Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD)

Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD)

Real Time Web Analytics


In October 2014, after having performed research over atmospheric dynamics since 2001 as Atmospheric Biologist, I published what it was my assessment over the potential changes triggered over the global dynamics by an increase in GHGs and aerosols.

Cooking an environment (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) November 7, 2013
Climate, “normal variability” or “change”? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) November 14, 2013
Climate variability and energy balance. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) November 27, 2013
February 17, 2014 Met Office. The Recent Storms and Floods in the UK (Feb 2014) (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
March 14, 2014 The breakdown of the Polar Vortex. It happened before so, What would follow? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
May 13, 2014 Looking at the influence of continentality in atmospheric circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
When the order of the factors does affect the product. “A Changing Climate can affect the diversity of an ecosystem” Vs “Changing the diversity of an ecosystem can affect the Climate”. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 21, 2014
June 26, 2014 Biological Productivity and its Influence on Cloud Formation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
July 17, 2014 Could plastic debris, coarse, fine and molecules (polymers), affect oceans functions as climate regulator, CO2 sink, albedo, evaporation…? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
July 24, 2014 Our Sun today (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
August 6, 2014 Inland sanctuaries of water vapour for atmospheric circulation. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
August 14, 2014 Biotic players and atmospheric processes. Another piece of the puzzle. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
August 14, 2014 Weather patterns and extreme events (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
September 15, 2014 Following the steps of water vapour in climatic events throughout the Third National Climate Assessment (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
September 30, 2014 Studying the fingerprints of Human Actions over the Extreme Climatic Events of 2013. AMS Report (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
Debating Climate, Environment and Planetary evolution. Define your position. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) October 2, 2014
October 7, 2014 What type of Polar vortex configuration can we expect for this winter? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
October 21, 2014 New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)

Being CO2 a molecular element enhancing atmospheric thermal conductance, and aerosols acting as droplet nuclei in cloud formation, their combined effect altogether with alterations in the water cycles and energy flows due to anthropogenic activity would increase the capacity for the atmosphere to absorb, contain and disperse water vapour. But more importantly, this water vapour would incorporate an increase of energy into the atmospheric pool which it would affect atmospheric developments such as the strength, paths  and life periods of lows and highs as much as those events concentrating energetic discharges in form of precipitation, wind and heat or cold waves.

The outcome from such assessment foresees an spreading of energy through the atmosphere in Latitude and Altitude, driving a climatic drift which will affect life cycles in animals and plants as well as in soil degradation and water availability.

The assessments presented through the series of publications shared in the line of research published in this blog apply a point of view which considers an order of factors driven by thermodynamical principles. As the process followed in the order of the steps taken to cook the recipe to make an environment.

All these assessments foresee a change in the progression of Seasonality from Orbital Driven to Kinetic driven, considering kinetic an expression of the energy being driving the seasonal climatic regimes around the latitudes and longitudes.

March 3, 2016 Seasonality Spring 2016. Continuous follow-up on my previous research assessing atmospheric dynamics. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)

And even though many scientists might look into the same events and parameters, not all of us are making the same assessments over the meaning behind those, and the conclusions which can be reached from our observation and analysis.

In particular there have been three assessments showing major discrepancies between the line of research presented here and main stream scientific coverage. The assessments are about the concept of climate drift, the link between the Polar Vortex and tropospheric circulation and the dynamics explaining abnormal Arctic Warming and sea ice cover.

November 14, 2014 Why there is no need for the Polar Vortex to break in order to have a wobbling Jet Stream and polar weather? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
September 2, 2016 Climate Drift, The True Meaning of Things and the Drift of Those. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)
November 17, 2016 Arctic Amplification versus Arctic Absorption (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)

In the recent November 2016 it has been an event at the Arctic which has called the attention of researchers and the media. This time it has been an episode of warmer than normal conditions over the Arctic through the period in which ice should be forming and temperatures should be dropping.

Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality.

The subject of Arctic warming has been very widely presented in the media, and yet, little discussion is added to address this event. Everybody seems to follow the same “mantra”, without giving much thought about it. Since the “leaders” represent the knowledge, they mark the path, others put on them the responsibility to think for us and many blindly follow.

One example which represents many sources is the publication: “Something strange is happening with the Arctic sea ice. Here’s what’s going on, and why it matters“. Written by Alex Gray (Senior Writer, Formative Content). Published Friday 25 November 2016. www.weforum.org

“This year the Arctic sea ice has retreated earlier than normal, meaning that the sea had longer to absorb the heat from the sun. As a result, at the start of the season when sea ice should be forming, the water was still too warm.

Air temperature also played a part. October’s air temperatures were unusually high over most of the Arctic Ocean for that time of year.”



This phrase immersed in the article is an example of how looking at the same pieces of the puzzle, each one of us can find different pictures. In particular, in this case, the previous paragraph leaves more questions open than those that it resolves.

  • This year the Arctic sea ice has retreated earlier than normal…

That is a phrase which takes for granted that being “earlier than normal” can be dismissed by offering a mere description of the situation. And yet, what has caused the ice to retreat earlier than normal?

  • … meaning that the sea had longer to absorb the heat from the sun.

The meaning of “seeing the ice to retreat earlier than normal” is not addressed here in any way. The suggestive interpretation of this situation is offered as if “the sea had longer to absorb the heat from the sun”. And yet, the angle of incidence for the radiation of the Sun received at Arctic latitudes has been declining since the Autumn equinox September 21-22.


