Ups and Downs on Climatic Assessments. A Matter of Multiple Perspectives from the Same Point of View (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)


Ups and Downs on Climatic Assessments. A Matter of Multiple Perspectives from the Same Point of View (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)

Escher - Cascade (01)

In previous publications I have shared images and created videos to support my research based on recent observed atmospheric events.

In this publication, I want to share one thought which has been coming very often around my research over climatic data sets and analyses.

From some time ago I have increasingly getting the sense of that there is a limitation which is playing a huge role over atmospheric assessments as the result of applying numerous indexes, (which keep increasing in number) defining in isolation everything measurable. And then, we look for “teleconnections” between them, like the AO, NAO, PDO, EPO, ENSO… But, all of them, either talking about variations in SST or Atmospheric Pressure, end up pointing to the same driving factor dominating their behaviour, changes in wind shear.

Many of those indexes overlap their significance and will never work together in a consensual approach because they represent atmospheric dynamics which are working at different grades of dependency for different variables, changing the magnitude of those “dominance interrelations” throughout time. It feels like looking at the relation in the atmosphere between atmospheric relative humidity, total water vapour, specific humidity, atmospheric liquid water and precipitation. All related but different.

And, I believe that all of the differences applied in compartmentalizing the structure and zonification of our atmosphere are carrying the limitations generated from the position and attitude adopted as observers.

We have a tendency to interpret many of the events observed relying on what it works for us as if it works the same for everything out there. And then we build data processes bypassing our faulty point of view so they should overcome such limitations. Because, computers do not question the validity of an outcome in terms of making sense. If it is “computationable” it is valid within probability margins. But, because computers do not question if considering something computational makes sense in itself, or resolves anything, or even if the approach/program applied is the correct, computational processes just take the info supplied under the parameters programmed, and deliver a “meaningless” result. The meaning of the result has to be evaluated by a human interpretation from a human perspective.

Ups and Downs

So we look at developments moving up or down, from east to west, a meaningful average or a meaningless event. But what if we consider that in a round object, there is no up or down, neither left or right, and everything happens as an indicator of a wider process.

Averages play a huge role in climatic studies. But like statistics there are huge limitations assumed. If the average food supply for each family in a town is 5 kg of meat per week, you will never suspect that maybe half of the population is starving while the other half takes 10kg or more of meat per week.

In a 300km drive on a 3m wide road, there is only one bump, 2m wide 2m long and 2m deep. In average, if you spread the size of the bump throughout 300km, you will have a smooth trip… It all becomes relevant when we consider that such localised event marks a threshold threatening the integrity of your car. Same happens with environmental events. Some localized events are significant because they represent thresholds endangering the continuity of coexistent processes. One example are earthquakes. They are able to change the course of a river for ever, and with it, all the ecosystems dependent on the old course as well as those under the influence of the new one.

But, what about such considerations in atmospheric dynamics? So far, nobody has identified localised events, either in time or in geographical location, representing the threshold that changed previous dynamics. And I believe that those have happened in front of our eyes, but we haven´t been able to conceptualise their significance.

We, as specie, learn to interpret codes, in form of languages, in order to predict outcomes and be prepared so our response lapse time gets reduced, as part of an instinct to survive. But once we have learnt a pattern of thought, it is very difficult for us to change it.

Atmospheric dynamics are driven by forces of all kinds. However, we focus our attention mostly over those of a magnitude enough to call our attention, or that of our man-made algorithms.

These type of considerations underestimate some situations which have shown in the past to play a role which can easily scape out of our radar. What we consider small magnitudes, can actually trigger chain reactions with big repercussions. One of the most noticeable startling example occurred in 1940 in Tacoma EEUU.

The collapse of the 1940 Tacoma Narrows Bridge stunned everyone, especially engineers. How could the most “modern” suspension bridge, with the most advanced design, suffer catastrophic failure in a relatively light wind?

Construction on the bridge began in September 1938. From the time the deck was built, it began to move vertically in windy conditions, which led to construction workers giving the bridge the nickname Galloping Gertie. The motion was observed even when the bridge opened to the public. Several measures aimed at stopping the motion were ineffective, and the bridge’s main span finally collapsed under 40-mile-per-hour (64 km/h) wind conditions the morning of November 7, 1940.

The investigation Board’s most significant finding was simple and obvious: the engineering community must study and better understand aerodynamics in designing long suspension bridges.

