A Living Earth

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/532468.stmb Fossil fuel revolution beginsb The methane could be liquefied at sea and transported by tankeri By BBC News Online's Damian Carringtoni The first step in a new era of global energy production is being
taken, with a Japanese attempt to recover vast reserves of frozen
methane gas from under the ocean floor.i End of the energy crisis?i Professor Richard Selleyi The drilling project began on Friday and is the first commercial
offshore attempt but it is fraught with danger. Accidental releases
of vast volumes of the buried gas have in the past led to the
destruction of oil platforms in the Caspian Sea.i These releases are also a possible explanation for the mysterious
disappearances of ships.i "It's horrifically dangerous," said Professor Richard Selley, a gas
hydrate expert at the Royal School of Mines, Imperial College,
London. "If they drill in with a conventional drill ship and they hit
the stuff and destabilise it, all the gas comes bubbling up and the
ship will sink.
< ... deleted >b Comment:Hydrates are electrical insulating and a critical aspect of living earth climatalogical feed backs in relation to cirrus clouds. Mining hydrates would be an unmitigated, unprecedented climate and ecological catastrophy.Fascism is not fair, free, or smart.

The SOI is a pressure measure between Tahiti and Darwin.It has been tracked for over 100 years.30 day averages correlate nicely w/ ENSO.But daily averages do not appear to couple with anything . . . BUTImpedence values in the oceans force cloud behaviors.It is true that the warmer the ocean surface, the more conductive, or less resistive the ocean surface becomes, and the impedence is impacted, as are forced cloud behaviors. Yet, since induction also is in play with impedence, the direction of the ocean current is important. So is resistance impacted by, counterintuitively, the cold upwelling of nutrient rich waters which then commences a food chain, and increases conductivity relative to temparature of the water.The SOI on shorter timescales impacts the roiling of the oceans, and hence gas exchange increases in conductivity.Imagine feeling how warm it is in my room across the nation on the East Coast. Impossible to feel, of course, because heat moves slowly from atoms bouncing into each other. OTOH, very quickly electrons move in a wire. That is the nature of the SOI's impact--it can impact global climate not from heat but from electrical change.

It WILL matter somewhat crucially (in so far as my own ability is concerned) as to if this is really PRE CELLULAR or not if you intend to bring the hypothesis AGAINST "Creationism". The outstanding issue seems to be if bad biological determinism is being avoided how is the causality of your new human design NOT one that does not require a maker other than you. Since come kind of biological causality and not Jacob's junk yard cobbler (unless you are taking a strict Wolfram view) by summing to a "pre"cellular state you could have design hypothetically but without chance randomly being the button hole of the causal evolutionist against a creationist but in the random chance that it is plausible still one would not have argued away (sans the cell) any conceiveable assymetry yet if it IS pre-ceullar you would have a better go of it(especially as to the probabilites).

If the issue IS NOT precelluar then Galvani's issue of animal or metalic electricity IS relevant as the advance in understanding of dielectrics (even up to Feynman) does not differntiate the logical difference between between Volta and Galvani-Faraday.

When you attempt to cross disciplines, up come the battlements.Do me a simple favor. Get a volt meter. Forget theory and math and the history of the study of electro magnetism. Then get a beer. Measure conductivity (the inverse of resistance). Then stir your beer and remeasure. What happens to conductivity?Simple experiment #2. Measure conductivity of salt you put in water at room temperature. Than nuke in microwave, and remeasure. What happens to conductivity?Simple experiment #3. Measure conductivity of tap water then water out of your kid's fish tank. Compare.The earth is alive.

Have you not ASSUMMED** that the frog is a Leyden Jar or that the Platypus Bill Bone is an inverted one by that simplicity in thought. If so ONE CAN NOT SIMPLY PURCHASE such a means to quantify electricity. After Einstein thought up sepeate electric and light quanta AND relative relations or not to the Eather indeed the volt meter you could have gotton for Christmass existed but if you think this must be a battle think again. THE HYPOTHESIS could be non fingo but you instead wish for a list of experimental philosophy. That's ok but it is not longer simple nor a beer. Yeast are not algae. I wish it was all as you said. Tesla had a quaint idea but I am not saying this earth is that alive. If cell death matters then assuming RNA life may also be a mistake of current "hot" biology. Animal vs Metalic vs Plant ELECTRICITY is a really thinkable option that may not exclude your clouds. I thouht that a neat idea.