From the post September 22, 2016 Solar Forcing in Our Climatic and Atmospheric Dynamics. Location, Location, Location (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.)


In winter, the Sun is below the horizon for 163 days of darkness and  24 days of semi-darkness when the Sun is just below the horizon.

Earth_seasons seasons.nasaClimate-zones

  • As a result, at the start of the season, when sea ice should be forming, the water was still too warm. (to form ice)

And the cause was the absence of ice through the summer? Which actually, the reduction of ice in the summer is normal, the inhibition of formation is not normal and can not be justified by the absence of ice.

  • Air temperature also played a part. October’s air temperatures were unusually high over most of the Arctic Ocean for that time of year.

How is that, in the paragraph, sea ice has retreated earlier than normal” has a meaning however, October’s air temperatures were unusually high” does not have any meaning?

The order of the factors

So, the order of the factors offered to explain the lack of ice in the Arctic is the following:

  • The ice retreated in Summer, which is normal.
  • It hasn´t recovered at the usual rate after summer.
  • The cause for the lack of ice is the absence of ice in itself because then the Ocean can absorb more heat from radiation.
  • Yet, radiation at the Arctic is decreasing towards zero due to the change in orbital tilt.

Now then, lets add some critical thinking. Temperature in the air are measured higher than normal, so :

  • If the source of heat for this air would be the water from the oceans, the oceans would be cooling down. And with the absence of radiation from the Sun, ice would be highly probable.
  • The heat transferred from the Oceans water into the air require an atmospheric molecule able to absorb the heat from the oceanic waters. The major molecular gas absorbing heat in the atmosphere is water vapour. Other GHG’s are in minor concentration, like CO2, but with higher capacity to absorb heat and with a longer time permanency period in the air since it does not condense (and precipitate) in liquid form at low temperatures. In order to measure atmospheric high temperatures at such latitudes, either there is water vapour or other GHGs holding it.
  • Since the Arctic circulation keeps the air is dry (no water vapour) due to its low temperatures, in order to measure high temp, in the absence of solar radiation and oceanic water releasing heat to the air from becoming ice, we can give strong considerations to assume that those high temperatures, at such high latitudes (Arctic), during the start of the coldest season of the year, for this region, comes from intrusions of warm masses of air from mid latitudes.

From previous publication “Cyclonic Alignment Towards the Arctic (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD)” November 10, 2016

Changing the order of the factors

Using the same words as those applied in the paragraph published but adding a different order we could end up with what it would be my assessment based on my research:

“This year the Arctic sea ice has retreated earlier than normal.  October’s air temperatures were unusually high over most of the Arctic Ocean for that time of year. Meaning that the sea had longer to absorb the heat from the sun. As a result, at the start of the season when sea ice should be forming, the water was still too warm.”

Needless to say that “Air temperature “also” played a part.”

Arctic Amplification focus the attention over the measurements showing the Arctic is warming faster than other latitudes in the planet. And then, scientists are looking for mechanisms driving this dynamic.

I will offer my assessment based on my research.

The Arctic is warming faster than other latitudes in the planet, like when you pour water into a glass continuously, there will be a moment in which the amount of water will start increasing faster outside the glass than inside.

Equatorial and Mid latitudes have already taken what they can from Kinetic energy. This volume is overloaded and it is expanding to higher latitudes and longitudes. This has increased the mixing ratio between parts of the atmosphere otherwise compartmentalised through thermal contrasts.

September 14, 2016 Between Global Cooling and Global Warming There Is “Global Mixing” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.)


The implications from such considerations have been discussed in previous publications such as

September 14, 2016 Between Global Cooling and Global Warming There Is “Global Mixing” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.)
October 7, 2016 Equatorial Dynamics. A conversation between Joaquin and Matthew (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)
October 13, 2016 Global Mixing in Atmospheric Dynamics (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla Ph.D.)
June 18, 2015 Extreme climatic events, implications for projections of species distributions and ecosystem structure (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)

The assessments  presented in the line of research published in this blog are shared in real time simultaneously with the events being unfolded. These assessments are built from direct observation and analysis based on numerical data and satellite imagery observation. The pace at which this line of research has evolved  from 2013 has required to empathise the coherence and consistency demanded in order to defend an approach offered with scientific value. The nature of its originality moving into uncharted waters has restricted the use of external references since, as cited by Jennifer Francis in 2014, “no previous studies could verify my assessments“.

Therefore, in such absence, the only review available is to test its coherence and consistency with a constant follow-up over the events being unfolded in real time.

But also, comparing those previous assessments with the new studies being offered by other fellow scientists.

Follow-up and Validation of Previous Assessments

Having and idea is simple. Making an idea simple is complicated. To make your idea a tangible product so others can find access to it, is the most demanding and challenging endeavour of all.

So I have applied imagery from different sources and created my own in order to facilitate the transmission of the meaning behind my words. (See images here and video-animation here)

One main concept has been constant since the beginning of my assessments. Energy is getting spread in latitude, longitude and altitude due to the incorporation of GHGs which enhance atmospheric thermal resilience (absorbs and maintain temperature) inducing increases in Water vapour content which increases energy conductance (gravimetric, thermal and kinetic). The implications derived from such assessment have covered publications in this blog addressing all parts of the ecosystem and the weather events associated. From plant growth and displacements, soil degradation, weather patterns, ocean circulation and polar ice cover to energy demands.

The imagery offered has been the best I could at the time with the resources available. Now, people at NASA have applied their resources to look at the distribution of GHGs in the atmosphere based on their models and they have come out with a representation which might help to visualize what I have been trying to describe through my research. An increase in global mixing ratio.

