Question: Someone recently brought to my attention that the sea level in the Gulf of Mexico is rising three times more rapidly than other places. And someone else pointed out that the sea ice extent around Antarctica is dropping rapidly. I’m wondering if and how these phenomena would fit into your geothermal hypothesis? – a reader
Thank you for your interest in my work and for taking the time to ask a very insightful question!
With regards to sea level increases in the Gulf of Mexico, the answer is, in all probability, YES!
If we look at some maps of the North Atlantic, we see that the thermohaline current “feeds” the Gulf of Mexico with warm waters from the tropical and subtropical Atlantic:
As per my hypothesis, greater global oceanic geothermal flux, indicated by heightened mid-ocean seismic activity, will intensify the thermohaline flow.
As a result, we should see more water entering the Gulf of Mexico, and due to the closed nature of that basin, should contribute to anomalous tidal spikes in that region.
From that, we should see a strong, and significant correlation between mid-ocean seismic activity and tidal activity in the Gulf.
As you so astutely deduced, we do, if fact, see precisely this dynamic playing out. Here is the time series of the global Mid-Ocean seismic activity:
Here are the correlations between mid-ocean seismic activity these tidal stations:
Port Isabel/Mid-Ocean seismic activity = 0.82
Apalachicola/ Mid-Ocean seismic activity = 0.81
For a system this noisy, and this complex, attaining correlations this high is truly remarkable.
When you consider that tidal variations are impacted a wide array of inputs, to include changing windspeeds, shoreline subsidence, dredging activities, changing sedimentation rates, jetty and groin construction, and changes in drainage basin discharge, finding a single variable (mid ocean seismic activity) that explains two-thirds of that variation is significant and must be explored further.
Some of the specious arguments that will be levied against the thermohaline argument include: “correlation is not causation”, and “changes in the thermohaline circulation takes tens or hundreds of years”, or “global seismic activity hasn’t really changed-it’s the number of seismographs that has.”
These arguments are all readily debunked, and I will continue to work to negate them going forward.
As for the Antarctic situation, that appears to be more complex, and I will address that in a separate email.
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.Â
Along the Texas Gulf Coast, sea-level rise is actually subsidence, caused by a number of human activities. Trinity Bay, north of Galveston was originally lined with a thick layer of oyster beds, filtering the water to near coral reef clarity. Decades of dredging for use as a road material has caused adjoining shorelines to slump into the bay. Steam mining of Sulfur using the Frasch process removed seams of this material. Most impactful has been groundwater extraction.
As I say in the article:
“…we should see more water entering the Gulf of Mexico, and due to the closed nature of that basin, should contribute to anomalous tidal spikes in that region.”
I also say:
“When you consider that tidal variations are impacted by a wide array of inputs, to include changing windspeeds, shoreline subsidence, dredging activities, changing sedimentation rates, jetty and groin construction, and changes in drainage basin discharge, finding a single variable (mid ocean seismic activity) that explains two-thirds of that variation is significant and must be explored further.”
The EPA both qualifies yet substantiates that claim by saying (https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-level):
“The sea level changes that affect coastal systems involve more than just expanding oceans, however, because the Earth’s continents can also rise and fall relative to the oceans. Land can rise through processes such as sediment accumulation (the process that built the Mississippi River delta) and geological uplift (for example, as glaciers melt and the land below is no longer weighed down by heavy ice). In other areas, land can sink because of erosion, sediment compaction, natural subsidence (sinking due to geologic changes), groundwater withdrawal, or engineering projects that prevent rivers from naturally depositing sediments along their banks.”
They substantiate by saying:
“Changes in ocean currents such as the Gulf Stream can also affect sea levels by pushing more water against some coastlines and pulling it away from others, raising or lowering sea levels accordingly.”
While it is true that parts of the Gulf Coast have been subsiding, most of that subsidence has occurred in the Mississippi Delta and in the north and central Texas coastlines. As Argus et al. argue (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AGUFM.G43B0711A/abstract):
“We find an 800 km stretch of the Texas and Louisiana coast to be subsiding at 2 to 5 mm/yr …. Florida is subsiding hardly at all, between 0 and 1 mm/yr.”
