The Glacial-Interglacial Cycle is Driven by Orbital Forcing

[ReinyDays]

Do you think that you know this material better than the sources to which I linked?

I know this material better than you ... and am better qualified to access the quality of your Google AI results ... most of it sucks and the results are based on your personal search habits for the past 12 months ... stupid ... you just puke forth this horseshit like it tastes good or something ...

You offer as fact what is conjecture ... that's profoundly ignorant ... ding doesn't offer as fact what he knows is conjecture, that's generally considered wisjgw ... umm ... wictabr ... er ... well, one hell of a lot smarter than you, though I don't think he'd appreciate the comparison ...

My conjecture is that convection is more efficient at higher temperatures ... and this causes more average cloudiness ... which lowers temperatures ... which reduces clouds allowing more solar energy to reach the surface, raising temperatures, more clouds, etc etc etc ... oscillating back and forth ... no, I have no proof, but I know this is an active area of research ... the reason for the interest is this also explains Arctic amplification ...

Everybody has assholes ... everybody has opinions ... everybody has their pet theory ... if you took calculus in college, then you know the OP is complete bullshit ... Kepler's Laws are a great example for the student, every textbook has sections on them ...

Obliquity doesn't change irradiation ... doesn't change surface temperature ... doesn't change climate ... butch ...

 

[Robert W]

Obliquity changes the amount of solar radiation falling on higher latitudes. That will cause glaciation to melt and recede.

Are you teaming up with Ding to contend that the glacial-interglacial cycle is NOT caused by Milankovitch orbital forcing?

So you are persuaded by Milankovitch orbital forcing?

 

[Robert W]

Which weather service isn't taxpayer supported? ... did you ever find all that 19th Century satellite data NBCNews has? ...

Your questions are important.

 

[ding]

Changes in eccentricity are small and so this factor has a small, but non-zero, effect on the Earth's climate.

So slow, gradual and small. How does that cause glacial periods to begin and end?

 

[ding]

This tends to moderate northern hemisphere (NH) winter and increase the intensity of southern hemisphere (SH) summers. When the angle has rotated 180 degrees, these effects will be reversed.

So slow, gradual, seasonal and no net change to total annual irradiation?

How would this trigger a glacial period and end a glacial period?

 

[ding]

Larger obliquity angles lead to deglaciation. The

How?

 

[EMH]

So you are persuaded by Milankovitch orbital forcing?

Truth is, there is absolutely no evidence at all to back up any of the claims in Milankovich...

Milankovich was cooked up right after homO's "silence" to re-write North American Ice Age from 50 million years to 70k...

How old were the 2.5 mile thick glaciers covering Chicago in the past 20k-5 million years?

This is where the climate debate is now stuck. Every piece of land within 600 miles of a pole is in ice age, everything outside of that is not. Nobody has attempted to dispute that. It is the clear truth of Earth today. Milankovitch Cycles, which I call McBullshit Cycles, take a very...

www.usmessageboard.com

obama climate silence 2010 2012 - Google Search

 

[Crick]

I know this material better than you

Given that you are challenging a widely held theory without providing an iota of reason, I'd have to disagree.

... and am better qualified to access the quality of your Google AI results

You have not demonstrated such abilities here. You make large numbers of mistakes.

... most of it sucks and the results are based on your personal search habits for the past 12 months ... stupid

I was not logged in to Google. It had no idea who I was when I executed that search. Stupid.

... you just puke forth this horseshit like it tastes good or something ...

You just reject it SOLELY because I put it out. You have no argument. You're just bitter because I've made you look foolish so many times.

You offer as fact what is conjecture ... that's profoundly ignorant

Milankovitch orbital forcing behind the glacial-interglacial cycle is a widely accepted theory, not conjecture.

... ding doesn't offer as fact what he knows is conjecture

Ding offers as fact contentions for which he has no evidence. And he misses the obvious reality about what he thinks himself to be an expert. The oceans are heavily involved in D-O and Heinrich events and, along with plate tectonics, with the actual ice ages the Earth has experienced. But not the glacial-interglacial cycle.

that's generally considered wisjgw ... umm ... wictabr ... er ... well, one hell of a lot smarter than you, though I don't think he'd appreciate the comparison ...

When one of you realizes that the consensus opinions of mainstream science are the most likely explanations for how the universe works, I might consider ceasing to insult your intelligence. Until then, you reap what you sow.

My conjecture is that convection is more efficient at higher temperatures

Efficient at what?

and this causes more average cloudiness ...

Right out of AR2-6.

which lowers temperatures ...

A great deal of research has been done on the effect of clouds on climate but I see you haven't kept up with it.

which reduces clouds allowing more solar energy to reach the surface, raising temperatures, more clouds, etc etc etc ... oscillating back and forth ... no, I have no proof

No one would ask you for proof. They would ask you for evidence. Got any? And if you don't why should anyone - including yourself - think this is the case?

but I know this is an active area of research

Clouds and climate? For decades now. But, as I said, you haven't been keeping up with it.

the reason for the interest is this also explains Arctic amplification ...

It's considered one of several factors.

Everybody has assholes ... everybody has opinions ...

"Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one"

everybody has their pet theory ...

But smart people choose theories with the strongest evidentiary support. You don't.

if you took calculus in college, then you know the OP is complete bullshit

I took Calculus I, Calculus II, Calculus III, Differential Equations, Mathematical Physics, Linear Algebra and Advanced Matrix Methods and I know the OP is absolutely correct.

... Kepler's Laws are a great example for the student, every textbook has sections on them ...

The perturbations of the Earth's orbit that cause Milankovitch Cycles is the gravitic attractions primarily of Jupiter and Saturn. Kepler's laws won't help you there.

Obliquity doesn't change irradiation

What you NEED to say here is that obliquity doesn't change the Earth's Total Solar Irradiance and I pointed that out before you did and I have repeated it several times. It DOES change insolation at higher latitudes and that is the means of its climatic effect. I've said that to you repeatedly but you keep ignoring the point.

... doesn't change surface temperature

It certainly does. It changes the contrast between the poles and the equatorial latitudes. You seem to have picked up a mistaken concept. It is not necessary to cool the entire planet to put the Earth into a glacial period; only the higher latitudes where ice will grow.

... doesn't change climate

Yes it does. Ask any scientist.