Arctic Warming as a Result of Convective Forcing by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

Arctic Warming as a Result of Convective Forcing by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD. CV english and españolResume.

(pdf available at ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.34551.73125)

1 March 2018 Update.

“If rain at the deserts would be a strong indicator of something changing, increasing rain at the north pole (in NH Winter) would have a devastating effect in the circulation.” (from previous analysis published in December 2015)

The energy contained by Mid-Latitudinal masses of air is strong enough to work its way towards the North Pole generating warm anomalies in the Arctic at tropospheric and stratospheric levels.

The power expressed for such convective motion is enough to displace Cold Dense masses of air from the Arctic into lower latitudes. The feedback loop resultant addressed in previous assessments is showing throughout this winter 2018. Energy is being released from Latent Heat carried by water vapour at Arctic latitudes (as it can be seen in the Pacific and Atlantic intrusions) and more latent heat is also being released at Mid Latitudes with the intrusion of cold masses of air.

Altogether, convective motions moving towards the Arctic are triggering the release of Latent heat simultaneously in the Arctic and at Mid Latitudes.

The incoming energy released into the atmosphere has the potential of fuelling more convective motion in the atmosphere to the point of self perpetuation, inducing changes in the ENSO phase and all the other Indexes as well as promoting Heat waves towards the seasonal increase in Solar Radiation.

Atmospheric Conditions 27 Feb 2017

Vertical Cross Section of Geopotential Height Anomalies The daily geopotential height anomalies at 17 pressure levels are shown for the previous 120 days as indicated, and they are normalized by standard deviation using 1979-2000 base period. The anomalies are calculated by subtracting 1979-2000 daily climatology, and then averaged over the polar cap poleward of 65°N. The blue (red) colors represent a strong (weak) polar vortex. The black solid lines show the zero anomalies. Compare with previous assessment: February 4, 2016
(updated 11-18 Feb2016) Polar Vortex, Old News, Same News? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)  ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25779.12328

Atmospheric Conditions 1st March 2018


Identifying the complexity of modelling can be complicated. Understanding the simplicity of what the models try to explain can be even more complicated than that. Or maybe, inherently within our models, we are just projecting our own limitations to understand the simplicity of things.

Energy fuels the work done by warm masses of air displacing colder masses of air in their path. That increases mixing patterns generating anomalies in temperature. Accordingly, behind an increase in the amount of work carried out by masses of air there is an increase in the energy fuelling such dynamics.

Energy can only be transferred, not created or destroyed. So more work means more energy in circulation. More energy in circulation can only be sustained by a substance carrying it. Either the energy comes from the Sun or from the Oceans, the carrier has to be in the atmosphere in order for the energy to produce work. And the body loosing heat cools down.

Airmass 7 Feb 2018

TPW 5-6 Feb 2018

TPW 24 Feb 2018

TPW 27-28 Feb 2018

Source of Heat Reaching the Arctic

Here there are different interpretations. The recent incorporation of assessments published in the media from scientists offers an hypothesis which I do not agree with.

Previous arguments have been exposed in previous assessments which would apply today to discuss the arguments shared in the media for this winter 2018 addressing warming processes at the Arctic:

North Pole surges above freezing in the dead of winter, stunning scientists By Jason Samenow February 26 at
Icy Europe, balmy North Pole: the world upside down February 28, 2018 by Marlowe Hood at

Against the argument: “One theory holds that newly ice-free ocean surface—which absorbs the Sun’s rays rather than bouncing them back into space like snow—releases warmth into the air that eventually disrupts the stratosphere.“”This much is certain—there is overwhelming evidence that changes in the Arctic will affect our weather.”

My Arguments defends the convective forcing of mid-latitudinal circulation invading the Arctic as the main mechanism driving warm anomalies at Surface and Stratospheric level.

November 17, 2016 Arctic Amplification versus Arctic Absorption (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Researchgate:  DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.24688.35848
December 17, 2016 Orbital Seasonality vs Kinetic Seasonality. A Change Triggered from Changing the Order of The Factors (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.20129.81760

*“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. – See full discussion following the links in the titles above with blue color-)

Contrasting hypothesis

The Arctic has been anomalously warm through the present Winter 2018.

It has suffered warm conditions in surface temperatures and at stratospheric level.