So, for the Apalachicola trend, we can assume that virtually all of the sea level rise is attributable to absolute sea level rise. Port Isabel, at the Texas/Mexico border, is, on the other hand, quite far from the area of rapid subsidence. Furthermore, its recent trend, along with Apalachiacola’s recent trend, comports to what we are seeing in terms of absolute global sea level rises. That is, according to the EPA:
“Since 1993….average sea level has risen at a rate of 0.12 to 0.14 inches per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend.” As I have written previously, that roughly corresponds to the time when global, underwater seismic activity started trending higher (https://juniperpublishers.com/ijesnr/IJESNR.MS.ID.556271.php).
As a scientist I have been a quantitive experimentalist. Hence my reference to experimental error about which I have no experience in measuring ocean tides. However, I observe that ocean surfaces can have what are termed ‘swells of varying short term heights. So I question how the measurement of the heights and lows of tides avoids this quantitative variation which must produce some experimental error of any quantitive measurement of the surface level of the ocean. And I claim to understand that the magnitude of a swell”s height is generated by variable surface winds at significant distance from a coast. When tidal heights are cited I never read a cited experimental error of the measurement and this is a ‘practical’
problem which produces articles such as Arthur’s.
Does anyone have an answer to what is the experimental error of a tidal measurement?
Hi Jerry,
As per the tenets of the Central Limit Theorem, the means of large samples will approach a normal distribution, provided there is no biasing of the samples. In the case of the large samples of tidal data I have presented here, we can have a high degree of confidence that the means will be normally distributed, and normality-based assumptions can be applied to any testing we wish to perform on that data. Stated otherwise, ALL samples have error, but that error “all comes out in the wash” for large, unbiased samples. I think we’re on safe ground here.
Tide heights are fairly well forecast based on lunar and solar predictions.
By measuring and recording high tides and low tides alone leaves a lot to chance.
If barometric pressure and wind direction and wind strength are recorded with the tide measurements the records will then provide relative clarity and consistency.
The fetch of the wind is also very relevant but would require a certain amount of expertise in interpreting MSLP (mean surface level pressure) weather maps.
The other influence which is a little more subjective is things like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which began switching from positive phase to negative phase in November 2021. This does effect sea level and these oscillations vary in relation to varied geological position of changes in ocean surface temperatures.
This switching of the PDO is one of the input factors of the loss of Antarctica ice shelf area loss but of course it is the Atlantic not the Pacific which is relevant to Texas.
The North Atlantic high pressure system never extended all the way up to Norway this past Northern Hemisphere summer. There were consistent low pressure systems between Newfoundland, Greenland and Ireland. This has effected ocean currents and sea levels.
If you check the above weather map the other point of interest is the straight fetch intensity of the Southern Ocean roaring forties, furious fifties, and screaming sixties.
Looked at your link and it was quite informative. Here is a link (https://raws.dri.edu) I consider you and should that a look. I don’t try to describe why I consider its informatiion is more useful than that of your link but I will admit that your link suggests where to currently look on my link to learn more about what is actually occurring at a specific location in the general region that your link suggests might be interesting.
Arthur you need to read Matt’s last comment (October 5, 2023 at 5:15 pm). Our entire solar system is quite heterogenous and the smaller individual systems (parts and actions)) of it as Matt reviewed in his comment are in turn quite heterogeneous. You cannot use the “Central Limit Theorem” or any averaging process which converts these naturally heterogeneous systems and actions into homogenous ones to begin to explain the Earth’s naturally variable weather for which there is abundant evidence that this extreme variability has cyclically produced long term extended periods of glaciation on the North American, European and Asian continents to below 45N Latitude.
I will wait to see if anyone wants to regularly comment to ‘slowly’ explain how these observed heterogeneous systems, both large and tiny, work together to produce the earth’s surface and weather now observed from day to day, from season to season, from year to year, to decade to decade, from century to century, etc., etc. … . For I believe we (humans) have observed (learned) enough if we merely summarize (not average as has been done) that which has been observed.
Jerry,
All due respect but you do not have a fundamental understanding of the Central Limit Theorem. For example, we can state with a very high degree of confidence that the height of the average American has increased significantly over time. The determinants of height are quite varied, and include improved access to nourishing foods, medical advances, access to quality medical care, improved nutritional education, etc., etc. In effect, all natural systems are in states of flux due to a multiplicity of drivers and causal mechanisms. Despite the inherent complexity of the inputs to these mean states, we can test for differences in those means through the branch of science known as Inductive Statistics. We then attach probabilities as to whether or not those differences are due to chance, or to some “other” significant driver(s). Identifying the significant drivers of those differences is then achieved through a series of carefully controlled experiments, and this is the very essence of the modern scientific method.