Carbon Dioxide from GMAO using Assimilated OCO-2. Data Visualizations by Greg Shirah on December 13, 2016

However, the representation from NASA, lacks the accuracy representing relevant atmospheric features which I have covered with the imagery presented through this blog such as

  • the Polar Jet Stream currents,

gfs-nh-polar-jet-stream-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd-22-sept-init drops-of-weather-sept-2016-diegto-fdez-sevilla-phd gfs-arctic-ws250-2016-09-06-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd gefs-250-mb-wind-from-6-sept-2016-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd

  • convective interactions

dec-2016-temp-10-mb-used-by-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd dec-2016-temp-50-mb-applied-by-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd

  • and pressure fronts interaction in the three dimensionality of the atmosphere.





gfs-t2_anom-2016-nov-04-init-diego-fdez-sevilla-phdPolar vortex 4th Jan 2016 ECMWF NOAA Diego Fdez-Sevilla


The implications derived from the assesments presented in this line of research have Implications which are being increasingly addressed by more studies:

  • The planet is heating up faster than species can migrate. A new study finds evidence of many local extinctions. By Marlene Cimons Nexus Media December 9, 2016. Source

Project Appraisal and Suggestions for Further Research

On the 13th Dec 2016, the latest Arctic Report Card from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was presented at the 2016 AGU meeting (American Geophysical Union).

Arctic Report Card 2016
Tuesday, 13 December
10:30 a.m. Fall meeting AGU 2016

The Arctic is warming faster than anywhere else on Earth, affecting people in the region, their cultures, the wildlife they depend on for food, and their environment. This unprecedented change has broad ramifications beyond the region for the global economy, weather, climate, sea level, trade, security and energy development. The 2016 Arctic Report Card brings together the work of 61 scientists from 11 nations to provide the latest information on multiple measures of Arctic environmental change, including air and sea surface temperature, sea ice, snow cover, the Greenland ice sheet, vegetation, wildlife and the abundance of plankton at the base of the marine food chain. The peer-reviewed report led by the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration will also include a report on Arctic ocean acidification and essays on the increasing pressure to effectively communicate information on Arctic change to communities and other stakeholders to help them strengthen their resilience to change.

Jeremy Mathis, NOAA Arctic Research Program, Seattle, Washington, U.S.A.;
Donald Perovich, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire, U.S.A.;
Marco Tedesco, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University, Palisades, New York, U.S.A.

In the press conference offered to present the report card (see video above) there were many questions which have been addressed in the line of research published in this blog. Since I haven´t had the opportunity, basically lack of resources, to assist, I will take this space to integrate the results from my research into the debate:

  • Jeremy Mathis, director of NOAA’s Arctic Research Program

We have seen in 2016 at the Arctic a stronger and more pronounced signal of persistent warming than in any previous year in our observation records. And those warming effects in the Arctic have had a cascading effect through the environment including down into Arctic Ecosystems. (I deeply believe that it is much more important to consider the conditions in the Arctic as a consequence of previous dynamics in a cascade effect than the trigger)

June 5, 2015 Climate and Data. Drinking From the Source (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
October 21, 2015 Discussing Climatic Teleconnections. Follow Up On My Previous Research (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)

And while the science of what’s driving that change gets clear we need to expand and improve our ability to do sustain observations in the Arctic. (Why there was not such a big problem in identifying the impacts of CFCs over the atmospheric Ozone, the atmospheric dynamics involved and the repercussions? The alteration in the composition of the atmosphere, as well as of all other parts of a thermodynamic system (liquid, gaseous and solid phases in our environment), alters the energy flows dynamics. Such alterations affecting energy flows, sources and sinks (water cycles, soil cover and use, atmospheric emissions of solid and gaseous compounds) have an impact over the compartmentalization of the system at macro scale (planetary atmosphere) and micro scale (zonificated ecosystems)  delivering new patterns of response, (behaviour and dynamics) against external forcing (like cosmical influences, Sun’s radiation, winds, cosmic rays, …) and internal forcing  (albedo, atmospheric circulation, SST, …).

December 23, 2015 New insides on old concepts (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
August 6, 2015 Atmospheric Composition and Thermal Conductivity. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
April 6, 2016 Atmospheric Dynamics, GHG’s, Thermal Conductivity and Polar Jet Stream (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
November 25, 2016 Atmospheric Thermal Conductance (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD)
September 22, 2016 Solar Forcing in Our Climatic and Atmospheric Dynamics. Location, Location, Location (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.)
May 7, 2015 Domesticating Nature. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
  • Donald Perovich, Research Geophysicist ERDC-CRREL.

A persistent warming in air temperature over the Arctic is driving the changes we are observing. (What was first? The chicken or the egg? What causes a persistent warming in air temperature over the Arctic is the most relevant question???? Like what causes a change in the wind shear triggering the El Nino fluctuations???)

April 6, 2016 Atmospheric Dynamics, GHG’s, Thermal Conductivity and Polar Jet Stream (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
March 22, 2016 Pacific atmospheric dynamics with and without a positive ENSO (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)

The extensive warm air temperature anomalies across the entire center Arctic is primarily due to southerly winds moving warm air to the Arctic from Mid Latitudes. (My research supports such statement)

Warm air and Ocean temperatures in the fall let to a record breaking delay of fall freeze up in the Arctic sea ice. (My research supports such statement)

  • Marco Tedesco, Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University.

