Why is climate change 5 times faster in the North?

[trevorjohnson83]

I think this could be a clue as to why the heat from fossil fuels is collecting in the North, also a hint on how gravity, the atmosphere, magnetic spin of the earth are all connected.

"The troposphere is the layer closest to the Earth's surface and extends up to an average altitude of about 8 to 15 kilometers (5 to 9 miles) at the poles and 18 to 20 kilometers (11 to 12 miles) at the equator. Above the troposphere is the stratosphere, followed by the mesosphere, thermosphere, and finally the exosphere, which gradually merges with the vastness of outer space."

The atmosphere forms a shape that appears to be related to torque of the spin of the gravity field which also creates a magnetic field? They are somehow related I think.

 

[jwoodie]

The only variable you mentioned is heat from fossil fuels. Were you referring to direct heat from combustion or indirect heat from atmospheric emissions?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

I guess maybe the shape of the atmosphere reflects the extension of the gravity field and how much gravity field is converted to a magnetic field. So in the poles where magnetism is strongest the atmosphere and gravity are both influenced by strong magnetic torque?

 

[trevorjohnson83]

The only variable you mentioned is heat from fossil fuels. Were you referring to direct heat from combustion or indirect heat from atmospheric emissions?

direct heat

 

[task0778]

Why is climate change 5 times faster in the North?​

That's where most of the money is.

 

[Donald H]

Climate explained: why is the Arctic warming faster than other parts of the world?

The Arctic region is warming much faster than the rest of the planet. The rapid loss of ice affects the polar jet stream, which influences weather patterns across the northern hemisphere.

theconversation.com

Sorry for taking this spam seriously, but a good excuse is that it enrages the denialists.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Huh...
In combination, the equatorial bulge and the effects of the surface centrifugal force due to rotation mean that sea-level gravity increases from about 9.780 m/s2 at the Equator to about 9.832 m/s2 at the poles, so an object will weigh approximately 0.5% more at the poles than at the Equator.

Naturally I disagree with there reasoning but an interesting fact, the gravity field is stronger as well as the magnetic field at the poles then at the equator. I would start by using torque and a record player analogy.

 

[ReinyDays]

Huh...
In combination, the equatorial bulge and the effects of the surface centrifugal force due to rotation mean that sea-level gravity increases from about 9.780 m/s2 at the Equator to about 9.832 m/s2 at the poles, so an object will weigh approximately 0.5% more at the poles than at the Equator.

Naturally I disagree with there reasoning but an interesting fact, the gravity field is stronger as well as the magnetic field at the poles then at the equator. I would start by using torque and a record player analogy.

If the Earth didn't spin ... the Mississippi would flow north and empty into a greatly expanded Hudson Bay ...

"The summit of Mount Chimborazo in the Andes is the point on the Earth that is farthest from the centre [sic]" ... not Mt Everest ...

The force of gravity follows the inverse square of distance rule ... further away is less force, less weight ... you'd be closer to the center-of-gravity at the poles, so you'd weigh more ...

The shape of the atmosphere is a geoid ... which is irregular and depends on the density of the Earth below, which itself is irregular ... the closest regular shape would be an oblate spheroid, a form of ellipsoid ...

As far as the Earth's magnetic field ... my understanding is the "dynamo" model has serious problems, and remains speculation ... I agree there's really nothing else but that ain't scientific proof ... "a lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack" ...

 

[trevorjohnson83]

A rocky planet emulates an atom because it is made of atoms. Galaxy's despite big bang hype, have to be far away from other galaxy's and stars within those galaxies have to be far from each other as well as planets and rocks, all that stuff can't be right on top of each other like the molecular world where atoms are joined together. So looking at the molecular world as if it was the exact same as the universe is false. This will cause debate as to whether there is a nucleus to the universe? There has to be to keep a continuous background temperature and create the aether? perhaps the nucleus for a universe floats alone in the deep emptiness and vastness? not in a nebulae?

 

[ding]

Because polar regions warm more during interglacial periods.

 

[Independent thinker]

I think this could be a clue as to why the heat from fossil fuels is collecting in the North, also a hint on how gravity, the atmosphere, magnetic spin of the earth are all connected.

"The troposphere is the layer closest to the Earth's surface and extends up to an average altitude of about 8 to 15 kilometers (5 to 9 miles) at the poles and 18 to 20 kilometers (11 to 12 miles) at the equator. Above the troposphere is the stratosphere, followed by the mesosphere, thermosphere, and finally the exosphere, which gradually merges with the vastness of outer space."

The atmosphere forms a shape that appears to be related to torque of the spin of the gravity field which also creates a magnetic field? They are somehow related I think.

Gasses rise so it only makes sense that greenhouse gases go up, which is North.