Bad news for Climate Change.

a reply to: Phage

The formula for tidal force is a bit more complex than that though.

No, it's not. F=ma.

Just because it's difficult to account for all forces, does not mean F=ma does not apply.

F=ma. Period.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

You will need a lot of vectors for all the different forces, masses and acceleration in terms of tidal pull of the ocean by the sun and moon as well as the Coriolis effects(ie tides have much bigger swings the further one is from the equator). Furthermore you need to take account topography features that enhance the tidal waves that will cause one area to have a much bigger tidal swing than some where else at the same lattidude.

It is a difficult linear algebra/differential equation problem, to claim F=ma...problem solved! is outrageous.

a reply to: jrod

Yes, you will. Please show me where I said otherwise.

Once you have all those force vectors, though, the solution is still F=ma. Period. People apparently have a problem with physics and they prefer to try and twist my words rather than state they don't believe in physics. If that is your position, that the laws of physics don't apply because they are hard, then there really is nothing else you can add to this discussion.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Topography adds another variable....

a reply to: jrod

Google Lord Kelvins analog tide predicting computer and educate yourself further.

a reply to: NorthernLites

Ok dude.

How much sea time do you have?

I can promise you understanding tides and ocean currents have been a vital part of my life. I find it amusing yet sad that some armchair expert one up me on my maritime knowledge and experience.

a reply to: jrod

Ok dude.

There you go, trying to label and oppress me by assuming my gender. Get real and tell me how Lord Kelvins analog tide predicting machine worked why don't you? Doubt you ever heard of it.

You guys are way over my head. I dont' understand a lot of things, like Accounting, Algebra, Physics etc. I am well read and fairly intelligent, I mean I own my own business. But I need some summaries by some actual scientists...However the republicans on this thread will tell me all scientists are in on some big conspiracy and then spout more physics at me. LOL

So...NASA? nah, they're in on it too they say.

a reply to: NorthernLites

That old machine is accurate for general but was still prone to errors. It was based on observations of previous tides with respect to the phase of the moon. Essentially it was using a sine wave with variable amplitudes that took into account the moon phase and time of year to predict tides with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

As for being called dude....it is not necessarily a gender specific term but you are just posting here to 'win' the debate without actually adding anything to it.

a reply to: jrod

dude do͞od
NORTH AMERICAN informal noun

1. a man; a guy. "if some dude smacked me, I'd smack him back"

BTW, not interested in trying to win an argument with a rapid climate alarmist. Interested in seeing how they try to justify their position, and to let others see the failures of their logic.

a reply to: NorthernLites

Yet you offer nothing to counter the reality of human induced climate change. As for the word dude....i grew up surfing dude.

Also they style of your writing suggests you are a male but that is beside the point...it is dribble that you are using to drown out meaningful discussion, in other words you are diluting the topic.

Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Back to the topic:

April 2018 was the 3rd Warmest on Record for the Globe

April was the 400th Consecutive Month World Warmer than 20th Century Average

Bad news for the world.

The question is when are folk like NorthernLites will stop denying science and reality.

a reply to: jrod

Back to the topic it is.

Did You Know the Greatest Two-Year Global Cooling Event Just Took Place?

Would it surprise you to learn the greatest global two-year cooling event of the last century just occurred? From February 2016 to February 2018 (the latest month available) global average temperatures dropped 0.56°C. You have to go back to 1982-84 for the next biggest two-year drop, 0.47°C—also during the global warming era. All the data in this essay come from GISTEMP Team, 2018: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP). NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (dataset accessed 2018-04-11 at data.giss.nasa.gov...). This is the standard source used in most journalistic reporting of global average temperatures.

The 2016-18 Big Chill was composed of two Little Chills, the biggest five month drop ever (February to June 2016) and the fourth biggest (February to June 2017). A similar event from February to June 2018 would bring global average temperatures below the 1980s average. February 2018 was colder than February 1998. If someone is tempted to argue that the reason for recent record cooling periods is that global temperatures are getting more volatile, it's not true. The volatility of monthly global average temperatures since 2000 is only two-thirds what it was from 1880 to 1999.

www.realclearmarkets.com...

"I'm not a climate scientist, but I know what bogus arguments look like --- and I can't think of a single climate skeptic who isn't arguing in bad faith."
"But that doesn't change the reality that the axis of climate evil is now firmly in control of U.S. policy, and the world may never recover."

quotes: New York Times columnist, Paul Krugman- "The axis of climate evil" - August 12, 2017

Source:

www.post-gazette.com...

a reply to: NorthernLites

Realclearmarkets is a biased site known for biased, misleading and at times false information.

That 'story' was already discussed here....

April 2018 was the 3rd warmest we have recorded....

a reply to: jrod

Link to where the story was discussed here?

No one doubts the climate is changing. That's why it's called "climate," not "stasis."

"The race to save Arctic cities as permafrost melts"

Source of news article:

www.msn.com...

What is it called when record low temperatures happen all over the Earth?

It's not called anything, it's just ignored. They only want to point out the record high temperatures, for some reason...

a reply to: jrod

can you explain what made the US have such a cold April, yet the rest of the world was so warm?

originally posted by: turbonium1
What is it called when record low temperatures happen all over the Earth?

It's not called anything, it's just ignored. They only want to point out the record high temperatures, for some reason...

That's not happening.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: jrod

can you explain what made the US have such a cold April, yet the rest of the world was so warm?

Temperature differential defines to a large extent the jet stream and the boundaries between hot and cold.

When the temperature differential is not so great, the boundaries move around more. That's why you get these polar vortexes and blobs of cold, where everywhere else is warmer.