Meanwhile, Professor F. B. Farquharson continued wind tunnel tests. He concluded that the “cumulative effected of undampened rhythmic forces” had produced “intense resonant oscillation.” In other words, the bridge’s lightness, combined with an accumulation of wind pressure on the 8-foot solid plate girder and deck, caused the bridge to fail.

Leon Moisseiff, who was contacted immediately after the failure, said he was “completely at a loss to explain the collapse.” Moisseiff visited the ruined bridge one week later, touring under the watchful eye of Clark Eldridge. Moisseiff’s design, while pushing beyond the boundaries of engineering practice, fully met the requirements of accepted theory at the time.

Many other examples of small magnitude factors having big repercussions can be found in many engineering challenges and behind many failures. Those small processes are all over our environment passing unnoticed. So everything comes to the scale of the force that we are able to recognise as significant.

A perspective of scale

When we look at the state of our atmosphere and the dynamics involved, in order to identify a forcing triggering a change, we look for big magnitudes which alter our cyclic patterns of thought. In other words, we look at what it is a referent of stability in our environment and we talk about variations between day and night, between seasons in a year and between seasons among years.

Such cycles are easy to identify to our understanding when in fact, our planet is in constant exposure to radiation from the Sun without day and night. It is like a chicken being roasted in a barbecue set in space. There is no average between day and night in the percentage of surface under radiation. The Earth has exposed to Sun’s radiation half of its surface, always and constantly. There is no day and night. Like when you are under the sun at the beach, you can face upwards or backwards, but you would not call that difference day and night.

Our seasons are only related to our position in latitude, whereas the planet as a whole, it has just small variations in the amount of radiation through the whole round around the Sun. And even more, our Sun is not static while our planet moves around. It also moves in position through space, and the Earth (we) with it.

So if we look for changes in those forces with the major magnitudes, we will be overcome by trying to understand the constant change of those and, at the same time, the constant rate at which those forces interact. Such constant rate in those changes gives stability to our environment. And that gives more significance to the repercussion from changes in the forces of minor magnitude. Like steering a ship in the middle of the ocean, you do not need to change the currents, you just need to change the angle of approach.

 Perspective and Attitude

We have to face major questions considering all magnitudes and perspectives. But that might require a change in our perspective and attitude.

What we consider too small to matter and big enough, are just considerations of our limitations.

Exploring the Ups and Downs

We are looking for answers everywhere, Up and Down, to East and West, to the North and the South. But how much of our limitations come from those same applications?

Many of us doing research over environmental transformations, atmospheric dynamics and climatic drifts are looking at the same images. However, we not all are applying the same perspectives and getting the same interpretations.

Such differences make science to move with its own ups and downs, as previous thinkers felt discussing the shape of the Earth. Nowadays science is facing similar challenges and, somehow, in the era of technology, the behaviour and attitude towards challenging the establishment seems to carry same type of threats.

Ups and Downs Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

In the present world of bigdata, we are facing also the challenge of figuring out what to do with the amount of data being generated. Such challenge represents the other side of the same coin represented by the previous image: “Without an opinion, you are just another person with data.” Somewhere in the middle lays the useful thinking we need.

Many discoveries have come from people unable to have the data which would demonstrate that they were in the right path. They would not have any chance to be considered by the scientific community in the present time. Not even Einstein had enough data to support all of his claims. So, was he kind of another person with an opinion?

An opinion has shape, data requires to be given shape.

Could we see different things in a different way by just opening our perspective to new positions as observers?

Ups and Downs by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

There is a price we have paid for leaning heavily on the idea that humans must be information processors just because computers are information processors (more here). The scope of Environmental Science and Scientific Thought has moved from Thought-driven to Data-driven, from Critical Thinking to Data Management.

Computers and models can give us results, and all of them will have to be interpreted from a human perspective since everything programmed by man is a projection of the limitations carried by the programmer.

You can obtain maps giving you images, and yet, we will look at them and interpret their meaning subjected to ups and downs.

Diapositiva21

Perspective on our ourselves

Perspective is a state of mind, not only represents where we stand but also, how difficult it can be for us to change ourselves before changing everything around us to find sense on it.