Daily mean temperature and climate north of the 80th northern parallel, as a function of the day of year. Calculation of the Arctic Mean Temperature The daily mean temperature of the Arctic area north of the 80th northern parallel is estimated from the average of the 00z and 12z analysis for all model grid points inside that area. The ERA40 reanalysis data set from ECMWF, has been applied to calculate daily mean temperatures for the period from 1958 to 2002. From 2002 to present the operational model (at all times) from The ECMWF is used for mean temperature calculations. The ERA40 reanalysis data, has been applied to calculate daily climate values that are plotted along with the daily analysis values in all plots. The data used to determine climate values is the full ERA40 data set, from 1958 to 2002. More information can be found here.

Vertical Cross Section of Geopotential Height Anomalies The daily geopotential height anomalies at 17 pressure levels are shown for the previous 120 days as indicated, and they are normalized by standard deviation using 1979-2000 base period. The anomalies are calculated by subtracting 1979-2000 daily climatology, and then averaged over the polar cap poleward of 65°N. The blue (red) colors represent a strong (weak) polar vortex. The black solid lines show the zero anomalies. Compare with previous assessment: February 4, 2016
(updated 11-18 Feb2016) Polar Vortex, Old News, Same News? (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla)  ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.25779.12328

Such warm conditions have inhibited the formation of ice.

The source of the energy inhibiting ice formation and promoting warm events.

Solar Radiation:

As it was discussed in previous assessments (here and here), the winter season at the NH is characterised by the absence of Solar Radiation due to the change in planetary tilt. So we can discard Solar as the source of the energy warming the Arctic.

Sea Surface Temperatures and Ice Melting

Lets look at some basic principles:

If we have an ice cube sitting at room temperature, we know the ice cube will begin to

melt. The warmth of the room is melting the ice because the water molecules are absorbing the thermal energy from the air in the room, and this energy is making the molecules move faster and farther away from each other, bringing them from a solid state (ice) to a liquid state (water). Because this process absorbs energy, it is endothermic.


However, if we put the ice cube back in the freezer, the liquid water will begin to turn back into solid ice.  In this freezing process, the water molecules are giving up thermal energy to their surroundings in the freezer, and are thus losing energy to change states.  This is therefore an exothermic process. (source)

The Oceanic waters at the Arctic are not cooling down releasing heat into the surroundings, so they are not releasing the heat required to deliver the anomalies indicating a warming process at the atmosphere.

However, the intrusions of water vapour from Mid Latitudinal circulation into the Arctic have been a constant throughout the Winter 2018.

16 Jan 2018

25 Feb 2018

See previous assessment to be contrasted with present dynamics: (Green letters show an extract from previous analyses published. Follow the link at the title to see full analysis)

Discussing Climatic Teleconnections. Follow Up On My Previous Research (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.) Posted on


The present patterns seen in the circulation over the Arctic, linking Pacific and Atlantic circulations (more also here), are consistent with the mechanisms presented in this theory.

Arctic Dynamics IN-OUT Diego Fdez-SevillaFurthermore, I believe that these mechanisms point to an interconnection between Atlantic and Pacific atmospheric circulations through the Arctic, which could be dominating the teleconnections identified at global scale and the oceanic and atmospheric phenomena that affect our weather at global scale.

In the following video I present the latest developments in atmospheric dynamics occurred between 13rd to 15th of October over the North Hemisphere. For better quality use HD definition. (see animation in combination with previous publicationA Climate Between Waters” where it is pointed out the mechanisms behind the Trans-Arctic circulation pattern which is also mentioned in follow-ups found at the Timeline page.)

Water Vapor Profile Retrievals for NOAA 19 on the 20th Oct 2015.

3D 20th Oct15 WV N19 by Diego Fdez-Sevilla

Water Vapor Profile Retrievals for NOAA 19 on the 20th Oct 2015.

See also this video from previous publication summarising some concepts:

Observational events on atmospheric dynamics. A follow-up assessment over the theory proposed over Energetic gradients by Diego Fdez-Sevilla.

I only have my own analyses to  support such assessments, and I am aware of that in order to consider any value over such assessments, some people needs to see it in a peer reviewed article published in a renown journal. My process allows for anyone to be a reviewer contrasting current developments with my assessments.


Overall, the current dynamics agree with previous assessments indicating an increasing predominant role of convective forcing in atmospheric dynamics. Such strength justify the amount of energy required to displace cold masses of air from Arctic circulation into mid Latitudinal latitudes as well as disturbing stratospheric circulation.