Reply to Arthur.
And then there is the option of including simple inputs into the data, as I have nominated above, so that the data has more fidelity with reality.
This would give improved baseline integrity to the scientific method and reduce the reliance on statistical assumptions, and possible homogenization.
I note my comments and fundamental understanding of tide heights have not been acknowledged or addressed which simply raises critical questions.
(10/5/2023 5:15pm) Matt wrote “The fetch of the wind is also very relevant but would require a certain amount of expertise in interpreting MSLP (mean surface level pressure) weather maps.)
“Fetch” is a word that I have seldom read anywhere but somehow I do know its definition and possible importance. I do not know from experience its significance but Matt does because he fishes on seas (oceans) which have tides. And I am sure he knows the difference between swells and waves. Because I do not have the experience, hence personal knowledge, that he has; I ask him to share the details of his knowledge. For I am reasonably sure fetch explains how it is that the Mediterranean Sea has no significant tides. For I have read that this explanation is that the narrow Strait of Gibraltar isolates the Sea from the tides of the Atlantic Ocean. But I doubt if tides of the Arctic Ocean are directly related to the tides of the Atlantic. For tides are a very localized phenomenon along the coasts of continents.
Matt, please share your knowledge about a possible difference between swells and waves.
From Mirriam Webster Dictionary;
Fetch
3a
the distance along open water or land over which the wind blows
3b
the distance traversed by waves without obstruction
Where ‘fetch’ is used to describe wind it is often or usually used to describe distance a wind has blown in a constant direction. A stone thrown in the water or the disturbance caused by wind friction on the surface of the water causes waves.
With a long wind fetch that wind friction grooms those waves into swell. Orderly, majestic swells which can become huge crashing waves when reaching the shore. The Mediterranean Sea is too confined to allow for wind fetch significant enough to generate orderly, majestic swells but enough to generate chaotic dangerous waves.
When one is recording tidal variation in relation to sea level rise or land level subsidence it is easy to understand the significance of barometric pressure and wind strength and direction when observing STORM SURGE from hurricanes, typhoons, tropical storms etc.
A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.
If you take a quick glance at the todays global MSLP map you can see that if trying to sail a sailing ship from East to West around Cape Horn you would fail in the attempt. Fetch with intensity. (strong winds with boisterous seas) http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/global/gmslp.000.shtml
Matt, you wrote “A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.”
I did not anticipate this but I know there is something termed the Coriolis Effect (CE) which is the result of the fact that the Earth is rotating about its polar axis. I expect you probably understand the CE’action but I know Michael has had a sailing experience in a small sail boat with an experience sailor and I know that Michael can explain (understand) things which I cannot. I know the westward prevailing winds diverge with the result that warm surface water is move poleward leaving sometimes a cooler surface near the equator. And that there are Horse Latitudes. But I only know this because I read it and until I met you and Michael I knew no one who had personal experience with diverging westward currents and converging eastward currents. But based on my reading, I am certain that the normal and abnormal winds (weather) cannot really be explained if the CE effect upon the spinning planet atmospheres and the genus Sun is ignored.
Matt, when you wrote “A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.”; I have little doubt that you accurately described what you and others have observed. And you may understand, as I do, that there is something termed the Coriolis Effect (force) which acts upon the matter of the atmosphere and oceans due to the fact that the Earth is near spinning sphere just as there is Centrifuge Effect (force). But we humans can ‘feel’ the Centrifuge effect but I cannot claim to have felt the Coriolis effect. That is why I have attempted to draw Michael’s attention to it for I accept that he is a genius and maybe can explain to ‘we’ non-genie the influence of the Coriolis effect.
I need to explain the reason for my two comments about the same topic. Last night I had composed the first and posted it. But instead of finding that it has been posted, it had disappeared. And this morning it appeared to still be gone. But when I posted this morning’s comment, last night’s showed up. I am getting old and make frequent mistakes but I will not accept that I made a mistake last night nor this morning.
(It never published because you made a log in mistake that turned your huge posted numbers back to ZERO which is why it never appeared in public due the set moderation rule that all NEW posts require moderator approval, which is why after I cleaned up your errors suddenly appeared again) SUNMOD
You have over 4,000 posts but when you make a log in error the post counts become zero which is why you end up in moderation automatically until I fix your log in error then your post is back to normal and approved with your large post count number.