Politics (religion) is about consensus, and science is about truth. Idea and test.In that sense, the flat lander had consensus and, wisely, may have passed that day. But today we consent that the earth is round.It is also alive. You argue a foolish view.

I am afraid you have spoken before you knew me wise wise. Best of luck in the NewYEAR. Poltics is something like a network connection that has merely caught up with the way I live but it was not there in the first days of net c/eing in the sense politics is not religion these days.

We're Sorry - Scientific AmericanOn of the more interesting contexts of the climate debate is how John Daly's fake skepticism sounds from OZ ( Still Waiting For Greenhouse ), where the southern part of OZ are experiencing horrible sustained drought conditions. Notice how the earth EMF has decreased everywhere but increased near southern OZ.Last year Daly did a victory tour to the US and actually spoke near me. I was invited by a third person, and, of course, declined. It was his victory tour, as his site is the leading "skeptical" site in the climate debate, and his fossil fuel backed politicians over threw the Gore CO2 green house gas warmers. It was a triumph for science, so he thought, and he came to America and spoke at several universities.There is not one mention of biological modulation, or CO2 as an electrical forcing on his page. Not one reference, footnote. But all of his stuff points that way--he just doesn't get it. The SOI, which he mentions on his first page, is nothing more than a main induction/roiling gas exchange factor in the global electrical circuit.The earth is alive.

Are you sure that it is a "global" electrical circuit and not merely the two disciplines of biology and physics viaing for your's or mine attention. Could it NOT be not the negative (non bold below) of Volta but rather the positive interpretation of the same ontological confidence we both could hold no matter the third party being addressed????From Marcello Pera THE AMBIGUOUS FROG The Galvani-Volta Controversy on Animal Electricity. For it may NOT be YOUR DIELECTRIC FROM A CLOUD but instead ONLY WITHINI the organic tissue as was argued and which I can similary to the dissimalarity argue the same as Gould compared Paley -Agassiz and Fisher-Wright only this day it is c-e or e-c, I care not who starts to "debate". p.104 "At the outset, despite the lack of direct proof, VOlta regarded the existence of animal electricity as at least "concievable." And nearly half the Memoria seconda is dedicated to demonstrating this plausibility. In the first place, it was suggested by the research on the minimum charge required for contractions." It appears you and I sensu stricto will not come to agreement until after some potentially dreadful results of nanotech are either avoided or secured in safty for on page 145 I explain positively counter Volta but also question the use of a faculty of reason that post Morgen geneticts gain says from G that V did not use appropo to the current standing issue of nanoecology not nanotech, (me in bold- Volta in plain)"Herein lies the whole secrect, the magic of GALVANISM. It is simply an artifical electricity, which acts there under the impluse of contacts between different conductors. It is these that strictly speaking if biologically closed electric circuits exist function as the true prime MOTORS of baraminic blood by specific planimetric dimensionality affordance ornamentation nor is such a virtue ex,clusive to metals (Pauling on BORON) or frist-class conductors, as one first might have believed in a naive seperation of biophysics and physical chemistry . It is common to all conductors of Faraday's question if electric fish, torpedos etc, can be ALTERNATIVELY this conductor AND Symmer's insulator (page39 "Symmer's experiment - which made him known as the philosophe dechausse (barefoot philosopher)..." to varying degree, depending on their nature and fitness-"I can continue but we would be better off to find some ground of dielectric exchange before I go off on a monologue.[This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-30-2003][This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 12-30-2003]

