"a major discrepancy between observation-based and climate model-based historical trends in near-surface atmospheric water vapor in arid and semi-arid regions.” Models are not even close to predicting reality. AGW is an artifact of unfit models, lets plan our whole society on a fever dream!
I was expecting this to be about water vapor being a lifting gas. With two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom, a water molecule weight 1+1+16 = 18. But for nitrogen the calculation is 14+14 = 28 and for oxygen 16+16 = 32.
To see the implications, picture a hot air balloon with the air heated to 200°C. If it were steam instead of air, the gas would weigh about half as much and the balloon would generate much more lift.
Now worry about humidity and wet bulb temperatures and whether people will die when the heat and humidity get too much. The neglected issue is the water vapor is lighter than air and tends to rise, so the feared problem of high humidity at ground level goes away, literally up into the sky.
I've read stuff about climate models being wrong because they ignore water vapor being a lifting gas. This strange article doesn't mention water vapor being a lifting gas, but the issue it discusses is humidity failing to increase like the models say it should, which is exactly what you expect to see if the models ignore that the water vapor is rising up and away from where humidity is being measured.
happytoes 0 points 2 months ago
I was expecting this to be about water vapor being a lifting gas. With two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom, a water molecule weight 1+1+16 = 18. But for nitrogen the calculation is 14+14 = 28 and for oxygen 16+16 = 32.
To see the implications, picture a hot air balloon with the air heated to 200°C. If it were steam instead of air, the gas would weigh about half as much and the balloon would generate much more lift.
Now worry about humidity and wet bulb temperatures and whether people will die when the heat and humidity get too much. The neglected issue is the water vapor is lighter than air and tends to rise, so the feared problem of high humidity at ground level goes away, literally up into the sky.
I've read stuff about climate models being wrong because they ignore water vapor being a lifting gas. This strange article doesn't mention water vapor being a lifting gas, but the issue it discusses is humidity failing to increase like the models say it should, which is exactly what you expect to see if the models ignore that the water vapor is rising up and away from where humidity is being measured.