Follow-up on the Research published in this Blog

Washingtonpost.com_news. The U.S. coast is in an unprecedented hurricane drought — why this is terrifyingtakoma narrow bridge. By Jason Samenow (August 4)

Twenty-seven major hurricanes have occurred in the Atlantic Ocean basin since the last one, Wilma, struck Florida in 2005. The odds of this are 1 in 2,300, according to Phil Klotzbach, a hurricane researcher from Colorado State University.

Florida hasn’t seen a hurricane of any intensity since 2005’s Wilma, which is shocking considering it averages about seven hurricane landfalls per decade. The current drought in the Sunshine State, nearing 11 years, is almost twice as long as the previous longest drought of six years (from 1979-1985).

ixty-seven hurricanes have tracked through the Atlantic since Florida’s last hurricane impact. The odds of this are about 1 in 550, Klotzbach said.

Even the entire Gulf of Mexico, and its sprawling coast from Florida to Texas, have been hurricane-free for almost three full years, the longest period since record-keeping began 165 years ago (in 1851). The last hurricane to traverse the Gulf waters was Ingrid, which made landfall in Mexico as a tropical storm, in September 2013.

Scientists have no solid explanation for the lack of hurricane landfalls. The number of storms forming in the Atlantic over the past decade or so has been close to normal, but many have remained over the ocean or hit other countries rather than the United States.

A study published by the American Geophysical Union in 2015 said the lack of major hurricane landfalls boiled down to dumb luck rather than a particular weather pattern. “I don’t believe there is a major regime shift that’s protecting the U.S.,” said study lead author Timothy Hall from NASA.

Every once in a while there is a broadcast about some type of discomfort between real time observation, data and models. But what it is more striking is that everybody seems to be expecting for data and models to give answers about everything. And when those do not fit, nobody has an alternative!!! There is no feasible theory or sensed opinion describing a possible mechanism explaining any principles driving the state of our atmosphere. Only  positions based on defending the probability of seeing a factor raise or decrease without  having a purposed mechanism driving those changes. Even the concept of Arctic Amplification has its ups and downs.

In Oct 2014 I shared my theory through all channels in my hand with the aim to offer it for an open, public and multidisciplinary review.

I wrote it down in my blog and I shared it in my profile in academia.edu and at several groups in LinkedIn, (you need to be logged-in in order to have access to the links)

(Updated 22/Dec/14) A Groundhog forecast on climate at the North Hemisphere. New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Posted on 21 October 2014. (link to the publication in this blog)

Links to the publication at LinkedIn’s groups (2014/10/25 12:58:23 UTC):

Wordpress Visits Stats Post Theory CLimate Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

WordPress Visits Stats 2 weeks between Oct 20, 2014 and Nov 2, 2014. Post Theory Climate by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD.

In an exchange of emails with Jennifer Francis asking for feedback she pointed me out that there were no peer reviewed publications at the time available to verify my assessments so I should offer my own data and analyses. Accordingly, in February 2015 I wrote a follow-up piece revisiting and contrasting my theory with the events occurred throughout the winter 2014-15.

(UPGRADED 24th March2015) Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla. Posted on 10th February 2015.

Links to the publication at LinkedIn’s groups (2015/03/24 07:22:15 UTC):

It is being more challenging than I expected to find feedback on it when members at specialised groups like AGU and NOAA kept silent without agreement or disagreement.

In the last year 2016 it has been refreshing and encouraging to finally start finding feedback and positive comments. Reaching same conclusions from different points of view is what strengthens the validity of any approach to discuss and implement new ideas in atmospheric and climatic assessments.

When it is claimed that there is an absence of ideas exploring connections between data, atmospheric dynamics and climatic shits, I am just trying to offer mine (follow this link to see those posts with DOI published at ResearchGate and this link with the Timeline and Framework of all publications in this blog)

Hurricanes, tornados, typhoons, thunderstorms… are all expressions of localised accumulations of energy in a constrained space. Their lifespan and impact, is conditioned by the rate at which the energy gets dissipated into their surroundings. Interfaces of phases with high contrasts in energy gradients clash abruptly. By homogenizing the energy contained and dispersed all over the surrounded atmosphere, it is reduced the differential in the gradients of energy, reducing also the amplitude of the shock wave generated by the contrast required to dissipate their energy.

Overall, my conclusions from my research are that the mixing ratio between the usually compartmentalised parts of the atmosphere, in latitude and longitude, is increasing.

The consequences are affecting dynamics in different ways, with different implications but all sharing same origin.

A week ago I answered a message to Kenneth D. Murray (Managing Director, IEC) about the action of Dust storms building high electric fields due to particle collision and electron transfer mitigating CO2.

The number of wildfires active around the world, and in particular in Europe, makes my answer quite appropriated at this time.

In previous posts in my blog I have said that if we consider that things are changing, we cannot contemplate projections based on maintaining the conditions as they are. Where I would put my finger pointing at would be at the generation of new synergies once thresholds are reached. And that is a complex matter on its own where we can incorporate, but not only, deforestation, fossil fuel combustion and seasonal hemispheric differences.

Particles in the air are compounds of different nature, characteristics and behaviour. Biological and none biological as well as organic and inorganic compounds. Some are inert and some are active. Activity can be chemical or other nature like holding electric charges. Some particles are crystals which can get dissolved like salt from sea breeze. Others are biological components liberated in evapotranspiration processes, pieces of tissue or cells like pollen and spores. Then we have also black carbon from combustion of fossil fuels. And more.

When you say: “Dust storms build high electric fields due to particle collision and electron transfer. How much do these mitigate CO2?”

A quick thought comes to my mind. How many wild fires will be started due to lightning from the thunderstorms? And overall, and in the absence of thunderstorms, how much CO2 can a thunderstorm mitigate in comparison with the amount of CO2 being emitted?

For a complete index with all the previous publications in the line of research published in this blog follow the link

At this moment I am in a transition period with no institutional or economic support. The performance of my work as independent researcher, with no institutional and economic support, is limited by my lack of access to resources and economic stability. So far what I have published in this blog is what I have been able to offer with those limitations. I am looking either for funding to extend the work published in this blog or for a job position worldwide joining a team in their efforts. The ideal situation for me would be to join a team having the opportunity to incorporate my experience and results from my research. I believe that with more resources it could make a contribution in the establishment of agreement in the scientific community as well as in the design and implementation of strategies aimed to adopt measures to adapt and to increase resilience in our societies and natural ecosystems.

I am always open for feedback in the comments section. Also, I will attend any communication at my email d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com

IF you want to know more about me you can find more info in the About page in this blog. Also you can find my Profile at ResearchGate, at Linkedin and at  SlideShare (CV and Resume letter in pdf format).

______________________________________

I keep constantly looking into new developments and info in related topics. Since every person reaching my publications are interested in the same subjects, I would appreciate that you leave a comment and use attribution to my work when you find it influencing yours. Either through inspiration, data or methodology.

So please, get involved in my effort and join me, don´t exclude me from what it should be a team’s effort.

At the end of the day, and our lives, each one of us choose what we want to be recognised for.

The aim of publishing my work openly is to allow for it to be exposed for an open review. So any constructive feedback is welcome. After a period of time of at least a month from the publishing date on this blog and at LinkedIn, if no comments are found refuting the value of the piece published I then publish it at ResearchGate generating a DOI for posterior references.

In order to protect my intellectual rights, more assessment in depth and the statistical and numerical analyses that I have performed to support my arguments can be discussed at my email: d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com

If you find that my work is worthy to be acknowledged, share your thoughts openly and publicly because by sharing public acknowledging over the value of my work is what will help me in order to find the attention from those able to allow me access to a job position or resources to increase the functionality of my research.

PerspectiveSince October 2013 I have been studying the behaviour of the Polar Jet Stream and the weather events associated as well as the implications derived into atmospheric dynamics and environmental synergies.

Many of the atmospheric configurations and weather and climate events we see these days are very similar with the progression followed since 2013. Please take a look at posts addressing those events from previous publications in this blog or look at the categories in the top menu. Also at research-gate. Feedback is always welcomed either in this blog or at my email (d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com). All my work is part of my Intellectual Portfolio, registered under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License,  WordPress.com license and it is being implemented at my profile in researchgate. I will fight for its recognition in case of misuse.

Advertisements

About Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

Citing This Site "Title", published online "Month"+"Year", retrieved on "Month""Day", "Year" from http://www.diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com. By Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD. More guidance on citing this web as a source can be found at NASA webpage: http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/bibliography/citations#! DOIs can be generated on demand by request by email: d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com for those publications missing at the ResearchGate profile vinculated with this project. Author´s profile: Bachelor in General Biology, Masters degree "Licenciado" in Environmental Sciences (2001, Spain). PhD in Aerobiology (2007, UK). Lived, acquired training and worked in Spain, UK, Germany and Poland. I have shared the outcome from my previous work as scientific speaker in events held in those countries as well as in Switzerland and Finland. After couple of years performing research and working in institutions linked with environmental research and management, I find myself in a period of transition searching for a new position or funding to support my research. In the present competitive scenario, instead of just moving my cv and wait for my next opportunity to arrive, I have decided to invest also my energy and time in opening my own line of research showing what I am capable of. The value of the data and the original nature of the research presented in this blog has proved to be worthy of consideration by the scientific community as well as for publication in scientific journals. However, without a position as member of an institution, it becomes very challenging to be published. I hope that this handicap do not overshadow the value of my work and the intellectual rights represented by the license of attribution attached are respected and considered by the scientist involved in this line of research. Any comment and feedback aimed to be constructive is welcome. In this blog I publish pieces of research focused on addressing relevant environmental questions. Furthermore, I try to break the barrier that academic publications very often offer isolating scientific findings from the general public. In that way I address those topics which I am familiar with, thanks to my training in environmental research, making them available throughout my posts. (see "Framework and Timeline" for a complete index). At this moment, 2017, I am living in Spain with no affiliation attachments. Free to relocate geographically worldwide. If you feel that I could be a contribution to your institution, team and projects don´t hesitate in contact me at d.fdezsevilla (at) gmail.com or consult my profile at LinkedIn, ResearchGate and Academia.edu. Also, I'd appreciate information about any opportunity that you might know and believe it could match with my aptitudes. The conclusions and ideas expressed in each post as part of my own creativity are part of my Intellectual Portfolio and are protected by Intellectual Property Laws. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial conditions. In citing my work from this website, be sure to include the date of access. (c)Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD, 2017. Filling in or Finding Out the gaps around. Publication accessed 20YY-MM-DD at http://www.diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/
This entry was posted in Biological productivity, Cultural Cognition, Energy Balance, Extreme climatic events, Filling in, Water vapour and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Ups and Downs on Climatic Assessments. A Matter of Multiple Perspectives from the Same Point of View (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)

  1. Pingback: Climate. The Long Distance Between Science And Politics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  2. Pingback: Atmospheric Circulation and Climate Drift. Are we there yet? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  3. Pingback: Aug 2016 Follow-up on previous assessments. Atmospheric Dynamics, Temperature Displacements, Atmospheric Mixing (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  4. Pingback: The True Meaning of Things (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla , PhD.) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  5. Pingback: Summer is what summer brings (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  6. Pingback: In Climate, Too Many Strange Things Are Happening (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  7. Pingback: Between Global Cooling and Global Warming There Is “Global Mixing” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  8. Pingback: Solar Forcing in Our Climatic and Atmospheric Dynamics. Location, Location, Location (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | diego fdez-sevilla, PhD.

  9. Pingback: Climate and weather December 2015. Another Polar Vortex another Heat Wave? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  10. Pingback: Forecasting Past Events In Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  11. Pingback: Forecasting Past Events In Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  12. Pingback: A conversation between Joaquin and Matthew (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  13. Pingback: Global Mixing in Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  14. Pingback: Energy in our environmental systems. Follow-up on previous assessments. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  15. Pingback: Another Heat Wave Another Polar Vortex II … Broken (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  16. Pingback: From Juno and Jonas to Janet (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  17. Pingback: Autumn and the NH Polar Jet Stream (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  18. Pingback: Forecast Unusual (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  19. Pingback: The Polar Vortex breaks again in the North Hemisphere 22 Nov 2014. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  20. Pingback: Atmospheric Thermal Conductance (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  21. Pingback: Just Thinking on Climate (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  22. Pingback: “The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything” is … 42 (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  23. Pingback: RECAP on previous assessments (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  24. Pingback: Wind conditions 250 hPa Jet Stream. What a Mess. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  25. Pingback: Worst than a change is a pattern of no change ( by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  26. Pingback: Orbital Melting vs Kinetic Melting (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  27. Pingback: The value of having a point of view (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  28. Pingback: Temp Displacements. Solid Water In A Dessert Which Is Not At The Poles. (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  29. Pingback: Following The Herd on Assessing Climatic Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  30. Pingback: Breaking Stereotypes Assessing Climatic Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s