In a global scale, the increase in strength and expansion (from tropospheric level to stratospheric) for the observed warming processes at the Arctic would reflect an agreement with other previous assessments pointing out an increase in the mixing ratio between previously compartmentalized parts of the Atmospheric circulation.

September 14, 2016 Between Global Cooling and Global Warming There Is “Global Mixing” (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19874.63684
March 23, 2017 Final Review in Progress. March 2017. From ENSO to Scientific Thinking by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD.  ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33915.82726
August 31, 2017 Climate. A System Becoming Dominated By Free Energy. The “Drama”, Character Driven VS Plot Driven (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD)  ResearchGate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18509.13289

Conclusions In a Nutshell

My definition of Climate Drift is: the deviation from equilibrium of the conditions allowing the perpetuity of an established symbiotic relationship between biotic and none biotic components in a micro and macro ecosystem. This situation can be due to changes in any component of the ecosystem playing a synergistic effect over the rest. And the causes can be either a change in the magnitude of the already implemented forces in place, changes in the directionality or rates in the flows of energy pre-established OR/AND the impact suffered by the incorporation of new components/forces and energy sinks or sources in any part of the system interfering with the previously established order and balance.

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. And ultimately, increasing the mixing ratio between mid-latitudinal masses of air with those from the Arctic across a weak Polar Jet stream. The number of heat waves seen around the world as well as the number  and direction in the track of the tropical storms seen over the Pacific and Atlantic basins, express an instability induced by a turbulent motion. A turbulent motion between fluids induce mixing, and my assessment is based on that such process can only be forced by a push in the amount of energy entering the system. Being Water vapour the carrier thanks to GHGs enhancing the thermal capacity of the atmosphere.

In my assessments I have defended that the increase in the energy pool at mid-latitudes would ultimately create an scenario with an overcharged atmosphere. That would reduce the contrasts with which to create and maintain stability in the structure required to condense energy in singular events, like hurricanes. Giving more relevance to the single contrast between Ocean/continental masses. However, the opening of the Arctic circulation through a weak Jet Stream would reduce the pressure in the containment absorbing the condensation of energy at midlatitudes, expanding into a new volume.

Accordingly, hadley circulation gets affected (see also) generating new patterns of turbulence at the ITCZ as well as it gets influenced Arctic mixing zones with lower latitudes.

In this scenario TCs are generated under an increase in the mixing ratio of an unstable atmospheric circulation dominated by kinetic energy transferred by water vapour thanks to GHGs, and immersed in an overcharged atmosphere with no place where to diffuse its energy, becoming resilient as long as they stay over the ocean. So they endure like a piece of an ice rock in cold water.

About Sea Surface Temperatures, my assessments take SST as subsequent conditions driven by wind shear. So the interaction between masses of air in circulation allowes or inhibits SST developments. Once the scenario is built on SST this becomes a “battle field” conditioning the subsequent interaction between the following masses of air and the characteristics of the “grounds” where the game will be played (sort of speak). Like the effect of the ice conditions in an ice hockey match.

El Niño is an event which happens in a very small portion of the Earth, it is related to the temperature of a very thin layer of the Ocean in depth, a small percentage of the area occupied by the whole Oceanic masses, and even smaller when it is integrated in the multidimensional space combining Ocean and atmosphere. It is kind of intriguing to think why it has been so easy to conclude that such small portion of the entire system is driving it as a whole. It is like considering that the flowering of plants drives the seasons. Similarly it could be said about using SST at the Arctic to justify altogether; the lack of ice, warmer temperatures at tropospheric level and even at stratospheric level. There is not enough energy in the SST of such small area as it is the Arctic to justify all those convective dynamics.

(March 22, 2016 Pacific atmospheric dynamics with and without a positive ENSO (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD) Reasearchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1968.5521).

It can not surprise me enough the fact that there is a scientific agreement followed by theories such the Arctic Amplification and Stephan Boltzmann black body radiation, which focus on single locations as sources of energy triggering warming events. Arctic amplification focus the attention in the Arctic, and the absence of ice decreasing albedo, to justify the location for the source of energy warming the atmosphere in the Sea Surface Waters. And it does it even considering the absence of Solar radiation, which in itself discards any process of albedo absorbing and re-emitting energy. Accordingly with their theory, Arctic amplification suggests that Arctic circulation affects circulation at mid-latitudes, however, all the dynamics we see point in the opposite direction. Mid latitudinal forcing pushes against Arctic restrictions through the Jet Stream, displacing cold masses of air in their path, using water vapour as the carrier of the energy feeding convective motions.

Stephan Boltzmann relation describing radiative gradients of temperature rely entirely on an idealized body homogeneous in composition and even pressure. Such statement neglects the nature of the processes involved in the transference of energy found in the atmosphere where there are simultaneously three states of matter, gaseous, liquid and solid, numerous compounds different in molecular composition and behaviour, as well as an active thermodynamic system made of heterogeneous cells containing independent microsystems of entropy, interacting in a macro system out from equilibrium. (more here). So opposite from a black body, the distribution of radiation and heat across an heterogeneous system delivers an uneven distribution marked by the nature of the connections built between micro and macro systems, ecosystems and abiotic systems, gaseous, liquid, solid and multi-estate systems. It becomes evident that there is not a distribution of temperatures following a gradient defined by Stephan-Boltzmann estimations because the transference of energy is heterogeneous due to the heterogeneous composition and disposition of the matter states in the planetary system. By understanding those limitations we can identify the expansion of energetic pulses throughout the atmosphere by avoiding focusing the attention over the temperatures and instead, focusing the attention into identifying the “work” expressed by the dynamics in motion, either as forms of precipitation, trans-latitudinal transportation of matter (Water Vapour), transference of radiation (SSW), discharges of electricity and displacements of cold and heat waves.

I could write something about the implications of current developments over the global assessment behind the dynamics we see unfolding this days (Winter 2018) over the NH and yet, I would look at the transition from summer 2017 and the present, and I would offer the same conclusions as the ones I published in 2015/16.

Nothing has changed in the dynamics that we see in the current situation. If anything can be taken from current developments is that those dynamics over the mixing fluctuations driven by kinetic forcing are becoming more evident over time.

It is not so relevant what makes Mid latitudes colder in Winter if it comes as an expression of reducing Solar radiation over the NH due to tilt variations. What it becomes relevant is the fact that colder conditions in the NH are being driven in location and extent by convective forcing dominating Arctic circulation.

“(From previous assessment) The changes we might face in Atmospheric Composition and Land Cover and Use, will always being followed by alterations in Thermodynamical behaviour towards increasing entropy. The only mechanisms playing resilience against those changes, towards reducing entropy, are the ones driven by Biological presence and processes. In one hand by reducing albedo, absorbing CO2, enhancing soil properties and fixing energy in an inert form. In other hand,  by its “functionally adapted” distribution around the world, by the “morphological configuration” as individuals and as whole ecosystems, by the interactive characteristic metabolisms aimed to control specific conditions in their surroundings and by the less understood contribution from Biological processes in atmospheric developments (here and here). The capacity of transformation that the human specie, and its activities, has to change the composition of the Atmosphere and the Oceans, the structure of the Land Cover, and the self evolved functionality of Biological systems compromise the “stability” of the whole planetary system by interfering with the performance of those mechanisms of resilience which are the result of years of evolution. “

Food for Thought

The material which  I present throughout the line of research published in my blog is not the result of a peer review process. More or less, those publications are similar to the letters that Darwin sent to London from the ship the Beagle through his voyage.

And yet, instead of avoiding peer review, I have challenged it, I have pursued it and encouraged it by offering a whole line of research for publicly scrutiny, eliminating restrictions by journal discipline or individual peer preferences, allowing access to it from all fields of knowledge.


Genuine Originality

In February 21, 2014 I wrote my first assessment over climatic alterations pointing out the need to focus the attention over the enhanced capacity of the atmosphere to contain water vapour and the repercussion over energetic dynamics through the atmosphere.

In this publication in my blog I offered in a nutshell what it was my assessment about the global state of the atmospheric dynamics, the climatic implications for the environment and the restrictions behind modelling. At the time it might seem like clatter in the echo chamber of things. Even in Dec 2014 Prof. Jennifer Francis replied to me claiming that:

many of your statements have not yet been verified by peer-reviewed research.

But furthermore, she acknowledged her own distant position and lack of understanding over my line of research by claiming that:

“To get funding or a job in this field, however, will require a deeper understanding of the state of the research, knowledge of atmospheric dynamics (not just suggestive examples and anecdotal evidence), and statements supported by published (or your own) analysis.”

(email exchange in full here)

Therefore, throughout the next three years I looked at all of my arguments embedded in those little phrases, looking for methods and sustainable analysis capable of building a message strong enough to make them worth of attention. I have sliced each argument in individual assessments in order to address their significant meaning. Now that the project has gone through all those aspects offering assessments for each one separately and as a whole, I believe that this little piece of writing will recover the original meaning with which it was intended.

February 21, 2014 Resilience in our models (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.27974.98884

In order to ensure the veracity of my claims over its original day of publication and content, this link points to the web archive record of it. Also available at the blog with updated links to posterior content:

On October 21, 2014 I published my theory describing the mechanisms involved and some of the repercussions derived:

October 21, 2014 (Updated 22/Dec/14) New theory proposal to assess possible changes in Atmospheric Circulation (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla) Researchgate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4859.3440“Based on my theory, Greenhouse gases store energy which leads to an increase in global temperature. This increase in T, altogether with synergistic effects of aerosols, allows more water vapor to be contained in the atmosphere, which consequently adds more energy into the atmosphere in form of latent heat and kinetic energy.”


All following publications are just different attempts to describe real time developments showing links with my ideas.

February 10, 2015 (UPGRADED 24th March2015) Revisiting the theory of “Facing a decrease in the differential gradients of energy in atmospheric circulation” by Diego Fdez-Sevilla. Researchgate: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1975.7602/1

… + 200 publications

March 23, 2017 Final Review in Progress. March 2017. From ENSO to Scientific Thinking by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD.  ResearchGate DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.33915.82726

For More related posts in this topic see timeline page to consult the index with all previous assessments published by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD. (author’s email:

About myself:

After finishing my Masters in Biology Environmental Science in 2001, I have performed research at PhD level and worked inside and outside academia at institutions linked with environmental research and management. In 2013 I found myself in a period of transition searching for a new job’s position.

In such competitive scenario, instead of just moving my cv between desks waiting for my next opportunity to arrive, I used it as an advantageous standing point to start and develop independent research in a blog in which I could open my own line of research completely free of external pressures or interferences.

Through the whole project I have increasingly being focused on publishing pieces of original research applying my own perspective aiming to address relevant environmental questions.

The level of uncertainty which I have accomplished in my assessments has reached enough accuracy to replicate real time developments to the point of compete with models sustained by corporate and administrative budgets.

On Feb 2017, it has reached an stage in which its framework has been defined and it has been applied in follow-ups (in the timeline section at the bottom use ctrl+F: “follow-up”) delivering the subsequent conclusions. Therefore, the work which I present in my blog has become a chapter in my career, and I should focus now my attention on my new steps towards professional and personal growth.

The economic support sustaining the three years of research presented in this blog has been private based on my own capacity to generate it. Once the main conclusions of the project have demonstrated their value, in the absence of economic support, I can only look into other activities aside offering detailed assessments in this blog in order to keep moving while hoping that my published work could call the interest for its continuity from external sources of financial support.

Therefore, since Feb 2017, the generation of assessments over real-time developments discontinues its weekly bases due to the absence of financial support.

You have to be aware of that while one single line of writing containing an original idea can be read in seconds, reaching such idea might take weeks, months or years of analyses and reasoning. Such process is time consuming and require to achieve a state of mind where the focus of attention is prioritised over the subject under study above other matters. This state of mind can only be achieved and maintained when there is no need to address solving the challenge of being under the pressure of having to find access to all kind of material resources while also searching for ways to support an autonomous life style.

If you are interested in the continuity of this project, please share your interest publicly so investors and institutions might recognise its value and offer the support required to make this research an activity sustainable in a full time schedule.

Some people might think that being independent is related with being free from economical agendas. Since we all rely on economic support to sustain our activities, every activity require economic support. Being “independent” is a mindset which only should reflect an attitude based on a self-evolved criteria built upon a critical mind. It should not be identified with isolation but instead with the reputation of the source offering an opinion.

I am sorry I can not be involved in discussions and assessments in a full time-frame since I do not have the required economic support.

I only hope that with my previous activity I have been able to build a reputation over my capacity to analyse situations, make assessments, build communication channels and interact with others. And I hope that it will help me to find a team interested in sharing such attitude helping to support the reputation of institution/s involved.

Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD In transition

I am looking for new opportunities and new challenges, to join a team. At the same time that I look for job openings to incorporate my resume, I would encourage any one finding interesting any of the skills which I apply throughout my research, as well as communicator, to evaluate my profile as a candidate for your projects. email d.fdezsevilla(at)

You can look at the whole project (more than 190 posts between Oct 2013 to Feb 2017) published at and also you will find some of those publications in my profile at ResearchGate and at the Citations page.