Soil weathering is affected by the warming events. (My research supports such statement)

December 9, 2015 SOILS. The Skeleton Holding The Muscle On Our Ecosystems (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
March 31, 2016 Plant growth, CO2, Soil and Nutrients. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
  • About El Nino

We will quantify how much influence has had the el nino over the Arctic warming.

What happens in the Arctic influence what happens outside the Arctic.

Again, what happens in the Arctic is the result of a process which has started already and science is not only behind identifying it, it is avoiding to face it.

  • Does this extreme Arctic warming of Nov 2016 represent a tipping point to recover from?


This is the First act of a three act play,

 Now, Fall freeze up has been very slow, with a record minimum ice extent.

Act 2 will come in March when we see what the maximum is.

And Act three will be next September.

Based on my research we are way beyond the first of many tipping points. We are actually going through stages like cyclists or like water going through the stages from solid ice to steam. And it is being a weathering process.

“The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything” is … 42 (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) May 15, 2014
Atmospheric Circulation and Climate Drift. Are we there yet? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) July 2, 2015

First the conditions of thermal capacity for energy absorption increases. Energy storing begins at the part of the atmosphere receiving the highest volume of energy: Equatorial and mid latitudes. Such process starts without an increase in temperature as the volume can transfer heat into variations in volume. Then the kinetic energy is not balanced by the work delivered so there is an increase in temperature. Such increase enhance the power of the atmosphere to expand its limits into the nearest compartment. Mid latitudes have such a strong friction with high latitudes that the barrier separating Arctic circulation from Mid Latitudes begins to wear off its strength becoming wobbly in altitude and latitude. Like releasing the tension in a guitar string. Such wobbly behaviour allows mid-latitudinal masses of air to invade a new compartment. The Arctic circulation.

Such increase in the volume of space to be occupied by the energetic overloaded mid latitudinal masses of air increases the amount of kinetic energy which can be converted in work expanding its volume. Such conversion creates a pause in temperature increase. However, like a pressure cooker when releases vapour pressure from inside, the temperature stops from increasing but it does not decrease. And at the same time, the system now can accommodate more energy in an expanded volume of space. The energy pool keeps increasing and it becomes evident in the different forms of extreme discharges we see for all different forms of energy, from gravimetric energy by the volume of water and precipitations, kinetic in the form of windy events, tornadoes, etc… as well as heat waves and cold displacements triggered from intrusions of warm air into the Arctic volume.

Simultaneously with horizontal movements, the expansion of the energetically charged mass of air from mid-latitudes starts to interact in the vertical profile of the atmosphere. Such movement, enhanced by the Coriolis effect, pushes warm intrusions into Polar latitudes while raising at higher altitudes, disturbing the lower part of the polar vortex and promoting processes of Sudden Stratospheric Warming.

December 18, 2015 Climate and weather December 2015. Another Polar Vortex another Heat Wave? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)
October 25, 2016 Another Heat Wave Another Polar Vortex II … Broken (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.)

Since the viscosity of air is lower for cold air than warm air, the incorporation of kinetic energy into higher altitude, carried by the mid-latitudinal warm air masses, increases the energy being dispersed and weakens the organization of those features built on thermla contrasts. Consequently, the stability of atmospheric features like the Polar Jet Sream and the Polar Vortex, suffer from a decrease in the require resilience of the air masses to keep their momentum and directionality, same as streamlines get altered by a source of heat. As we can see when we observe images wobbling over warm tarmac.

October 7, 2016 Equatorial Dynamics. A conversation between Joaquin and Matthew (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.)

In my actual circumstance as independent researcher, I don´t have the resources to participate and assist personally to conferences abroad. However, I do try to promote and get involved in any discussion or debate which challenge my ideas and assessments in order to verify their integrity and coherence.

In particular I addressed the situation over the Arctic in November 2016 in some discussions at the platform linkedin which I share as follows:

Discussion 1



Commenter 1#

Probably we are getting used to read adjectives like “unusual” and “exceptional” related to climate change and, I think, this is a big social and scientific mistake. While I’m writing something alarming is happening: in mid-november arctic sea ice cover tracks 2 million sq. km below the 1981-2010 average. This exceptional lake of ice is favoring a massif heat release to the atmosphere (Arctic Amplification). It is very likely that the current weakness of the tropospheric polar vortex is related to this unusual heat movement (continues below).

Commenter 1#

this means that in the next coming weeks or months, the mid-latitudes of Northern Emisphere may be affected by several cold episodes (Europe included). It is a good news? YES, if we think about the last three very mild Winters in most of Europe, NO if we think that the main reason is probably a historical and alarming loss of Arctic sea ice. Image by National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC)

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I would make a slightly different interpretation for the same conclusion. The ice cover missing is not due to a “massive heat release to the atmosphere (Arctic Amplification)” but due to an introduction of heat from mid-latitudes. The arctic snow and ice cover is lower on its rate of recovery from summer, so there is not a melt down releasing heat. The absence of “solid water” comes from the heat being transferred by intrusions of warm air. These warm intrusions are reducing the differential in energy gradients between oceanic water and atmosphere so there is not enough contrast to grow ice or to form enough snow. Since the heat can only be contained and transferred by matter, the atmosphere in the arctic containing the heat shows to carry moist from midLat instead of being dry air from Arctic circulation, and it is having an effect below its position (reducing arctic ice cover and oceanic temperatures) as well as above it, inducing the weak polar vortex. At least that is what I take from my research.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

The same conclusion which I referred to is that “The door of the Arctic freezer is not closed properly. In other words, the Polar Jet Stream is too weak to keep the Arctic isolated from MiDLatitude intrusions. With such weak Polar Jet Stream configuration we are going to get “frost” all over the place. For as long as warm air gets into the Arctic the air already there will get pushed out.

