Pluto and Surface Air Pressure

Could you define the terms in your equations here ... or a citation would be fine ...




barf2.gif

 
No evidence for Earth......because the Jews.

Pussy.



So, if temperature is correlated with air pressure at a given altitude, tell us, are all barometers precisely at sea level?

LOL!!!

And clearly since they are on land they are NOT at sea level.... then the air pressure recorded as SURFACE AIR PRESSURE is in fact correlated with temperature per the above equation.


Because h is not zero... it may be 2 feet, but it is not zero...


And so, since air pressure is correlated with temperature from 0.000000000000001 mm to the top of the atmosphere....

HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION THAT, SOMEHOW, MAGICALLY, at PRECISELY SEA LEVEL, air pressure "flips" and becomes inversely correlated with temperature....???


Does it bother you that, your position, that SAP on Earth is inversely correlated with temp, is 180 degrees from EVERY OTHER FORM OF AIR PRESSURE

air in rigid container
air in tire or balloon
SAP on Mars
SAP on Pluto
SAP during Jurassic on Earth
air at every altitude above ZERO on Earth



LOL!!!
 
So, if temperature is correlated with air pressure at a given altitude, tell us, are all barometers precisely at sea level?

LOL!!!

And clearly since they are on land they are NOT at sea level.... then the air pressure recorded as SURFACE AIR PRESSURE is in fact correlated with temperature per the above equation.


Because h is not zero... it may be 2 feet, but it is not zero...


And so, since air pressure is correlated with temperature from 0.000000000000001 mm to the top of the atmosphere....

HOW DO YOU EXPLAIN YOUR POSITION THAT, SOMEHOW, MAGICALLY, at PRECISELY SEA LEVEL, air pressure "flips" and becomes inversely correlated with temperature....???


Does it bother you that, your position, that SAP on Earth is inversely correlated with temp, is 180 degrees from EVERY OTHER FORM OF AIR PRESSURE

air in rigid container
air in tire or balloon
SAP on Mars
SAP on Pluto
SAP during Jurassic on Earth
air at every altitude above ZERO on Earth



LOL!!!

Does it bother you that, your position, that SAP on Earth is inversely correlated with temp, is 180 degrees from EVERY OTHER FORM OF AIR PRESSURE

You have sources that agree with your claim?
You have sources that say higher temperatures mean higher SAP?
On Earth? Now?
Post them already, you daft twat.

Or run away whining, again, pussy.
 
Does it bother you that, your position, that SAP on Earth is inversely correlated with temp, is 180 degrees from EVERY OTHER FORM OF AIR PRESSURE

You have sources that agree with your claim?
You have sources that say higher temperatures mean higher SAP?
On Earth? Now?
Post them already, you daft twat.

Or run away whining, again, pussy.


LOL!!!

All of that is already posted.

Your argument is pathetically laughable and based on one fudge job by WU.

Every other form of air pressure is correlated with temp, and as the taxpayer funded Co2 FRAUD faux skeptic you are, you cling to that one piece of fudge and resort to bathroom talk like your pal Ding.
 
LOL!!!

All of that is already posted.

Your argument is pathetically laughable and based on one fudge job by WU.

Every other form of air pressure is correlated with temp, and as the taxpayer funded Co2 FRAUD faux skeptic you are, you cling to that one piece of fudge and resort to bathroom talk like your pal Ding.
When you fart does that increase SAP?
 
You, the American Taxpayer, pay Ding and Toddster to "practice climate science."
 
LOL!!!

All of that is already posted.

Your argument is pathetically laughable and based on one fudge job by WU.

Every other form of air pressure is correlated with temp, and as the taxpayer funded Co2 FRAUD faux skeptic you are, you cling to that one piece of fudge and resort to bathroom talk like your pal Ding.

No, you have posted no evidence that today, on Earth, higher temperatures mean higher SAP.

Pussy.
 
Temperature is a constant -55ºC between 8km and 20 km ... above that, temperature increases with altitude ...

Someone doesn't understand the Barometric Formula ... c.f. Lapse rate - Wikipedia

"Unlike the idealized [International Standard Atmosphere], the temperature of the actual atmosphere does not always fall at a uniform rate with height. For example, there can be an inversion layer in which the temperature increases with altitude." ... as well the pseudo-adiabatic process ...
 
Temperature is a constant -55ºC between 8km and 20 km ... above that, temperature increases with altitude ...

Someone doesn't understand the Barometric Formula ... c.f. Lapse rate - Wikipedia

"Unlike the idealized [International Standard Atmosphere], the temperature of the actual atmosphere does not always fall at a uniform rate with height. For example, there can be an inversion layer in which the temperature increases with altitude." ... as well the pseudo-adiabatic process ...

Someone doesn't understand a lot of things, but it's not his fault.
The Jews fire beams of charged particles into EMH's brain while he sleeps.
It's not easy, the target is so small. You have to admire the skill they use to do it.
 
Temperature is a constant -55ºC between 8km and 20 km ... above that, temperature increases with altitude ...

Someone doesn't understand the Barometric Formula ... c.f. Lapse rate - Wikipedia

"Unlike the idealized [International Standard Atmosphere], the temperature of the actual atmosphere does not always fall at a uniform rate with height. For example, there can be an inversion layer in which the temperature increases with altitude." ... as well the pseudo-adiabatic process ...
I'm having a really hard time with all this discussion on temperature when it is density of the fluid composition that is the primary component of the fluid weight of the atmospheric column. As a completion engineer it's fluid weight adjusted for temperature and pressure that determines the hydrostatic weight of the column of fluid. The atmosphere is no different. The dominant component is fluid weight or density.
 