Fred at another bb linked:Ball Lightning and AtmosphericsWe know that electrical phenomena do store, modulate and dissipate the solar/geothermal/cosmic energy inputs to the 'greater biosphere' (ocean floor to stratosphere). But it is interesting that perhaps Faraday's laws are not the only mechanisms involved in these phenomena. Quantum Mechanical mechanisms may also be at work.Prof J Gilman of U Cal, believes that photon-exchange forces hold the 'ball lightning'(BL) together.The 'luminosity' of the BL indicates that at least some of its particles are Rydberg atoms or molecules that are excited to very high quantum states. Typical BL sizes range from .02 to 1.5 meter and the cohesion within them occurs as a result of long-range dipole-dipole interactions between Rydberg atoms with principal quantum numbers of up to 10^4. The polarizability of such atoms is therefore large. The shear modulus is roughly 1.4 atm which is consistent with the behaviour of BL that has been seen to pass through small openings such as open windows.From Laser Focus World, Dec 2003, p11,Gilman@seas.ucla.eduRydberg Atoms:http://cfa-< !--UB Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University< !--UE-->When an atom in a low-lying excited state or a Rydberg state is brought near a ground state atom or molecule, much of the interaction derives from simple electron scattering off the ground state species. This picture was developed in a classic paper by Fermi [1] to describe pressure shifts of atomic Rydberg spectral lines. In a high Rydberg state, the electron kinetic energy is so low that the electron—perturber scattering is primarily s-wave, and in that case the main physics is carried by the s-wave scattering length. A recent study [2] showed that, in an ultracold gas, the negative 3 S-wave scattering length can produce a new type of ultralong-range molecule with unusual properties.[1] Fermi E 1934 Nuovo Cimento 11 157 [2] Greene C H, Dickinson A S and Sadeghpour H R 2000 Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 2458Fred,Gaia--the sorting of nucleotides over 3 billion years ago then forward, did not require quantum state chemistry. What is involved is LARGE scale low frequency ion coupling.Mike,Quantum Chemistry, living cells and Proteinshttp://pages.prodigy.net/sullydog/archives/qm/qm7.htm***** Tubulin: is the protein that polymerizes into long chains or filaments that form microtubules, hollow fibers which serve as a skeletal system for living cells. Microtubules have the ability to shift through various formations which is what enables a cell to undergo mitosis or to regulate intracellular transport. The formation-shifting of microtubules is made possible by the flexibility of tubulin which is why scientists have sought to understand the protein's atomic structure since its discovery in the 1950s.
http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/3D-tubulin.html***** A Look at Cell Biology with a Quantum Mechanial slant:
http://pages.prodigy.net/sullydog/archives/qm/qm7.htm***** And just for interest, Quantum Consciousness which looks at how tubulin proteins can transact QM entities to form the basis of consciousness:
http://www.wedothingswell.com/QuantumC.aspFred.Okay. See where you are going.BUT the basic nucleotide sorting I was talking about did not require the quantum approach, and right now I am only trying to teach what theSOIISto your daly gathering, pun intended.

