How Long is Twilight?
Definition of twilight:
NOUN
⦁ the soft glowing light from the sky when the sun is below the horizon, caused by the reflection of the sun’s rays from the atmosphere.
synonyms: half-light · semi-darkness · dimness · gloom
So there you have it, in a word or three: “soft glowing light”
Do we live in a twilight world? Some of us do actually, for weeks at a time within the Arctic Circle and the Antarctic, when the sun no longer rises above the horizon but it is not yet totally dark during the epic Arctic or Antarctic winter months.
Why the question?
Well, as you may not be aware, the entire climate alarm scenario over the human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) is based on the entire earth living in a 24-hour twilight.
Shocked yet? You should be. The world’s greatest scientists have devised a scheme whereby the only manner in which our emissions of CO2 can be regarded as threatening to our very existence is by mathematically transforming our world into perpetual twilight.
Here is how that was done by two professors, Kiehl and Trenberth:
Source: http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/cas/abstracts/files/kevin1997_1.html
Mathematicians the world over can see nothing wrong with this because, mathematically speaking, it is perfect!
Input equals output, perfect!
Now comes the sleight of hand: Incoming Solar Radiation is indeed 342 W/m2 on average, but … we do not live in an average world!
We live in a world where one hemisphere is in daylight whilst the other half is in darkness and although the numbers can be added and divided by two to create an “average” sun, such a sun does not exist!
Why do we write about this?
Once you realise that the sun does not shine as per the “average” input, you realise that there is no need to create a simulacral phenomenon called the “radiative greenhouse effect” and without such an effect there is also no need to invent “climate forcing” by CO2 in order to make our world “warmer than is would be” – the sun does it all on its own!
To put it mathematically: 12 hours daylight + 12 hours darkness ≠ 24 hours twilight.
The reality of the world we live in is quite simply one of a continuous spending of the energy we receive from the sun and it doesn’t matter what we do with that energy, it can never be increased, not by water vapour, not by CO2 or by any other means. That energy can be converted or transformed, yes, but it can never be increased.
The actual amount of energy that our sun sends us through space is just perfect to maintain the world as we know it, with all of its weird weather, all of its storms, rain, snow, heat or cold.
Solar variations alone are sufficient to make the climate changes that we have seen over the millennia that we have data for.
Our world can not be made warmer than it should or would be by adding CO2 to its atmosphere, that would be truly miraculous.
Now that you know why climate alarm over the emissions of human CO2 is based on a sleight of hand the time has come to stand up and be counted to stop the erosion of your freedom.
Thank you.
Hans Schreuder and Joe Postma
10 January 2019
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. Telephone: Calls from within the UK: 020 7419 5027. International dialling: (44) 20 7419 5027.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
jerry krause
| #
Hi Hans and Joe,
I totally agree that averaging any sequence of actual variable events can never represent anything real. For the average conditions which result from the averaging process, as in this case, never actually exist. And that is why I have never spent anytime considering what anyone wrote as soon as I see this result, to which you point.
However, when you wrote—”Do we live in a twilight world? Some of us do actually, for weeks at a time within the Arctic Circle and the Antarctic, when the sun no longer rises above the horizon but it is not yet totally dark during the epic Arctic or Antarctic winter months.”—I question if you are describing (defining) a real observation.
You place the observer at a latitude where the observer is looking toward the equator, toward where the sun would rise if it rose. However, would the observer, looking in the same direction, 12 hours later see a twilight sky?
I have never been where the sun never rose during a 24hr period, so I have to reason and I get very uncomfortable when I have to reason because I have personal experience that I can reason some absolutely wrong ideas.
So this comment is merely to call your attention to the possibility that ‘midnight’ and ‘midday’ must still exist even if the sun never rises so it can never set.
It will be interesting to see what your response might be for I consider when you propose a perpetual, unchanging, twilight, as it seems you have, you are proposing an averaged result which does not actually exist. But because I reason this, instead of observing what is actually the case, I could easily be wrong.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
richard
| #
let’s see the same diagram but at night.