I'm having a really hard time with all this discussion on temperature when it is density of the fluid composition that is the primary component of the fluid weight of the atmospheric column. As a completion engineer it's fluid weight adjusted for temperature and pressure that determines the hydrostatic weight of the column of fluid. The atmosphere is no different. The dominant component is fluid weight or density.

What definition of "weight" are you using? ... a quick Google search for "fluid weight" turns in diet and weight loss websites ...

Do you mean fluid pressure? ... or specific weight? ... air pressure is the fluid pressure of the air ... usually defined as the weight of the air column above the surface in question ... as in "pounds per square inch" - there are 14.7 pounds of air above a square inch at sea level ... volume and density aren't involved ...

Here, educate yourself:

 
What definition of "weight" are you using? ... a quick Google search for "fluid weight" turns in diet and weight loss websites ...

Do you mean fluid pressure? ... or specific weight? ... air pressure is the fluid pressure of the air ... usually defined as the weight of the air column above the surface in question ... as in "pounds per square inch" - there are 14.7 pounds of air above a square inch at sea level ... volume and density aren't involved ...

Here, educate yourself:

In oil and gas we use HH=0.052xPPGxTVD. So lbf per gallon. That gets you really close with brine but due to the temperature profile of deepwater wells we use a program that adjusts for temperature and pressure.

So my point is that it's fluid weight that dominate the equation. It's idiotic to be making the argument EMH is making. It's not a function of temperature. It's a function of density. Density is a function of temperature and pressure. But it's a minor adjustment. And when it comes to the temperature adjustment it's more about how different temperatures affect water vapor content rather than expansion or contraction of the gas.

EMH is a train wreck.
 
In oil and gas we use HH=0.052xPPGxTVD. So lbf per gallon. That gets you really close with brine but due to the temperature profile of deepwater wells we use a program that adjusts for temperature and pressure.

So my point is that it's fluid weight that dominate the equation. It's idiotic to be making the argument EMH is making. It's not a function of temperature. It's a function of density. Density is a function of temperature and pressure. But it's a minor adjustment. And when it comes to the temperature adjustment it's more about how different temperatures affect water vapor content rather than expansion or contraction of the gas.

EMH is a train wreck.

We don't use that in Atmospheric Science ... we use pressure ... do you understand what "density is a function of temperature and pressure" means ... f (T,p) = mass / volume x a constant ... that's the ideal gas law sir ...

Is the "pounds per gallon" of water the same at 18,000 feet? ... if I remember correctly, that's around 8 lbs at sea level ...
 
Last edited:
  • Thanks
Reactions: EMH
The Co2 FRAUD really hates two things - DATA and TRUTH.

It prefers FUDGE and LIES....

It relentlessly clings to one piece of fudge from WU and a lot of "hot air" about weather patterns that are irrelevant to a planetary SAP issue.


Issue #1 Mars.... very high correlation with SAP and distance from Sun, which is extremely correlated with temperature.


Seasonal variation of Mars' global mean surface pressure at five ...





This is ACTUAL DATA, and Co2 FRAUD hates it. It proves that a planetary SAP is very correlated with temperature... same as every other form of air pressure

in a sealed rigid container
in a tire
At any altitude in an atmosphere (the calc does not factor in weather issues, but is correlated with Temp, another big big problem for Co2 FRAUD)
And we know that during northern hemisphere winter when Earth is closer to Sun that SAP rises ... in the northern hemisphere.

Somehow the Co2 FRAUD has spun that into an "inverse correlation" with SAP and temperature.... which is completely refuted by the data from MARS. So so so it is just Earth....


EVERY FORM OF AIR PRESSURE IS CORRELATED WITH TEMPERATURE

The Co2 FRAUD wants you to believe that the only time that does not hold is.... just on Earth, not Mars or Pluto.... at precisely sea level, and not a micromillimeter above... the relationship between temperature and air pressure flips over and becomes inversely correlated...

and you the American taxpayer paid them to think that bullshit up to go along with WU's fudge....
 
The Co2 FRAUD really hates two things - DATA and TRUTH.

It prefers FUDGE and LIES....

It relentlessly clings to one piece of fudge from WU and a lot of "hot air" about weather patterns that are irrelevant to a planetary SAP issue.


Issue #1 Mars.... very high correlation with SAP and distance from Sun, which is extremely correlated with temperature.


Seasonal variation of Mars' global mean surface pressure at five ...' global mean surface pressure at five ...





This is ACTUAL DATA, and Co2 FRAUD hates it. It proves that a planetary SAP is very correlated with temperature... same as every other form of air pressure

in a sealed rigid container
in a tire
At any altitude in an atmosphere (the calc does not factor in weather issues, but is correlated with Temp, another big big problem for Co2 FRAUD)
And we know that during northern hemisphere winter when Earth is closer to Sun that SAP rises ... in the northern hemisphere.

Somehow the Co2 FRAUD has spun that into an "inverse correlation" with SAP and temperature.... which is completely refuted by the data from MARS. So so so it is just Earth....


EVERY FORM OF AIR PRESSURE IS CORRELATED WITH TEMPERATURE

The Co2 FRAUD wants you to believe that the only time that does not hold is.... just on Earth, not Mars or Pluto.... at precisely sea level, and not a micromillimeter above... the relationship between temperature and air pressure flips over and becomes inversely correlated...

and you the American taxpayer paid them to think that bullshit up to go along with WU's fudge....

Still no recent data from Earth to help your claim? It should be easy.

If more energy from the sun really raises SAP on Earth, SAP in the Northern Hemisphere
should increase in summer when the Northern Hemisphere receives more energy.

If more energy from the sun really raises SAP on Earth, SAP in the Southern Hemisphere
should increase in the summer, when the Southern Hemisphere receives more energy.

Does that happen?
 

Forum List

Back
Top