http://www.chemistry.ucsc.edu/...Winter02/Chem1C/Lect.10.htmTime to talk about the evolution of ATP in the context of Gaia.Again, the basic ID creationist argument is implausible complexity. IOWs, these chemical processes couldn't have happened by blind chance.The above link talks about the energies and chemistry of ADP. This is well known information and taught at every university and college and even in modern high school chemistry and biology classes. I simply want to talk about how it likely evolved, as opposed to implausibly "appeared" as the creationists surmise.Many basic physiological phenomena invoke thermal cycling. Biochemical regulatory mechanisms such as regulation by protein phosphorylation can be interpreted as methods for mimicking thermal cycling that were acquired later in evolution during the transition from living at a fluctuating temperature to living at a constant temperature.The heat engine. At a first glance the proposed similarity between heat engines such as the steam engine and biochemical objects may seem farfetched. In the steam engine water is thermally cycled: liquid water is heated in a boiler, and evaporates, turns into steam - a phase transition; the expanding steam performs external work; in the condensor the steam turns again into liquid water, the reverse phase transition. In gaia a protein is similarly thermally cycled, and undergoes a phase transition-like process as well (to an unfolded respectively more fluid state). The external work is done during the release of the synthesized ATP. In a steam engine the product, work that is done, is obtained at the outside of the system, while in early Gaia the product is formed within the system where ADP and phosphate are 'pushed together' to form the ATP that is later released.The process of producing ATP is in simple form about the burning of sugar. As a sugar burns, it gives off CO2 and water. The water is meaningless here because in a marine environment, salts diffuse with the water. The significant chemical is CO2 as a "waste" product. So, you have a protein that becomes more fluid and a surface tension brought about by CO2 as a bubble, and a ride that is about to occur--as the nucleotide complex rises to the surface where it becomes much more probable that the complex is swept up by ambiant winds to become sorted by the cirrus, and to feedback living temperatures and chemistries. The increase in the temperature of the complex and its surrounding gases would also operate to levitate the complex to the marine surface, so the heat engine has caused an increased probability of capture by the nucleotide complex to the surface--IOWs, hot air rises.The next question--where does the sugar come from? On the early Earth there was much more energy available in ultraviolet light than in lightning discharges. At long ultraviolet wavelengths, in which methane, ammonia, water, and hydrogen are all transparent, but in which the bulk of the solar ultraviolet energy lies, the gas hydrogen sulfide (H2S) is a likely ultraviolet absorber. Again, it should be pointed out that gases and lightning are tied together by surface tension properties which would rise up the nucleotide complexes to the marine surface to be swept by winds and then sorted by cirrus.Carl Sagan et al made amino acids by long wavelength ultraviolet irradiation of a mixture of methane, ammonia, water, and H2S. The amino acid syntheses, at least in many cases, involve hydrogen cyanide and aldehyde such as formaldehyde as gaseous intermediaries formed from the initial gases. UV light, of course, would be a fair weather occurrance, as it is blocked by clouds. So, again, we are talking about chemistry occurring relative to gas bubbles suspended on the surface tension of those bubbles, and having that buoyant force -- causing the complex to rise to the surface.Amino acids, particularly biologically abundant amino acids, can be made so readily under simulated primitive conditions. When laboratory conditions become oxidizing, however, no amino acids are formed, suggesting that reducing conditions were necessary for prebiological organic synthesis and, hence, the importance of electro chemical conditions. This is another hint at the importance of sugars burning . . . and electrons added via strikes to the soap, which could have produced a relatively basic pH.Under alkaline conditions, and in the presence of inorganic catalysts, formaldehyde spontaneously reacts to form a variety of sugars, including the five-carbon sugars fundamental to the formation of nucleic acids and such six-carbon sugars as glucose and fructose, which are extremely common metabolites and structural building blocks in contemporary organisms. Furthermore, the nucleotide bases as well as porphyrins have been produced in the laboratory under simulated primitive Earth conditions by several investigators. Therefore, all of the essential building blocks of proteins, sugars, and nucleic acids can be readily produced under quite general primitive reducing conditions.What ties them together is the behaviors of the nucelotide protein complex riding gas bubbles to the marine surface and coupling large scale roiling conductivity moments with specific cirrus behaviors, which are altered by the size, shape, mass and charge of the complex. Sorting occurs by effectiveness, and the parasol rains down to start the process anew, whereas ineffective parasols are likely damaged in the UV light of fair weather, or do not fall together with sufficient probability to self replicate, or do not feed back the strikes to present proper pH, and so forth.

The leading fossil fuel backed solarists, Baliunas et al, and their recent paper, with critical comments, is located here:http://cfa-< !--UB Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University< !--UE-->I would start from the end of the paper, page 11, first. There you can see what the study finds . . . see it, if you don't appreciate the statistics they conclude with it. Now, I would be MOST concerned in looking at the graph in the years 1978/79 and 1988/89 La Nina years, and, of course, the studies end foward, which would have been post El Nino, during the cycle's peak. As you know, temperature anomalies haven't been as bad as 1998 but the solar cycle was going through it's double peak, so the data is selective that way. Otherwise, it is an interesting study and SUPPORTS what I am saying about an internal modulating ELECTRICAL aspect of the biosphere. Look at it this way--where their data diverged. During La Nina the colder anomalies off the coast of Peru SUPPORTS life there--upwelling of bio rich nutrients cause the waters, while colder, to be paradoxically more conductive. That is because living chemistry is more conductive than the diffused chemistries.Therefore, the electro-magnetic dynamics that are at the heart of this paper's discussion become more important. And remember, this variable impedance is NOT coupled directly to the ocean surface temperature, BUT IS DEPENDANT ON THE DIRECTION OF CURRENT, where induction will cause relative cirrus cloud feedbacks, biological activity, prevailing SSTs. While this impact is most obvious globally during La Nina, climate cycles biologically EVERYWHERE. The authors here have no bio or significant "pattern" EMF training.I don't quite get how this can be ignored, but CO2 IS electrically significant, and biologically significant, and the evidence continues to support global "fever", just not in the coupled way that these scientists, without bio or EMF training, consider.But here is what they admit from the paper itself: A further difficulty in studying the sun-climate connection is the compleixty of the terrestrial response. One example is the possible, subtile sensitivity of the ocean radiant heating rates to changes in the color (energy distribution) of the Sun alone, even if the total irradiance were to remain constant. This mechanism works by way of spectral-selective scattering and absorbing media in the ocean (e.g., phytoplankton/chlorphyll; Livinston 1994) or in the air (e.g., low-level clouds; Siegel, Wesberry, & Ohlmann 1999), although the effects are poorly quantified.