Difficult when the desert goes from 100 degrees to zero in a few hrs.
Reply
Peter C
| #
Does the desert go from 100 to zero in a few hours?
At Warburton airfield, Western Australia yesterday the daytime maximum was 44.6C and the overnight minimum was 32.2C
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Peter,
It seems Richard was wrong but I would have expected a little greater diurnal temperature oscillation. So I did a bit of searching and found the maximum temperature was about 10C above the average. And another factor is what appears to be average ‘strong’ winds near the summer solstice. And when I double checked I found a minimum temperature for the 11th to be 28.3C. Which gives me the diurnal temperature oscillation which i expected. But previous 30 days temperatures showed a significant lack of consistent temperatures for a desert region, which without more information I would not expect.
But I observe that ‘heat (energy) is ‘trapped’ (stored) in the soil.ususally limits the air temperature diurnal oscillation to 20C when the atmospheric dew point or clouds do not limit the cooling during the nighttime.
Have a good day, Jerry. ..
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Peter,
Just scanned the sounding data for Giles for 12/15/2018 to present and discovered that the precipitable water of the sounding can vary over a considerable range in the middle of Australia. And the greater the value the greater the surface air temperature. Because Giles appears to be a far distance east of Warburton and its temperature did not reach near the maximums of Warburton it is apparent the atmospheric circulation to the west is probably different. On a crude map with topographical elevations it appears that the surface from the ocean to the north gradually slopes upward to Warburton which could explain the significant winds observed. there. More speculation later, have to run.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Peter,
Go to http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/dwo/IDCJDW6049.latest.shtml and review min/max temperatures and sun hours for Dec 2017, Jan 2018, Dec 2018, Jan 2019. Not absolutely the case but clouds (lower sun hours) generally cause highest temperatures. Its amazing what one finds when one actually looks at a lot of actual data.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Peter,
If you hadn’t refuted Richard’s statement with actual temperature measurements at Warburton I and the readers of PSI would have probably remained ignorant of its existence and its extreme temperatures. But more importantly for me I would have never learned of the manned weather station at Giles where atmospheric sounding balloons are regularly launched. Hence, another Natural Laboratory whose data must be important to better understand the earth’s weather and climate and atmospheric circulation.
Australia, as we know, is a large continent surrounded large expansions of oceans and it does not have the ‘high’ elevations that the other continents do. And surrounding Giles at (XXX) is a vast expansion of dry land whose climate is hot and dry even during the winter season because of its latitude.
Because Giles weather station is manned, their observations (reported data) are unique. They report the number of hours of bright sunshine for each day. They report the fraction of the atmosphere’s cloud cover at 9am and 3pm and I expect they observe this on the hour but do not report the other hours observations. For I am familiar with the data observed and recorded at the manned weather station at the airport at Hibbing MN USA until it became an automated weather station. And I know these weather observers observerd a one-tenth cloud cover during the nighttime when I could see stars and the moon and no evidence (to my untrained eyes) of cloud. And I know that during such nights, when there was observed to be one-tenth cloud cover, that air temperature conventionally measured did not cool near as much as it did when the observers observed no cloud cover.
So, Peter, because you obviously are curious about weather and climate and live in Australia, I urge you to contact these weather observers at Giles to learn about what more they observe that is not reported in the daily summary of data. For these three observers in this isolated location must be quite interested in their work and willing to share what they have learned that is not summarized in the daily summary.
Then you might report to the readers of PSI what you have learned. And maybe put me into email contact with these observers if they are interested of such.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Hans and Joe,
For a bit I really began to question if I had reasoned wrongly. Then I remembered a comment one of my breakfast companions had made a few weeks ago. He told us about a picture his son had sent him showing a sun that was rising and setting at the same time. So I now know about an observation which confirms the validity of what I had only reasoned before.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply