight, and that all the greenhouse gases, except for one, are virtually the same every day.? That one exception does have good records on its own chart, so let’s take a look:

How does this help?  Well, if you get close to the screen you will see a circular shape near the middle that is shaded solid black, which means all of the area inside contains somewhere between zero and one kilogram of precipitable water (PWat) readings, if known.  More exact readings could be made on the ground, if someone wanted to take the trouble, but no one does.  What we do know is that a reading as low as 17 grams has been made at one location at a time of extreme cold, probably around minus 85C.  Assuming PWat would be acting as a mostly normal and yet unusual greenhouse gas, what would happen if, for instance, you doubled the amount of its presence to 34 grams?  I have often maintained that doing so should add 10C to the ambient air temperature, no matter whether the double were to happen here or on a sunny spring day in Siberia.  Then if you doubled it again, in this case to 68 grams, that means you should see a temperature gain of 20C. Perhaps that is what actually happened here but we just don’t know about the doublings. I hope some day the idea will be thoroughly tested, to see how temperatures change if and when four more PWat doubles, as mathematically required, would take everything past the one kilogram box.  This chart provides a suggestion:

Does minus 30 sound about right? Could that much total warming really happen just be doubling a tiny bit of water vapor six times over? It seems like a real possibility, from what is apparent according to the limited data right in front of our eyes. Antarctic temperatures are real, just as real as those in your own back yard, and real heat is needed to raise them. If PWat is not the source of that heat what other choices are there?

Now go back and look at the entire anomaly again, which clearly has two separate parts.  The second part, to the right, was also demonstrably caused by an infusion of water vapor as it sliced across an edge of the continent.  This time the vapor came in with a reading starting at 5kg, dropping to 4 and 3 and back as it did the slicing, all of which can be observed if you again take a close look at its downward pathway on the second chart.  Again there are two doubles involved in this part of the anomaly, but this time actual temperatures shift from minus 30 to a few spots as high as minus 10, while PWat readings are registering changes from 1kg to an occasional high of 4.

Today we have “traveled” over a total of 75 degrees with a total of eight PWat doubles. Temperature-wise, we are more than half-way “home” to places that have seen record highs of plus 50C on another part of the globe. Things are sure to get more complicated as we leave this continent and its present darkness but we must give it a try. What will be the role for the remarkable PWat greenhouse gas under radically different circumstances?

Carl

“Whys it’s so damn hot in the Arctic right now” (Vox) https://www.vox.com/2020/6/23/21300279/arctic-siberia-temperature-heat-wave-record-russia-fire-climate-change  This article has the latest numbers from Siberia.  It also has considerable commentary from a senior scientist at the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the U of Colorado bearing a set of explanations.  I find it interesting that he has nothing to say about any greenhouse effect from high-altitude passage of water vapor streams or any other features of the temperature feedback loop that has been described in these letters.  This reinforces my belief that this whole complex of ideas has either been rejected by the scientific community or has never even been taken into consideration.  I suspect the latter, which compels me to keep on making the case for gaining proper attention.

The first thing I want you to do is to take a quick look at today’s animated version of the globe’s Precipitable Water streams, as issued by the U of Wisconsin:  http://tropic.ssec.wisc.edu/real-time/mtpw2/product.php A truly astounding amount of content can be seen passing over Siberia.  Moreover, values as high as 25kg are seen briefly traveling all the way to the North Pole.  I wonder how long it has been since the last time this happened?  This particular imagery is also highly revealing about what a difference the strength of jetstream wind velocity makes with respect to allowing or blocking the passage of PWat streams as they make their way toward the poles in both hemispheres.  The jetstream image in the letter of two days ago is an ideal one to use for reference.  In the south only a few minor amounts of vapor can get past 40-50S, while the north seems almost helpless at stopping massive movement at any latitude, most strikingly in the run over Siberia.  Here is a snapshot of the results from today’s Weather Maps:

As things now stand, when water vapor of this magnitude does pass over the Arctic Ocean it has nowhere near the effect on surface air temperatures that it does over continental land.  Mainly this is because the ocean is almost completely covered with thick low clouds while the land has no clouds of any kind over the warmest region.  You can see just how sharp the distinction is by going to the Windy site at https://www.windy.com. The low clouds block a relatively high percentage of sunlight from ever reaching the surface, and what does get there is mostly put to use either by melting sea ice or by warming surface water that is still very close to freezing temperature and thus unable to give off more than a minor amount of radiation for greenhouse gases to trap.      

Let’s look at one more of today’s images that is quite interesting because it shows how the deformation of high-altitude air pressure in the north has reached a new level of extremity.  Not long ago we were noticing how there was nothing left of the “blue zone” over the pole.  Since blue zones, even the little ones, are always encircled by a regular jetstream pathway this meant there was one less pathway encircling the globe, leaving only two in place instead of the usual three (as we see in the south). Now there is no longer any piece of green zone over the pole, and as you may recall every independent green zone has its own encircling jetstream pathway just as the blue zones do.  So now there is only one pathway left that completely circles the globe, located far out in the red country.  At least that one is safe, I think.  But not very capable of producing strong winds, especially with all the crazy loops and twists we are seeing. Note the way it compares with the more healthy red zone pathway in the south!

Carl