When I first started writing about the lunar effect on the weather I fully expected the people I was writing to to take a look at what I was saying.
I had found that the experts have always had people telling them about the tidal influence. I just assumed that because nobody was able to make accurate forecasts consistently using the Nautical Almanac such ideas would be treated as garbage.
I would occasionally make an accurate guess. And of course the next time it would fail to happen, either just the way I said or it happened a few days later. There was always something.I could accept that I didn’t have it -because I didn’t have it.
Contemporary science was easily able to do a much better job. But I would be delighted every time I got an hit, even more if I failed and I could explain the failure.
The problem with tidal theory is that the solar system is in free-fall, that every step of every planetary orbit is a Lagrangian Point.
The problem is much bigger than getting a mechanism to explain the physics. The problem is getting experts to see that all the present physics is wrong. Even if they wanted to believe, the sheer weight of unbelief will crush a normal person. Fortunately god has given us gifts in men. People who could look inside the circus and see the clowns.
These kinds of people are generally considered crackers. Someone once explained to me that her son was brutally honest. That is because he is autistic. Apparently such people see things in black and white. Like Abraham’s son Esau. I had assumed that only having the ability to see thing one way -a one track mind, is a curse. It isn’t normal. But it is in fact a blessing because ordinary people have to deal with the odd person now and again who will not go with the crowd because they have a mental disability to tell lies.
The rest of us have to learn the hard way.
The secret to storms. all storms is the salt content of the oceans:
On Thursday, 1 June 2017 19:44:00 UTC+1, Weatherlawyer wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 08:55:48 UTC+1, Asha Santon wrote:
> > Haar.
> > That pretty much covers it, and us 🙂
> The main problem with nomenclature is that the experts don’t really know what they are talking about. They are still under the depression that wind causes storms. That is not just the case.
> But you can’t convince them to get their head out from their backsides by telling them to take a closer look.
> What cyclogenesis is all about is rain, to be more precise: salt content.
> All that crap about different polarities is really about temperature differences and the reason why polar lows are short lived is that the initial storm has played out.
> It starts with the warm pool and spreads north~ or south~ east according to which side of the equator it originated. They can be followed by means of the Nullschool charts so not even the experts have any excuse for not finding out.
> Far be it from me to enlighten the ‘stards.
Whilst the experts are allowing themselves to be misled, they can not be blamed. It is ridiculous to assume they have not at least looked at what evidence there is, in what we lunatics are saying. But like I say, there was no viable explanation just the occasional lucky guess.
Even now with the explanation I can see no reason for an expert to recant. I find it impossible to conceive of the magnitude of the power of storms -even though I have watched the whole thing unwrap right ahead of me.
The warm pool on the equator rises in temperature until the heat content is so great the shift in humidity forces the rain to fall. Once it starts to rain, the salt taken up in the wind is washed out. But the salt has not risen as high in the air as the water, so it is still warm. The salty rain is warm enough to keep the cycle going. The only reason it doesn’t continue indefinitely is because cross winds can deposit the salt in the wrong place.
The eye of a storm is slightly offset and when the downdraught settles the salt ahead of the cyclone it is able to go round. When the salt falls aside, things die down until next time. I am sure that if it were that simple things would have been mathematically worked out by now. The one absolutely imperative qualification for meteorologists is a mathematical aptitude.
Therein lies a problem in that an ability with maths is also an ability to delude one’s self with maths. The idea that Coriolis Effect can act like an applied force is one such problem. I am sure that if you can hold in your head sufficient numbers, you can accept the explanation. It doesn’t work on me because I am not able to count. But I was able to convince myself that I am not stupid. (This despite the fact I only found out a few days ago that the term “Polar” means rotational. DOH!)
In my defence I found out that the reason tidal theory has never been explained with mathematical lore is that the new and full moons should cause low tides not high ones.
(If you disagree with that try to explain to a dyscalculiac the “Cavendish Experiment.”)