Commenter 1#

Hi Diego, I think the logical steps are: 1) large areas of Arctic ocean usually cover by ice in the Summer are, in the last 10 summers, almost always ice-free 2) this big surface of ocean absorbs heat during the Summer and early Autumn season 3) during the re-freeze season (late september-mid november) these areas release into the Atmosphere over North Pole an impressive amount of heat that weakens the polar vortex 4) the weakness of the polar vortex facilitates the northward movement of warm air masses from the mid-latitutes that contribute to weaken further the polar vortex This is my thought

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Thanks. I was writing about it to publish a more extended point in the blog. But in short what I am trying to highlight is the fact that the Arctic is a half full/half empty scenario. But we have to remember that cold is the absence of heat. The process of thinking you describe assumes that Arctic Amplification comes from an increase of heat being released in the Arctic. I disagree with that. The thermal energy accumulated through summer in the Arctic can not be transferred into the atmosphere if this atmosphere is Arctic Dry Air as it used to be. The heat contained by Arctic masses of air comes with the air mass in itself due to the moisture carried from Mid Laitudes. Since there is thermal heat within the mass of air, the heat absorbed by the Arctic can not transfer it to the atmosphere and freeze in the process.

Commenter 1#

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D. Hi Diego, I will read your new post asap! It seems to be very interesting! Meanwhile I suggest you to read this article http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v464/n7293/full/nature09051.html

Commenter 1#


Commenter 1#

and this https://nsidc.org/about/monthlyhighlights/2009/09/arctic-amplification

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Thanks. Yes I know the arguments and the data presented by those articles, also by Cohen and colleges and Jennifer Francis. and I agree with their observations but I disagree with their interpretation. When we look at sea ice melting we can consider a transference of energy, but from where to where? Where is the energy coming from to melt ice? Albedo is energy rejected from the system so this energy does not melt ice. You can not justify a decrease in ice based on a decrease in Albedo due to a decrease in ice. Which matter is absorbing and transferring heat into the ice? Ashes immersed in the ice? warmer surrounding water? atmosphere? What happens when one volume of mass transfers heat to another? It gets colder, so the atm column is warmer in surface colder in the middle and warmer again in altitude, always in relation with its surroundings.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

“Increased transfer of heat from the ocean to the atmosphere resulting from sea ice loss” means that sea ice is melting in a process where sea ice releases heat!!! That is against any thermodynamic coherence and understanding, despite of being in peer review articles and from recognised scientists and institutions. I am sorry but I can not agree.

Commenter 2#

Diego, There are 2 ways less ice results in the release of heat. First between 100 and 900 meter depths there is an enormous amount of heat derived from relatively warm and dense inflowing Atlantic waters that could melt Arctic ice several times over. The removal of thick mulityear ice by freezing winds removed the insulating ice cover and released more of that subsurface heat to the atmosphere. Second after the winds removed thick ice, now more new ice forms each winter and ice formation releases latent heat as well new ice having less insulating capabilities. In accord with this theoretical ventilation of Arctic ocean heat, MIT/Harvard oceanographers recently estimated the upper 700 meters of the Arctic ocean has cooled over the past 2 decades.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Thanks 2#. Latent heat is released in a process of transference between substance with thermal conductivity. When the air above the water containing heat is cold and dry generates the so called “steam fog” we saw over the great lakes in 2014. The inhibition of ice and snow over the Arctic in periods of low radiation can be explained by the lack of differential in energy with its surroundings so water can not release its heat content in order to freeze. Therefore, the atmosphere is not taking the energy required for water to freeze.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Therefore, the atmosphere is not taking the energy required for water to freeze because it contains energy already, carried by water vapour introduced from mid latitudes. That is a trend which would explain the lack of mechanisms mentioned in scientific literature linking all the atmospheric events happening all around the globe. At least that is the conclusion from my research.

Commenter 2#

I dont understand your reasoning regards the “atmosphere taking” heat. Heat simply travels from a region of higher temperatures to lower. At 80 degrees north latitude air temperatures are only above freezing for about 80 days during the summer. For about a hundred days during the winter, air temperatures are 25 to 30 degrees below freezing. The Atlantic water between 100 and 900 meters is much warmer than the air, 2 to 4 degrees above freezing, thus heat is traveling from the ocean to the atmosphere.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Temperature is measured through an atmosphere with a molecular composition thermically active. The atmosphere is nitrogen, oxygen, and argon. The molecular composition which absorb and retain radiation affecting climatic regimes and ice cover anomalies are GHGs (CO2) being water vapour the major component as part of a feedback with the other GHGs. Through periods of low radiation (winter) temperature drops enough (as in the Arctic should be) so the molecular composition would be mostly N and O without water vapour since it would freeze. So the atmosphere in itself looses its thermal conductance by drying out. How ever, if there is a forced increment of GHGs, like the increase in water vapour measured in the latest decades, the thermal conductance of the air increases, carrying more energy in circulation by water vapour. Being increased the pool of energy carried at the Arctic decreases the amount of energy which the atmosphere can absorb from the oceans. Water releases energy until it freezes only if it the surrounding medium can take all the energy supplied by the ocean. Otherwise it absorbs energy only up to thermal equilibrium. If this equilibrium is higher than freezing there is no ice.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

My research points to an increase of the energy pool in the atmosphere carried by water vapour as consequence of transformations induced in the composition and structure of the gaseous, liquid and solid phases of our environment, from increases of CO2 in the gaseous phase, transformations in energy sinks due to land cover management in the solid phase, and alterations over water cycles due to compartmentalization, inland water losses, acidification and pollution. An increase in the energy pool of the atmosphere explains ice loss in the Arctic, ice increase (at the moment) in the Antarctic (differences in land-ocean contrasts with NH), increasing number of events related with strong winds, water downpours and snow fall, heat heat waves and cold displacements moving crossing latitudes instead of having smooth transitions through longitudes.