I am living in Spain free to relocate geographically worldwide.

About this Project:

My definition of Climate Drift is: the deviation from equilibrium of the conditions allowing the perpetuity of an established symbiotic relationship between biotic and none biotic components in a micro and macro ecosystem. This situation can be due to changes in any component of the ecosystem playing a synergistic effect over the rest. And the causes can be either a change in the magnitude of the already implemented forces in place, changes in the directionality or rates in the flows of energy pre-established OR/AND the impact suffered by the incorporation of new components/forces and energy sinks or sources in any part of the system interfering with the previously established order and balance.

This project published in a blog format, offers pieces of original research in environmental science, and a space for discussion, based on considering as a major factor limiting our understandings the lack of attention given to the gaps of knowledge existent. The concepts, measurements and parameters applied to address environmental synergistic interactions are too narrow and isolated from each other to understand their full meaning. Such circumstance induce to reach dogmatic patterns of thought to make the quickest conclusions in the absence of a better and clear idea describing what is happening.

In this Project I aim to address those limitations using observational analyses offering assessments over real time events considering those as proxies of significant value to make interpretations over global synergistic relationships.

Feedback is always welcome here and at my email d.fdezsevilla(at)

Since 2002 I have performed research over the Atmospheric Dynamics interacting with the biota in the field of Aerobiology. In Oct 2013 I focused my attention over climatic dynamics and in Oct 2014 I published what I believe to be a valid theory explaining current developments in atmospheric dynamics. I shared my thoughts at my blog and several groups in LinkedIn (like the AGU, NASA and NOA groups) where the immense response offered has been silence.

In Feb 2015 I published a revision and since then a constant follow-up throughout more than 200 assessments. Still today, March 2018, the majority of the response is silence despite the amount of visits identified by all the SEO tools and the interactions and shares accounted. See the related stats at the Timeline page.

So I thank your open feedback and share.

Nowadays, there are many divisions between disciplines due to the isolated nature of their specific language and methodologies. I might not use the right vocabulary for all the fields which I discuss, or the right data or the right reasoning. But when nobody is able to offer a consensus over what it is going on, I wonder, what is right this days?.

Licencia de Creative Commons
Esta obra está bajo una licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.


About Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

The work here presented has no economic or institutional support. Please consider to make a donation to support the means for making sustainable the energy, time and resources required. Also any sponsorship or mentoring interested would be welcome. Intellectual Property This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Citing This Site: "Title", published online "Month"+"Year" retrieved on "Month""Day", "Year" from By Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD. Or by using its DOI at ResearchGate. More guidance on citing this web as a source can be found at NASA webpage:! For those publications missing at the ResearchGate profile vinculated with this project DOIs can be generated on demand by request at email: d.fdezsevilla(at) **Author´s profile: Born in 1974. 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 work previous to 2013 as scientific speaker in events held in those countries as well as in Switzerland and Finland. After 12 years performing research and working in institutions linked with environmental research and management, in 2013 I found myself in a period of transition searching for a new position or funding to support my own line of research. In the current competitive scenario, in order to demonstrate my capacities instead of just moving my cv waiting for my next opportunity to arrive, I decided to invest my energy and time in opening my own line of research sharing it in this blog. In March 2017 the budget reserved for this project has ended and its weekly basis time frame discontinued until new forms of economic and/or institutional support are incorporated into the project. The value of the data and the original nature of the research presented in this platform and at LinkedIn 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 achievements and that the Intellectual Property Rights generated with the license of attribution attached are respected and considered by the scientist involved in similar lines of research. **Any comment and feedback aimed to be constructive is welcome as well as any approach exploring professional opportunities to be part of.** 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, 2018, 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) or consult my profile at LinkedIn, ResearchGate and 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 and DOIs found at the Framework and Timeline page and ResearchGate. (c)Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD, 2018. Filling in or/and Finding Out the gaps around. Publication accessed 20YY-MM-DD at
This entry was posted in Energy Balance, Extreme climatic events, Filling in, Polar vortex and Jet Stream, Water vapour and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Arctic Warming as a Result of Convective Forcing by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD

  1. Pingback: Climate. Too Simple To Be It (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla, Ph.D.) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  2. Pingback: Convecting Forcing Dominating Atmospheric Circulation NH (By Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

  3. Pingback: Tropical Cyclones under a New Climatic Scenario (by Diego Fdez-Sevilla PhD) | Diego Fdez-Sevilla, PhD.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.