​

. . .

​

The second study of cloud cover and charged particles used an independant set of data covering 1990-1995 . . . to extend the previous correlation in time (Menzel, Wylie, & Strabala 1997). However, Menzel et al. (1997) found that a good correlation exists only for cirrus cloud cover and neutron count.

​

Several of the major excursions in the MSU global temperature record that are not traced by the coronal hole area may be explained by other documented terrestrial colmatic anomalies. For example, large dynamical warmings of the El Nino events . . . The largest, unexplained mismatch between global tropospheric tempertues and the tow coronal hole cures is the large cooling event persisting throughout the whole of 1989. The 1989 tropospheric cooling may corresopnd to a large La Nina cooling episode of 1988-1989 . . . clearly illustrats a complex interaction of the tropical ocean and the global atmosphere and calls for continued, close consideration of internal climatic factors . . . Pages 16-18. All good material--too much to type.Under concluding sections: Baranyui et al (1998) inferred a complex pattern of surface temperature response under the assumptions of a direct influence by solar charged particles and the solar and terrestrial magnetic fields coupling scheme of Simon & Legrand (1992). They found evidence not only for the opposit responses in the surface temperatures from solar particle events originating from from polar and equatorial regions, but also for regional responses sensitive to the location relative to the terrestrial magnetic meridian line. These patterns of response reverse when the polarity of the Sun switches. The last paragraph here is interesting to me, in that the biosphere has evolved a variable impedance/resistance to the electrical and magnetic flux--where poliarity of the flux isn't as important because the biosphere can deal with it either way by altering how it resists this flux. Again, warmer surface conditions like an El Nino will be, it is true, more conductive because the warmer salt water is, the better it will carry a current, BUT, warmer surface conditions stop nutrients from reaching the surface biosphere, and so, biologically speaking, chemical containment of more conductive surface chemistries is reduced.I would like to connect with this discussion of the sun another Sallie, her research, and suggest to you that these Sallies should "talk":Faculty - MIT Department of Biology "We participated in three expeditions that tested this hypothesis, in which a patch of ocean was fertilized with iron, and the response of the phytoplankton community was monitored. The results were dramatic. Phytoplankton biomass increased 20-fold with the addition of iron, and the structure of the phytoplankton community also changed substantially. Our role in the project was to describe and understand the differential response of phytoplankton species to iron enrichment." There is an interesting aspect of iron, no? It's conductive!How big is this discussion? Isaac Asomov has a book on "history" going back to the Big Bang. As of 1992 when this book was published, on the subject of pre cellular life--he had no answer (the scientific community HAD no answer).The answer, again, is in cirrus clouds. The reason there is a difference between surface algae Sallie Chisholm discusses in the above link and in Sci Am this December issue, page 52-3, and the deeper algae is explained in this way. Nucleotide parasols must alter a movement between ionosphere and conductive, field from convection charged cloud tops, and in the oceans below, later, cellular life in cummulations altered the conductivity of the oceans. Different role, but symbiotically related.More comments from the Scientific American December issue where she says on page 52 several things about Prochlorococcus, which she discovered in 1988, which are fundimentally ignorant of Gaia: 1. That "the microbe's minute size enables it to capture sunlight efficiently (there is less self-shading)" This implies incorrectly why the microbe is small. It evolved to this size simply because by its history it stems from smaller nucleotide based parasol cirrus modulators and because once it became cellular, the tiny ice crystals that form around it work more efficiently at trapping heat underneath, and are more responsive to the charge potential it carries given its mass and shape and size. 2. It is "responsible for half of the photosynthesis in the oceans. A drop of seaswater contains up to 20,000 cells." This is informative, but what is missing here is, like Paul Harvey loves to say, is the rest of the story. Converting CO2 to sugar and O2 is critical in the ocean's surface because the methane in oceans is broken down into CO2, and food chains metabolize down to CO2. CO2 on the ocean surface will with ambiant winds gas exchange, meaning they move between CO2 as a gas and CO2 as carbonic acid. This frees electrons and drops the conductivity of the water in an essentially amplified chaotic way. Carbonic acid also impacts conductivity. By removing the CO2, the algae produces a less conductive gas exchange state and at the same time produces an ability to have a biological signal dependant on the level of positive input of iron in the water, or the negative input of chemistry that is poisonous, or temperatures that are poisonous to its existence. The algae, hence, becomes sensitive to upwellings. IOWs the algae impacts conductivity better, thereby modulating large scale ion waves and cloud behaviors. 