Has anyone ever walked through a fog, or walked up a tall mountain through a cloud and seen these micro-droplets that the cloud is made out of? I think most of you have. And I have. And I’ve watched these micro-drops very closely. The great poet said “I’ve looked at clouds from both sides now. From up and down. But still somehow….”
I’ve walked through these clouds. The little drops don’t rub up against each-other if its static electricity we want. I’ve seen them. They keep their distance as if repelled by an “unknown” (ho ho) force. But the other thing is to be a greenhouse gas you want to capture that thermal energy and force it to drop lower
What greenhouse substance would be better than micronised water droplets to actually create warming? If no secondary force is acting upon them they ought to release their enthalpy and drop. Hot tiny droplets reversing the commonplace understanding that heat rises and in doing so acting like a greenhouse gas ought ot.
That would make micronised liquid water the ideal greenhouse substance. If the water vapour could release its energy of evaporation or itsenthalpy and the micro-water could drop down down down down only to evaporate before it hit the ground. Then that would be an idealised greenhouse gas because it would capture the thermal joules and pull them downward.
But thats not what we see is it? And if we don’t see that and the droplets suspend, could it be that they are in non-cloud form accepting electrical energy in an inbetween way? Neither as an insulator, thus creating stormy winds, nor as a fantastic conductor, thus solving the problem without drama. What if a column saturated air, without a cloud in sight, is leading to that sort of electrical conduction that creates heat.
But further to this, this is one of these special situations where I do in fact agree with greenhouse. For complicated reasons. I agree with water vapour causing greenhouse warming in the tropics because in the tropics a new parcel of saturated air doesn’t necessarily go straight up. But Cycles presented me with a situation of an whole column of saturated air that was akin to my model of the tropics. So the same assumptions would apply and we could pay some level of greenhouse effect in that situation if we aren’t being bloodyminded.
Why do the micro-drops suspend? See the whole situation we need to think far more deeply about. When I have to backpeddle, by my own admission, 70% I’m not saying that Cycles is 100% right and I’m 100% wrong. I’m saying that I was being blinkered and we need to think far more deeply about this situation.
We have to say that the water is suspended (if the droplets are indeed suspended) by electrical means. In every last case. But it can be particularly obvious in big black clouds with these huge juicy drops that they are suspended by electrical energy. Because after the first lightning and the thunderclap, often thats when gravity takes over and the suspended anti-gravity water falls down on our heads.
If airborne micro-drops of water actually fell in accordance with gravity, and yet caught enough energy to evaporate before they got to the ground then airborne micro-drops would seem to be the ideal greenhouse substance. They could drift down even though they were warmer than the air surrounding them. Are there even smaller droplets than those in the fog that act this way and toggle between water and water vapour? I don’t think anyone is looking. Tiny water droplets don’t seem to fall even on average. They defy gravity. White clouds defy gravity. If there wasn’t electrical energy involved the droplets in the white clouds would have to fall. Just on average and even if very slowly. They seem to be suspended by the earths electric field. Which means they must be ionised or aligned in some way on the molecular level, which means they could conduct.
I had always thought that evaporation was the ultimate air conditioner. Say for example if we spent a thousand years hydrating the continent. And we had trees around the water features and grasses throughout the inland. We would never get a heatwave. Because that hot wind blowing in from the north-west would pick up all this transpired water from the plants and there would be a cooling effect so that the temperature would likely never break 38 degrees. So in this situation the water vapour is a cooler. Definitely during the day it is a cooler. We must remember that the Siddons moon information tells us that we don’t have a heat anomaly that greenhouse is needed to fill. My step-daugters grandfather built a restaurant near Chiang Mai and towering above this restaurant is shade-cloth where water runs down but evaporates before it hits the ground. The refrigerant effect of this is astonishing. Its almost unbelievable. Like practicing witchcraft.
So the situation is that where a parcel of water vapour-laced air has special buoyancy the water vapour is a cooling factor. A refrigeration factor. But consider the tropics or somewhere that the air is already reliably full of water vapour? Then that parcel of air doesn’t necessarily rise. Or if it does another one just like it falls. Lets say we can break the ecological niches down to about 14 separate niches. My understanding is that the paleo record is telling us that when the planet heats up its as though the equatorial tropical zone is expanding and pushing the other 13 niches north and south, and up the mountains. Its as though everything is being driven by the tropical zones expanding and shrinking. If a parcel of water vapour does not head upwards its no longer acting like a refrigerant.
Cycles has talked about the idea of a whole column of saturated air but with no clouds as being this powerful heating situation which he says is all about greenhouse. If I’m interpreting right. Well you’d have to admit that if the whole column of air, and lets imagine it goes almost all the way up to the top of the troposphere …. well then the refrigeration effect of evaporation is going to be nullified just like my thinking of the tropics. So I think when this happens you get rapid buildup of joules. I don’t think its just about greenhouse. I think better conduction of electrical energy from the stratosphere will be a part of the story.
But there is this thing about temperature. Temperature tells us the direction of thermal energy transfer, and how much more energy that parcel of air can absorb. So that 36 degree air in the tropics probably has more thermal energy imbedded than 50 degree air in the Sahara. I say this because of the latent heat of evaporation. But the tropics can keep absorbing energy because of the lower apparent temperature than in the desert. And the desert heat will be lost quickly overnight.
I think its this schizophrenic function of water vapour that is driving everything. Notice that when the planet is warmer the severity of storms is less severe. I think thats the water vapour helping conduction of electrical energy so that the voltage difference between the ionosphere and the deep earth isn’t working itself out as much in terms of kinetic energy. So what I’m saying is that water vapour is usually a net cooler. But its bipolar. Its a bipolar situation and any runaway global warming could only be about expanding the tropics. As powerful as the joule buildup would be we are talking about a situation where even more of the planet is unlikely to break 38 degrees. Because thats how the tropics works. Thats how water vapour works. When the planet heats up the tropics don’t heat up. They just expand.
Understanding how the climate works both currently and historically means coming to grips with the schizophrenic role of water vapour. That would be my take-home story. If we are not getting this idea we are not really understanding the situation.