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.Â
Joseph Olson
| #
Along the Texas Gulf Coast, sea-level rise is actually subsidence, caused by a number of human activities. Trinity Bay, north of Galveston was originally lined with a thick layer of oyster beds, filtering the water to near coral reef clarity. Decades of dredging for use as a road material has caused adjoining shorelines to slump into the bay. Steam mining of Sulfur using the Frasch process removed seams of this material. Most impactful has been groundwater extraction.
“Texas Gulf Coast Groundwater and Land Subsidence” at https://txpub.usgs.gov
Reply
Arthur Viterito
| #
As I say in the article:
“…we should see more water entering the Gulf of Mexico, and due to the closed nature of that basin, should contribute to anomalous tidal spikes in that region.”
I also say:
“When you consider that tidal variations are impacted by a wide array of inputs, to include changing windspeeds, shoreline subsidence, dredging activities, changing sedimentation rates, jetty and groin construction, and changes in drainage basin discharge, finding a single variable (mid ocean seismic activity) that explains two-thirds of that variation is significant and must be explored further.”
The EPA both qualifies yet substantiates that claim by saying (https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-sea-level):
“The sea level changes that affect coastal systems involve more than just expanding oceans, however, because the Earth’s continents can also rise and fall relative to the oceans. Land can rise through processes such as sediment accumulation (the process that built the Mississippi River delta) and geological uplift (for example, as glaciers melt and the land below is no longer weighed down by heavy ice). In other areas, land can sink because of erosion, sediment compaction, natural subsidence (sinking due to geologic changes), groundwater withdrawal, or engineering projects that prevent rivers from naturally depositing sediments along their banks.”
They substantiate by saying:
“Changes in ocean currents such as the Gulf Stream can also affect sea levels by pushing more water against some coastlines and pulling it away from others, raising or lowering sea levels accordingly.”
While it is true that parts of the Gulf Coast have been subsiding, most of that subsidence has occurred in the Mississippi Delta and in the north and central Texas coastlines. As Argus et al. argue (https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018AGUFM.G43B0711A/abstract):
“We find an 800 km stretch of the Texas and Louisiana coast to be subsiding at 2 to 5 mm/yr …. Florida is subsiding hardly at all, between 0 and 1 mm/yr.”
So, for the Apalachicola trend, we can assume that virtually all of the sea level rise is attributable to absolute sea level rise. Port Isabel, at the Texas/Mexico border, is, on the other hand, quite far from the area of rapid subsidence. Furthermore, its recent trend, along with Apalachiacola’s recent trend, comports to what we are seeing in terms of absolute global sea level rises. That is, according to the EPA:
“Since 1993….average sea level has risen at a rate of 0.12 to 0.14 inches per year—roughly twice as fast as the long-term trend.” As I have written previously, that roughly corresponds to the time when global, underwater seismic activity started trending higher (https://juniperpublishers.com/ijesnr/IJESNR.MS.ID.556271.php).
Finally, in knowing that the Northern branches of the Gulf Stream have also intensified (https://bjerknes.uib.no/en/article/news/gulf-stream-has-increased-steadily-over-last-century), especially since the mid-1990s: (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15485-5), I’m very confident that the sea level rises we’ve seen in the Gulf of Mexico, the southern limb of that intensified Gulf Stream, have been driven, in large part, by an energized thermohaline circulation.
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
Forgot to mention, subsidence in the south Houston area is documented to be over 10 feet since 1900.
Reply
karlito
| #
lol, NOAA fake, sorry, homogenized graphs are not a reliable source of information… 😛
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Arthur, Joe and Karlito,
I consider the sea level changes cited to be less than the experimental error of their measurements. Hence any claim of any change is nonsense.
Have a good day
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Arthur, Joe and Karlito and others,
As a scientist I have been a quantitive experimentalist. Hence my reference to experimental error about which I have no experience in measuring ocean tides. However, I observe that ocean surfaces can have what are termed ‘swells of varying short term heights. So I question how the measurement of the heights and lows of tides avoids this quantitative variation which must produce some experimental error of any quantitive measurement of the surface level of the ocean. And I claim to understand that the magnitude of a swell”s height is generated by variable surface winds at significant distance from a coast. When tidal heights are cited I never read a cited experimental error of the measurement and this is a ‘practical’
problem which produces articles such as Arthur’s.
Does anyone have an answer to what is the experimental error of a tidal measurement?