3. "Even if you fertized the entire oceans [with iron], it wouldn't make much of a dent on global warming--at best postponing the inenvitable by about five years." This misstates the forcing--which is cloud and cirrus parasol, ion movement/conductivity based. It misstates a modulated system over a chaotic system.Clouds are forced ELECTRICALLY!!!! Think IRON might be important in this? Dah! Meanwhile, also at MIT is Professor Lindzen, who is chain smoking and cannot explain to himself, or the President, what is the mechanism behind the 'iris'. Ask yourself, why is Lindzen and the other climatologists so out of touch? And I don't think it is because they didn't know that iron was conductive--they have known all along about iron firtilizers and algaes and CO2 sinking . . .Decadal-Scale Variations in El-Nio Intensity by Dr Theodor LandscheidtNow, in relation to questions about the sun's role, and the questions I here ask, like WHAT is the SOI, the paper above linked is the favorite fossil fuel cynic, fake skeptic's substantive argument. The problem with the arguement is that correlation is not cause, and statistics here are merely showing that given the modulation, the signal of the variable sun can be predictive of weather. Put it another way, if you are in a hot room and sweating, even though you are sweating, your body may be slightly warmer than 98.7 degrees F. (alhthough on your skin where evaporation is taking place, it may be actually cooler). But the mere fact that there is a variable input says nothing about the HEALTH of the dampening feedback, which is key here. The question isn't whether there are chaotic inputs that the living earth modulates--there are, but whether these modulating feedbacks are healthy and doing their job to protect us from the very extremes which are being measured and used as an excuse to say, chaos was, chaos is, burn fossil fuels, when it is the earth was alive, the earth is alive, take care of its health.If the models of hurricanes based on coriolis and boyles laws and other thermodynamic factors are so great, how come the BEST models, with high data input and super computing, are worthless after 5 days.Mmmmmm?Sounds like something isn't coupling. If anything, this is PROOF that there is another forcing afoot. The short term stability of a hurricane is electrostatic in nature and from a center or eye extends outwards without care of direction of wind, clockwise or counterclockwise. Above the eye of a hurricane the ionosphere will either have a point or ring of negative ions of extremely high voltages. That ring forms with stability because the dielectric of water is about 80 times that of air and hence this field can couple with the ocean in a capacitive manner. That means that in the ionosphere above the cirrus disk the charge will be relatively POSITIVE and in the shape of a DISK, surrounding the point or ring of negative ions. The positive charge of the ionosphere levitages cirrus clouds electrostatically. In no way is this levitation impacted by direction of wind, clockwise or counterclockwise.Schematic of Hurricane Isabel during cyclops eye stage with 5 vorticesIONOSPHERE....................+..............+.....................\............/......................\........../.......................v .......v........................^......^.........................\..../..........................\../..........................-.-.+ -----><----- +............................-............................|............................|............................v............................^............................|............................|............................+atlantic surface....................-..............-.....................\............><----- + - -----><----- -............................+............................|............................|............................v............................^............................|............................|............................-ionosphere ocean capacitive coupling:............................-..+..-............................|..|..|............................|..|..|............................v..v..v............................^..^..^............................|..|..|............................|..|..|............................+..-..+http:>When supercooled water and ice crystals occur at the same location, the ice grows at the expense of the water, and an ice cloud forms. This occurs because at a given temperature ice has a greater affinity than liquid water for water vapor. Cloud droplets and ice crystals first form on certain types of small particles of dust or other airborne materials. They are called condensation nuclei when water droplets are formed and ice nuclei when ice crystals result. The nuclei generally range in size from as small as 0.01 micrometer to about 1 micrometer (4/10,000,000 to 4/100,000 inch). The number of nuclei vary widely, depending on the source of the air mass in which the parcel is imbedded. The atmosphere over the ocean generally has the lowest number of nuclei, whereas polluted air has the highest. The more nuclei, and therefore the more water droplets or ice crystals, the slower the process of formation of precipitation-sized particles, because the competition for the available water is greater. Thus, although Rain often falls shortly after a cloud forms over the ocean, a much longer time is required over continental areas. Page Not FoundHowever, ice growth in a field is asymetrical, slower, and therefore does not give phase change energies to the air as effectively, nor trap heat. Hurricanes have cold cloudless high pressure areas above their eyes, and the reason is electrical.Once in the cirrus disk, the lack of strikes and strong dielectric of water allows cloud nucleation to take place smoothly and rapidly, giving phase change energies to the air and allowing the cloud mass to rise. This cirrus well traps heat underneath it, furthering convection processes.The argument that Buliamus is making is that w/ the reduction of the solar output/field comes cosmic ray flux.The argument is just a postulation, they admit, because they don't know what is going on w/ inputs--how what is happening in space is taken on earth.What I am saying is these La Ninas are biological increases in conductivity that are "warmer" than they should be because of how they take the heat, not how they get it.During La Nina the western Pacific Equatorial Current is very warm, and biologically depleted. However, the ENSO 1,2 regions by Peru are very cold, w/ upwelling. That brings biological activity and chemical containment that is more conductive. Hence, along the equator in the Pacific, in the largest expanse of ocean, which is connected electrically to most of the day, solar signals of an electrical nature get organized powerfully by induction--the movement of the Equatorial Current, independant of the sun's signal brought to the closed isobars of the poles. This patterns cloud behaviors and traps heat, and specifically along the Equatorial a capactive coupling zaps cirrus clouds.http://cfa-< !--UB Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University -->Page not found - Harvard University">http://cfa-Page not found - Harvard University< !