Space Weather/Tropical Development Ahead

[loon]

I don't think I'd say Dr Tinsly is an "internet kook" as you put it. It appears anyway, he is well qualified to put out any info on space weather that he would like to.

"Dr. Tinsley has been actively involved in observational and theoretical research on upper atmosphere processes (Aeronomy) for more than 40 years, and has served on many national and international organizations in this field. In 1986-88, while serving as Program Director for Aeronomy at the National Science Foundation, he had the opportunity to discuss long-standing problems in atmospheric science with program directors in areas of meteorology. This led him to begin research on the centuries old question of the effects of changes in the sun on day-to-day weather, year-to year climate changes, and global warming on the century time scale. During the past 15 years he has published more than twenty papers on his developing theory of a mechanism for such effects."

Too bad that Space Weather got moved away from the "crowds" and people still come mess with the thread.....

cheers,
loon

[loon]

I see you are set in your convictions, I can honestly say I don't know any better either way. I, like you, do however find it facinating, but alas I do not have the knowledge on the subject to downplay his postings, or Mikes for that matter. Therefore I simply just follow along. I do like for anyone to be able to have their say if they would like to speak in depth on a subject, and of course the other side of that coin I suppose is your ability to have your say. At any rate, I hope something constructive comes out of this area at some point.

[kevin]

Albert Einstein said something like 'Everything can be explained simply'.

When someone is trying to appear as if they know something they will use all kinds of constructions. They will appeal to authority, and to conspiracy, and they will quote papers that are long and don't hint at what they are talking about. In reality they should be able to demonstrate HOW they arrive at certain conclusions about the atmosphere before saying what their conclusions are.

When Derek says that a storm is going to form, he may look at models that are chugging equations, or he may look at the current atmospheric conditions and think about past events. This is the conventional method. The peer reviewed and understood way. How do these people arrive at their conclusions? Are they examining a statistical correlation or are they thinking of what should cause a correlation and are seeking an examination of the data? I haven't seen any numbers crunched or offered.

[mf_dolphin]

Admin Note: Either participate in this discussion the right way or stay out of the discussion. I've deleted some posts this time, next time comes suspensions.....