|
meteoptic-l [ät] ursa.fi
message archive
This is meteoptic-l [ät] ursa.fi message archive.
Note, your can reply the messages on this page only if your
are already subscribed the list.
» To the end of the list/message
> I had no intention to point out that altocumulus virga is the only valid
> source for hydrometeros causing the elliptical haloes.
Timo, you missread the conversation. Look at the
earlier mails. In the first mails the Ac Virga was listed
as the cloud type, whereas you have done nothing of the
sort. Hence is a sheer impossibility for anybody criticizing
YOU of that. It was a part of an explanation referring to
letters that went to Meteoptic before you had partaken the
issue at all.
> Have you considered the fact that Mr Nousiainen observed the
> phenomenen half a kilometer from the pipe, whereas Hakumaki made
his observation about a half a kilometer further away.
Due to having having lived for 15 years in a geometrical
point that is approximately 250 m from your home and
roughly 150 m from that of Hakumaki, and between the
places of you two gentleman - yes, the thought has
occurred to me.
At that day you were both along the plume cloud route, which
is evident in your combined photo shots.
In Fairbanks we drove with a car crisscros city for
several hours on consequintive days. We went for plumes,
we drove both outside plume clouds and under them, and
along and through the plume routes. If you dont see any halos
outside particular plume route and when you go in foot the
plume minus couple of hundred meters with the plume in zenith
and you see visual virga directly from that plume dropping
directly to your feet and making instant coffee halos, and
you experience this several times, it then requires some hell
of a intellectual eye-closing and extraordinary
explanation talent not to admit that this actually is
happening.
That might recall Dr. Können the high moment of The Dutch
Royal Meteorological Institute when the meteorologist in
charge answered to a telephone complaint about unforecasted,
present rain: "Its impossible" and closed the phone.
Arctic plume raiding by car in hell-cold temperatures
is a very eye-opening experience, a thing we managed to miss
in Kuopio back in the days of KuVaR. Halo people are nowadays
painfully aware of the discrepancy between laboratory and nature
concerning ice crystal growth. That is one of the main reasons
we are going to Antarctica to study halos at all.
South Pole researchers have gone routinely through ice crystal
blitzkriegs in which water droplet clouds turn into crystals within
the very time span that you quote referred as being a
dangerous assumption and that you quote considered as
inadequate.
> I wave no intention of crashing your argument against AC virga as
the > only source, neither do I try to prove industrial smoke is not
> responsible for the elliptical halo observed (and photographed) in this
> peculiar case.
There was no-one suggesting you were wishing to intend
such things.
> I merely want to point out that IF the argument for
> industrial smoke is based on this one observation alone, then it should
> be noted there is really no hard evidence for it.
If you have an ellipse photographed against a plume cloud
like in Feb 1988 display, it is then literally a piece
of evidence. It is better than average in those conditions
as we both know. In the light of Fairbanks experiences it
gives essentially more than 50% that the halo is from that
particular plume. What the stationary photos from two p
oints don't give - without e.g. car driving around the
plume, crystal replicas etc etc - it doesn't give full
certainty that the halo is from that particular source -
and from this we probably agreed in the first place.
Piikki's and Sillanpaa's photos will be asked from the
photographers to be sent to Applied Optics - similarly
as with the earlier examples. Besides Timo, you are (sincerely)
and heartfully welcomed for a visit to see the
pictures. Also I invite you to make a comment about them.
Regards, Marko Pekkola
|