--UE-->The most telling graph, again, is page 11 as well as 573. If it is helpful, when in pdf there is a magnefying function you can use. Look at not were the correlations are on but where they are not. Start with the 1988-9 La Nina. That is where we are starting to talk about Lindzen's selected data.Anyway, what is going on is that solar activity is low, but the earth is hot. Why?Think shivering when cold. Upwelling in ENSO 1,2 causes increases of algae activity with the nutrients. That increases conductivities. Cirrus trap heat and the earth warms.It's fairly consistant across the board w/ the La Ninas.Now, of course the sun being more active is going to warm the oceans, the troposphere, BUT that warming comes with, eventually, a lack of upwelling and a depleted marine nutrient level, especially in the cloudless equatorial regions in the Pacific where river run off is not nearby. The resulting lack of biological activity drops the conductivity. Although warmer salt water is more conductive, the lack of life relatively drops the conductivity.The argument that Buliamus is making is that w/ the reduction of the solar output/field comes cosmic ray flux.The argument is just a postulation, they admit, because they don't know what is going on w/ inputs--how what is happening in space is taken on earth.What I am saying is these La Ninas are biological increases in conductivity that are "warmer" than they should be because of how they take the heat, not how they get it.During La Nina the western Pacific Equatorial Current is very warm, and biologically depleted. However, the ENSO 1,2 regions by Peru are very cold, w/ upwelling. That brings biological activity and chemical containment that is more conductive. Hence, along the equator in the Pacific, in the largest expanse of ocean, which is connected electrically to most of the day, solar signals of an electrical nature get organized powerfully by induction--the movement of the Equatorial Current, independant of the sun's signal brought to the closed isobars of the poles. This patterns cloud behaviors and traps heat. The earth warms despite the sun.Quantify the problem?http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~dennis/paper010723.pdfI like this Hartmann/Fu paper best. Check out figure on page 22 entitled Net Cloud Radiative forcing. This tells you how important cloud dynamics are in heat dynamics.Thankfully, the complexities of cloud heat retentions is simplyfied, visually, by IR loops. I use them all the time to seen how the EMF is altering cirrus when watching a hurricane real time.EO - 404 ErrorEO - 404 ErrorWhat you could really see this season in eye watching, with the sophisticated satellite imagary of today, is how the capactive coupling elongated cirrus formations, as described in the linked paper above, experimenting with cloud nucleation in DC feilds, and that has profound effects.1) Slows nucleation processes. That means slower to give phase change energy to air. That means moisture diffuses to other nucleating particles. Surrounding air relatively cools for lack of phase change energy.2) Elongated cirrus. This cirrus will not as effectively trap infra red heat. Air underneath relatively cools, and causes down drafts. Dropping air no longer in zone of phase changing, and melting ice takes more heat from air, causing down drafts. Elongated, its shape allows gravity and air friction to be decreased, and it falls faster, again, to where phase change temperatures cannot be reached. The droplets evaporate back into vapor, take phase change temperatures from the air, causing further dropping of the air mass.3) Dropping air seeks surface low. I have seen on IR not just the pictures of the 5 vortices of Isabel, but also tropical storms with very powerful point EMFs literally burning a path through the clouds toward the surface low, frame by frame. When the surface low and the electrical condition couple, storms explode. Each of the 5 vortices of Isabel contained elongated or no cirrus, and a down draft engine was created--very much like a tornado. This is the mechanism of the destruction of Andrew, BTW, same star shaped eye. Relatively speaking, the eye is free of clouds, and the symetry of the storm is kept.You have during La Nina a very very conductive Equatorial current. Problem is that this conductivity is used against itself in terms of impedance, because the current moves from east to west, which inducts an electrical current relative to the large scale low frequency ion waves and coupling discussed. During La Nina the west tropical Pacific is warm anomaly and warmer salt water is more conductive. Likewise, the tropical east Pacific contains much life from the upwelling--so even though the water is colder, life provides a conductivity enhancing forcing.What appears then to be going on is an 'iris', exactly as the Lindzen paper indicates, which cools the oceans by the same elongation mechanism on cirrus caught between a very strong capacitive coupling between ionsphere and ocean. Since the ionosphere is positively charged at its base, that coupling would require that the surface have a Negative charge. IOWs, that the induction feature of the east to west mode causes a downward current vector--which flows electons to the surface. If you take your right hand, orient it as required by Fleming's right hand rule,Get to know your pupils with our maths diagnostic assessment tool – Sumdogand assume that the earth's south pole is EMF north. Assume that the earth is below you on your lap, from the perspective of looking at the Pacific Ocean and that the south pole is closest to you and north away. Point your right hand index finger at yourself and your thumb back hooking toward your right hand. That is the orientation of the Equatorial current, which moves from west to east. Your bird finger points into the ocean, POSITIVE current flowing away from the ocean surface, rendering it NEGATIVELY charged.http://www.schooljunction.com/electric_current.htmNote that "[b]y convention, the direction of flow of current is taken to be the direction of flow of positive charge. The electrons always flow in direction opposite to marked in circuit diagrams."This creates a very powerful displacement current that elongates cirrus clouds coming into the Equatorial current.That is 'iris'.