Have a good day
Reply
Arthur Viterito
| #
Hi Jerry,
As per the tenets of the Central Limit Theorem, the means of large samples will approach a normal distribution, provided there is no biasing of the samples. In the case of the large samples of tidal data I have presented here, we can have a high degree of confidence that the means will be normally distributed, and normality-based assumptions can be applied to any testing we wish to perform on that data. Stated otherwise, ALL samples have error, but that error “all comes out in the wash” for large, unbiased samples. I think we’re on safe ground here.
Reply
MattH
| #
Hi Jerry, Arthur, and surreptitious observers.
Tide heights are fairly well forecast based on lunar and solar predictions.
By measuring and recording high tides and low tides alone leaves a lot to chance.
If barometric pressure and wind direction and wind strength are recorded with the tide measurements the records will then provide relative clarity and consistency.
The fetch of the wind is also very relevant but would require a certain amount of expertise in interpreting MSLP (mean surface level pressure) weather maps.
The other influence which is a little more subjective is things like the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which began switching from positive phase to negative phase in November 2021. This does effect sea level and these oscillations vary in relation to varied geological position of changes in ocean surface temperatures.
This switching of the PDO is one of the input factors of the loss of Antarctica ice shelf area loss but of course it is the Atlantic not the Pacific which is relevant to Texas.
The North Atlantic high pressure system never extended all the way up to Norway this past Northern Hemisphere summer. There were consistent low pressure systems between Newfoundland, Greenland and Ireland. This has effected ocean currents and sea levels.
http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/global/gmslp.000.shtml
If you check the above weather map the other point of interest is the straight fetch intensity of the Southern Ocean roaring forties, furious fifties, and screaming sixties.
Have a nice day.
Matt
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi MattH,
Looked at your link and it was quite informative. Here is a link (https://raws.dri.edu) I consider you and should that a look. I don’t try to describe why I consider its informatiion is more useful than that of your link but I will admit that your link suggests where to currently look on my link to learn more about what is actually occurring at a specific location in the general region that your link suggests might be interesting.
Have a good day
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Arthur and MattH,
Arthur you need to read Matt’s last comment (October 5, 2023 at 5:15 pm). Our entire solar system is quite heterogenous and the smaller individual systems (parts and actions)) of it as Matt reviewed in his comment are in turn quite heterogeneous. You cannot use the “Central Limit Theorem” or any averaging process which converts these naturally heterogeneous systems and actions into homogenous ones to begin to explain the Earth’s naturally variable weather for which there is abundant evidence that this extreme variability has cyclically produced long term extended periods of glaciation on the North American, European and Asian continents to below 45N Latitude.
I will wait to see if anyone wants to regularly comment to ‘slowly’ explain how these observed heterogeneous systems, both large and tiny, work together to produce the earth’s surface and weather now observed from day to day, from season to season, from year to year, to decade to decade, from century to century, etc., etc. … . For I believe we (humans) have observed (learned) enough if we merely summarize (not average as has been done) that which has been observed.
Have a good day
Reply
Arthur Viterito
| #
Jerry,
All due respect but you do not have a fundamental understanding of the Central Limit Theorem. For example, we can state with a very high degree of confidence that the height of the average American has increased significantly over time. The determinants of height are quite varied, and include improved access to nourishing foods, medical advances, access to quality medical care, improved nutritional education, etc., etc. In effect, all natural systems are in states of flux due to a multiplicity of drivers and causal mechanisms. Despite the inherent complexity of the inputs to these mean states, we can test for differences in those means through the branch of science known as Inductive Statistics. We then attach probabilities as to whether or not those differences are due to chance, or to some “other” significant driver(s). Identifying the significant drivers of those differences is then achieved through a series of carefully controlled experiments, and this is the very essence of the modern scientific method.
Reply
MattH
| #
Hi Arthur, Jerry, and readers.
Reply to Arthur.
And then there is the option of including simple inputs into the data, as I have nominated above, so that the data has more fidelity with reality.
This would give improved baseline integrity to the scientific method and reduce the reliance on statistical assumptions, and possible homogenization.
I note my comments and fundamental understanding of tide heights have not been acknowledged or addressed which simply raises critical questions.
Have a lovely day.
Matt
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi All,
(10/5/2023 5:15pm) Matt wrote “The fetch of the wind is also very relevant but would require a certain amount of expertise in interpreting MSLP (mean surface level pressure) weather maps.)