Commenter 3#

This is an interesting and arresting debate. Please keep exchanging views and thoughts – it is a creative process and you may find some common threads through discussion – or new threads to follow! I got lost early on, but you two can work on this, in spite of differing views.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I have to leave the library where I am now. 20:00 UTC+1. Thanks for the feedback.

Commenter 4#

As a lay observer, I can only say that climate scientists have told us that the compounding effects of anthropogenic global warming will be massive and not entirely predictable. The FACT of this loss in ice mass is important all by itself. We can argue about what the knock-on effects might be, and scientists will do that, but let’s remember that the big story is that the ice mass is dwindling and that will alter the planet in major ways. We do know that.

Commenter 2#

But what we dont know is how much of the recent Arctic ice loss is due to an increase in invading warm waters from the Atlantic and Pacific and how much from CO2. First there was a similar loss of ice in the 1920s and 30s and it was associated with ocean oscillations and the transport of warm water and more southerly marine life into the Arctic. Second measurements over ice covered Arctic waters demonstrated a declining trend in air temperatures during the 80s and early 90s.

Commenter 2#

Third the rapid loss of Arctic ice was not due to melting from warm air, but due to a shift in the direction of freezing winds that blew thick ice through the Fram Strrait and out into the Atlantic where it melted. The shift in freezing winds were due to the Arctic Oscillation which appears to be a natural cycle unaffected by CO2 concentrations in modeling studies.

Commenter 5#

There’s no such thing as Arctic Amplification, increased forcing of the climate increases positive NAO/AO, which cools the AMO and Arctic. Arctic sea ice loss is increased this summer because of negative NAO May to August because of weaker indirect solar, and because of the usual post El Nino warm pulse to the AMO. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/correlation/amon.us.data

Commenter 1#

hi Commenter 5#, sorry for the delay in my reply. I think solar activity and ocean sst (and related teleconnections) are strongly related to sea ice fluctuations…but I’m also aware that the human-made climate change is exacerbatig this natural process.

Commenter 5#

higher levels of solar forcing increases positive NAO/AO, and rising greenhouse gases are modeled to do the same. Yet Arctic warming is strictly negative NAO/AO driven. That is why Arctic amplification is bunkum, and why the Arctic warming since the mid 1990’s is due solely to declining solar factors and nothing to do with rising CO2. http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-3-5-6.html

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Concerning my awareness over Arctic amplification please read the following where I explain my exchange of feedback with Jennifer francis on 2014: https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/2015/02/10/revisiting-the-theory-of-facing-a-decrease-in-the-differential-gradients-of-energy-in-atmospheric-circulation-by-diego-fdez-sevilla/

On Solar forcing I have explained my posture to your approach in 2014 at the AGU group https://www.linkedin.com/groups/2196290/2196290-5931346213575102464 and also a month ago www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6186970395367788544.

With what I have already said and everything that I have shared in my blog throughout three years, I believe that there is enough to offer you some sights helping you to find “the answer” you are looking for. Look for the origin driving the behaviour of “wind shear” instead of using wind shear to justify all atmospheric and SST indexes.

Commenter 5#

And your response was.. “I know your thoughts and who knows, may be you are right, I don´t have all the answers”

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Yep, it is for you to see if there is anything in my research useful for you to apply in yours. As I have explained before, I have looked into ways of incorporating the influence of solar forcing in my line of research and I have seen other major forces which would justify atmospheric dynamics better than solar. Solar pulses of any kind can be comparable with a nuclear detonation in space, and the absence of matter in outpace invalidate transference of pressure or heat. So I conclude that the influence of solar activity is directly dependant on the composition of the atmosphere receiving radiation and I can not apply your approach into my research.

Commenter 5#

the solar wind is particular, i.e. matter. It can warm the thermosphere by 1000°C in a very short time. So you are entirely misinformed. Neither the rise in CO2 or any terrestrial processes can account for the increase in negative North Atlantic Oscillation since the mid 1990’s that has driven AMO and Arctic warming since then.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.


Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

You just need to explain that to the Planet and convince it to behave accordingly in both hemispheres and through the column of the atmosphere. We should be able to measure those thermal oscillations as well as changes in the composition for the ratio C12-C13 and C14. Sure we would also see chemical reactions affecting Ozone in both poles, … May be is not worthy trying to talk me out of my thoughts and try to reach people at NOAA, AGU, NASA, Met Office. They know more than I do, or at least they are officially recognised. I am just a dude with an attitude problem. Solar Forcing in Our Climatic and Atmospheric Dynamics. Location, Location, Location (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) Posted on September 22, 2016 https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/2016/09/22/solar-forcing-in-our-climatic-and-atmospheric-dynamics-location-location-location-by-diego-fdez-sevilla-ph-d/

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I am fooled in a daily bases due to many of my imperfections. But I don´t allow others telling what to think when thinking is the only thing that I can do by myself. Some people might thank some help here: “The stream of energetic particles warms the thermosphere. Carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide, coolants in the thermosphere, absorb the energy and then re-radiate heat back into space. A small fraction of the extra heat from the solar flare radiates to layers of the atmosphere below the thermosphere, but it is miniscule compared to the normal amount of heating the lower layers of the atmosphere already experience from incoming visible and ultraviolet sunlight.”