Ok, but for me I would be questioning the existence of the geneotype-phenotype distinctioN in the CONTEXT of creation and evolution between Gould and Eldgridge CONTENT for much of the difference of their anti-c opinion user who was not me as I can easily be it resolved, if copying and duplication are -not- the same, but this incomprehensibity of IA does not get to how "ENERGY" is coupled biologically,If we find water on Mars and all that...Two species are not one but reproductive isolation does not need to pervert metabolism. It may however. Conspiring motions are altogether something other for Mother or Father etc, on earth or Bacteria on MArs etc etc.

b How 15,000 French fried:KEY LINK--PLEASE REVIEW, this is your cirrus EMF zapping link!Page Not FoundHowever, ice growth in a field is asymetrical, slower, and therefore
does not give phase change energies to the air as effectively, nor
trap heat.Cells, to maintain osmotic pressures, are more saline than the surrounding ocean. The red algae also specifically contain iron compared to the surrounding ocean--the algae patch as a whole makes the ocean surface more conductive. This alters large scale capacitive couplings between ionosphere and ocean, and distorts cirrus cloud formations, and changes wind patterns. Let's see it in action:EO - 404 ErrorEO - 404 ErrorEO - 404 Errorhttp://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/Calen2/jet.htmlSee figure three and notice how course of jet and HP area is right where algae patch is. Meandering jet is going to have significant INDUCTION meaning and hence what the total electrical symmetry is, what the impedence is relative to the "result" of an earth EMF. In
short, the earth EMF is BIO/Electrical, Einstein. It's not a pure physics problem, really, and is more about electrical patterns, like electronics, such concepts as signal/noise (and, yes, Don, I realize it is too mushy for your tastes), and biological modulation, dampening of these chaotic patterns.The earth is alive.[This message has been edited by Mike Doran, 01-08-2004]