“Fetch” is a word that I have seldom read anywhere but somehow I do know its definition and possible importance. I do not know from experience its significance but Matt does because he fishes on seas (oceans) which have tides. And I am sure he knows the difference between swells and waves. Because I do not have the experience, hence personal knowledge, that he has; I ask him to share the details of his knowledge. For I am reasonably sure fetch explains how it is that the Mediterranean Sea has no significant tides. For I have read that this explanation is that the narrow Strait of Gibraltar isolates the Sea from the tides of the Atlantic Ocean. But I doubt if tides of the Arctic Ocean are directly related to the tides of the Atlantic. For tides are a very localized phenomenon along the coasts of continents.
Matt, please share your knowledge about a possible difference between swells and waves.
Have a good day
Reply
MattH
| #
Hi Jerry and readers.
From Mirriam Webster Dictionary;
Fetch
3a
the distance along open water or land over which the wind blows
3b
the distance traversed by waves without obstruction
Where ‘fetch’ is used to describe wind it is often or usually used to describe distance a wind has blown in a constant direction. A stone thrown in the water or the disturbance caused by wind friction on the surface of the water causes waves.
With a long wind fetch that wind friction grooms those waves into swell. Orderly, majestic swells which can become huge crashing waves when reaching the shore. The Mediterranean Sea is too confined to allow for wind fetch significant enough to generate orderly, majestic swells but enough to generate chaotic dangerous waves.
When one is recording tidal variation in relation to sea level rise or land level subsidence it is easy to understand the significance of barometric pressure and wind strength and direction when observing STORM SURGE from hurricanes, typhoons, tropical storms etc.
A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.
If you take a quick glance at the todays global MSLP map you can see that if trying to sail a sailing ship from East to West around Cape Horn you would fail in the attempt. Fetch with intensity. (strong winds with boisterous seas)
http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/global/gmslp.000.shtml
Have a nice day.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Matt and Michael,
Matt, you wrote “A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.”
I did not anticipate this but I know there is something termed the Coriolis Effect (CE) which is the result of the fact that the Earth is rotating about its polar axis. I expect you probably understand the CE’action but I know Michael has had a sailing experience in a small sail boat with an experience sailor and I know that Michael can explain (understand) things which I cannot. I know the westward prevailing winds diverge with the result that warm surface water is move poleward leaving sometimes a cooler surface near the equator. And that there are Horse Latitudes. But I only know this because I read it and until I met you and Michael I knew no one who had personal experience with diverging westward currents and converging eastward currents. But based on my reading, I am certain that the normal and abnormal winds (weather) cannot really be explained if the CE effect upon the spinning planet atmospheres and the genus Sun is ignored.
Have a good day
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Matt and Michael,
Matt, when you wrote “A wind with a long fetch creates a very small ‘storm surge’ on the shore that wind blows on to and lower tides on the shore the wind blows from and the magnitude of these tidal variations are also influenced by barometric pressure.”; I have little doubt that you accurately described what you and others have observed. And you may understand, as I do, that there is something termed the Coriolis Effect (force) which acts upon the matter of the atmosphere and oceans due to the fact that the Earth is near spinning sphere just as there is Centrifuge Effect (force). But we humans can ‘feel’ the Centrifuge effect but I cannot claim to have felt the Coriolis effect. That is why I have attempted to draw Michael’s attention to it for I accept that he is a genius and maybe can explain to ‘we’ non-genie the influence of the Coriolis effect.
Have a good day
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
I need to explain the reason for my two comments about the same topic. Last night I had composed the first and posted it. But instead of finding that it has been posted, it had disappeared. And this morning it appeared to still be gone. But when I posted this morning’s comment, last night’s showed up. I am getting old and make frequent mistakes but I will not accept that I made a mistake last night nor this morning.
(It never published because you made a log in mistake that turned your huge posted numbers back to ZERO which is why it never appeared in public due the set moderation rule that all NEW posts require moderator approval, which is why after I cleaned up your errors suddenly appeared again) SUNMOD
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi SUNMOD,
Maybe I should not respond to your explanation how I made an error last night; but please tell me, and others, what my “huge posted numbers” were.
Have a good day
Reply
sunsettommy
| #
You have over 4,000 posts but when you make a log in error the post counts become zero which is why you end up in moderation automatically until I fix your log in error then your post is back to normal and approved with your large post count number.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
What was my log in error so I do not make it again?
sunsettommy
| #
Misspelling is the dominant reason, double check your spellings should be the difference.