The link to the previous paragraph is the following: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/do-solar-storms-cause-heat-waves-earth

more also here: http://scied.ucar.edu/shortcontent/thermosphere-overview

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D. Since the scientists at NOAA (EEUU) have been blamed of being biased on their reports I leave here a different source of basic information about the atmosphere, its temperature and what it means for heat transference through the atmosphere column http://www.weather-climate.org.uk/02.php


The thermosphere (literally “heat sphere”) is the outer layer of the atmosphere, separated from the mesosphere by the mesopause. Within the thermosphere temperatures rise continually to well beyond 1000�C. The few molecules that are present in the thermosphere receive extraordinary amounts of energy from the Sun, causing the layer to warm to such high temperatures. Air temperature, however, is a measure of the kinetic energy of air molecules, not of the total energy stored by the air. Therefore, since the air is so thin within the thermosphere, such temperature values are not comparable to those of the troposphere or stratosphere. Although the measured temperature is very hot, the thermosphere would actually feel very cold to us because the total energy of only a few air molecules residing there would not be enough to transfer any appreciable heat to our skin.

Commenter 5#

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D. If evidence and facts cannot change your mind then there is no hope for you.

Commenter 5#

This link is highly misleading and ignorant, it confuses the heating of the thermosphere from the solar wind with that of the flare. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/do-solar-storms-cause-heat-waves-earth Of course the heatwave of March 2012 was caused by the strong solar wind conditions. I predicted it to begin from around 9/7 March 22012, from many months earlier.

Commenter 5#

typo.. 6/7 March

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I don’t have all the answers, because I only have the ones I have found. But I don´t have your answers or those of anybody else’s. I would love to have a sustainable way of life made of being part of a team looking for answers. But at the moment, I don´t have such position and I am not even sure if by spending my last 3 years looking into questions and offering my share, is getting me closer to find a job or just distracting me from the more important question of how can I find a sustainable way of life. So I don´t have all the answers to everyone’s questions. Sometimes I don´t agree with the the arguments justifying the relevance of answering some questions, and even I might not give the same level of priority to the same questions as others do. At the end of the day, it is getting difficult for me to be focused on addressing environmental questions while wondering how to pay bills. Here is where linkedin and facebook meet. Sad I know, but this is the professional state of my career.

Commenter 5#

The interplanetary magnetic field influences mid-latitude surface atmospheric pressure http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/4/045001/pdf

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

There is understanding, knowing and statistics. Understanding physics allows you to take pieces of information supplied by others and make your own. Knowing physics would allow you to know the difference between what happens when you put a chicken egg at the bottom of the ocean, in the surface of the ocean, at the surface of bare soil, at surface of grass, in the air at 10 m above surface, at 700 hPa, at the thermosphere and out space. Statistics will tell you that such thing never happened, is not happening and it will never happen. Yet if you know about those differences you know about physics and how those are related with the behaviour of the Sun and our planet. ”

Commenter 5#

You didn’t know the physics when you said… “Solar pulses of any kind can be comparable with a nuclear detonation in space, and the absence of matter in outpace invalidate transference of pressure or heat.”

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I can also take some publications which support my claims emphasising the relevance of the composition of the atmosphere over solar activity.

“Mysterious Winds Cause Rapid Melting of Antarctic Ice” published November 15, 2016. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/foehn-winds-melt-ice-shelves-antarctic-peninsula-larsen-c/

July 28, 2016 Climbing the Hill of Acknowledgement. Peer reviewed articles supporting previous assessments and research published in this blog. (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) https://diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/2016/07/28/climbing-the-hill-of-acknowledgement-peer-reviewed-articles-supporting-previous-assessments-and-research-published-in-this-blog-by-diego-fdez-sevilla-phd/

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

What ever the sun brings to the planet has a different impact through the atmosphere based on the composition of the atmosphere. That works in altitude, latitude and throughout changes over time.

Commenter 5#

A strong solar influence exists on the NAO/AO at daily to weekly scales. I have been forecasting such scale NAO/AO anomalies from the planetary ordering of solar activity since 2008. You are not in a position to assert what the solar influences are on the basis of your zero research, and with misinformation from NASA.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

Little you know

Scientists find errors in hypothesis linking solar flares to global temperature April 7, 2010 By Lisa Zyga http://phys.org/news/2010-04-scientists-errors-hypothesis-linking-solar.html

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I have to give credit to Commenter 5# since it is by confronting different approaches how theories are challenged, and something useful comes out of it.

Not everyone is willing to engage in such challenge having to offer all types of arguments incorporating a diverse range of associations, links and synergies even incorporating a multidisciplinary dissertation which finds coherence in the mechanisms driving the numbers and data analysed connecting different fields.

We both have exposed our arguments, I keep all of mine and Commenter 5# keep his. Now is time for others to look into those and make their own research, adopt their own postures and make their contribution.

Discussion 2


Commenter 1# (same person as Commenter 1# in Discussion 1)

Something incredible is happening in the North Pole this November…


hi Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D. , we can discuss about the origin, destiny and effects of this heat…but one thing is sure: it is impressive!

