Search results

Apparently, I stand corrected.

As Tamino in his 'Open Mind' blogpost "So What" pointed out: https://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/03/31/so-what/ Sea level rise is mainly a response to temperature. If sea temperature rises the ocean water will expand, and together with air temperature rise land ice will melt, or ablate at...

Hello, Netherlands here. From theory to practice. On a population of 18 million we have 23 million bikes. Small children first learn how to walk, then how to ride a bicycle, then how to swim. From the very young to the very old we ride bicycles. To go to work, do shopping, visiting friends and...

Perhaps this video of potholer54 could help; it deals with almost every argument that went around and shows what the science and fire combatting officials have tot say about it. Source: https://youtu.be/t0x46-enxsA

There is no doubt about the logarithmic relation between radiative forcing and CO2 concentration. But Epsteins reasoning is a non sequitur. It is a bit like what you could hear from the merchants of doubt a few decades ago, that 400 ppm CO2 is such a tiny amount, that it could not possibly have...

according to this site: https://beyondhorizons.eu/2015/04/19/barcelona-tramuntana-range-majorca-184-193-km/ you are looking at PuigTernelles: It is still part of Mallorca at a distance of 184 km with a height of 838 m

Waste water discharge during flight is forbidden; and technically impossible since the valve is on the outside. After the plane has landed ground personnel takes care of it. That is what I have been told. If anything has changed I would like to see a source on that. But even if it was true. The...

Antarctic yearly precipitation is on average 166 mm (liquid equivalent)/m2. With an area of 14.2 km2 this means that 2.4x10^12 L of water falls yearly on Antarctica. Aviation uses in the order of magnitude of 7 x 10^8 L of fuel daily, leading to 1.3x as much water exhaust. That means that...

Contrail's have been calculated to have a net warming effect: https://www.ann-geophys.net/17/1080/1999/angeo-17-1080-1999.pdf At the top of the atmosphere, a mean contrail cover of 0.1% with average optical depth of 0.2 to 0.5 causes about 0.01 to 0.03 Wm)2 daily mean instantaneous radiative forcing

It describes a model with three sets of reference frames. These are interconnected and to avoid overcomplicated math (it is already very complicated as it is) the three frames are taken to be euclidic ("traditional" x,y,z-frames). This is applicable for movements within a limited space range. It...

I agree, but I can't explain what causes the difference in appearance against the dark (cloudless/cold?) background and the white (cloudy/less cold?) ?

The funny thing is that all "where is the curve" claims about objects that should be behind the horizon only make sense (neglecting all kinds of errors) if you accept that light goes in a straight line.

The problem is that the moon is not visible all night except for a FULL moon. When you see a crescent moon in the evening it indeed more or less "points" at the direction where the sun has just disappeared under the horizon. But soon after that it follows the sun and will also set and your...

Yes. And so does the moon. This is the general idea:

I think you could be right considering this schematic drawing: The grey line corresponds with the direction of the "non-refracted"horizon; the purple with with the refracted horizon; there is an angle between the two: the refracted horizon appears to be higher. I don't know in what amount though

How did you deduce from that contact that the distance was 40 mi?

Very good idea. And in addition to that: A takes a picture of B, switches position and hands over the camera and then B takes a picture of A against the same background. Lay the second picture over the first one. Any effect of difference in height will be averaged out.

To make clear what a vanishing point is. It has nothing to do with the horizon or eye-level, things I hear sometimes when the "FE notion" on this passes by The parallel lines seem to converge in a vanishing point somewhere up there. If the stairway would have been much longer you would soon not...

Mick's overlay is not precise enough to determine whether the mountain peaks are slightly distorted or not. Any distortion would in this case be in the vertical direction and there is only very little vertical mountain range to distort.

And so it has. This is what happens every sunset: And this is what you see. The red circles show a constant movement of the sun about every 3 min. The blue objects show what you actually see. You can check it with a stopwatch or an automatic sequence of photographs every so much minutes. Al...