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

I didn´t want to add a comment in your update because I don´t want to be invasive in others walls. But since you mentioned, yes, I have been following and it is impressive but not a surprise since I have been in my research pointing to this scenario as part of a tendency. I discussed already this situation last year predicting raining at the Artic in Winter (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dear-sir-diego-fernandez-sevilla-ph-d-) It is difficult for me to make my message through for some reason. What temperature is doing in the Artic is to inhibit the formation of ice instead of being the other way around. Temperature is not dropping despite of the drop in solar radiation, and that is a global assessment. But there is just as much as I can do, and every day without funding or a job, even less. Heat is not transferred into matter. It is matter the one which sucks heat. If matter does not take the heat we call it high albedo. The properties of the matter holding heat is what it is important. Without thermically active matter (no water vapour of GHGs) there is no transference like happens in outspace. With thermically active matter there is transfer up to reaching thermal equilibrium avoiding diffusion

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

It is as simple as looking at how a freezer works. It is not the absence of ice what makes it to cool. It is a system containing a substance which captures heat and takes it away. If you have the freezer sealed it will be dry inside. If it is open you will have frost from the water vapour entering inside.

Diego Fernandez Sevilla, Ph.D.

If the amount of air containing water vapour entering heat into the freezer is enough to counteract the heat captured by the cooling system, there is an inhibition of ice to be form and the temperature does not drop enough to freeze since the thermal equilibrium is higher than freezing temperatures.

(c) by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD. (17 Dec 2016). Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors. http://www.diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Discussion 3

Discussing Climate Under the Radar. Dear “Sir”… (published on Dec 31, 2015)


Real Time Web Analytics

Author’s Disclosure Declaration

For those unaware of the content offered in this blog I might have to issue a warning: Handle with care. Also with the product obtained from scientific analytical thinking there are traces of personal and professional “passion”, by-products obtained from “original and unpeered grey matter juice” originated from “independent critical thinking”. Also sometimes the packaging might be rough around the edges due to its “unfunded nature”.

4 years ago I joined a discussion which made me realise how much knowledge was settled on the past, built upon past conventions and unable to give answers about present developments in all parts of our environment. From the impact from GMOs, plastics, soils degradation, atmospheric composition, land use and cover, water cycles, … I had addressed scientifically unanswered questions before doing my PhD so I decided to give it a go and to offer my take over those gaps. It has been a pilgrimage to become aware of how much faith and fear is put on scientific publishing above raw understanding and discussion.

I do not know how far this blog will go, however, it represents the assessment of a global process and I expect that past posts will become a description of continuous present for the next years.

Altogether, the body of work which represents the line of research presented in this blog is composed by more than 170 pieces, covering data analyses and conceptual discussions. All those different discussions and assessments presented here build together a single concept. The format applied is the result of making a big effort trying to apply simplistic approaches with the aim to allow a multidisciplinary access. Since the topics treated in my publications have implications for many sectors in the academic and not academic world, with the aim of allowing my research for open review, there is also the objective of allowing access to a multisectorial and multidisciplinary audience sharing interest.

Diego Fdez-Sevilla Ph.D.

For a more profound discussion over my assessments and analyses as well as constructive feedback, please use my email d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com.

My agenda is simple, I am in transition looking for either funding to grow the research published in this blog or for a job position in any field in which my assets are valued. Behind my research there is nothing more, nothing else than to showcase my capabilities doing what I like, research. I am a methodologist. I don´t look at the color of the result obtained, only at the suitability of the method and the coherence of the result. As I have said before, if I am wrong on my assessments and conclusions, it will be better for all, and my work would showcase my capabilities anyway. A CV shines the goals obtained by anyone, but by publishing here my research, I expose myself and my work to public judgement. There is a difference between being naive and raw. If you see the difference you will understand better my work and my personal position.

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.


(This post is part of a more complex piece of independent research. I don´t have funding, political agenda or publishing revenues from visits. Any scientist working in disciplines related with the topics that I treat in my blog knows how to judge the contribution that my work could potentially add to the state of knowledge. Since I am in transition looking for a position in research, if you are one of those scientists, by just acknowledging any value you might see from my contribution, would not only make justice to my effort as independent researcher, but ultimately, it will help me to enhance my chances to find a position with resources to further develop my work.

I believe that the hypothesis that I have presented in previous posts in this blog (here, here and here) could help to understand present and possible future scenarios in atmospheric circulation. However, this is an assessment based on observation which needs to be validated throughout open discussion and data gathering. So please feel free to incorporate your thoughts and comments in a constructive manner.

If you feel like sharing this post I would appreciate to have a reference about the place or platform, by private or public message, in order for me to have the opportunity to join the debate and be aware of the repercussion which might generate d.fdezsevilla(at)gmail.com

This work is protected under Intellectual Property laws licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.)

Since October 2013 I have been publishing pieces of research 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.

More assessments presenting chronologically the line of research published in this blog can be accessed in the category Framework and Timeline.

For anybody interested in the posts related with this discussion here I leave you those more relevant in chronological order (there are comments bellow some of them. Please check them out, updated 09th Dec 2016):


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#! 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, 2016. Filling in or Finding Out the gaps around. Publication accessed 20YY-MM-DD at http://www.diegofdezsevilla.wordpress.com/
This entry was posted in Aerobiology, Biological productivity, Energy Balance, Extreme climatic events, Filling in, Finding out, Influence of Continentality, Inland Water Bodies and Water Cycle, Polar vortex and Jet Stream, Solar activity, Water vapour and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD)

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

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

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

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

  5. 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