Watch the skies and land and oceans

Wondering if there is any correlation between the seeming increase in global fog reports and the instances of Coronal Mass Ejections or any other type of solar radiation. Asking Chat GPT...

You are an expert in data science, astronomy, and meteorology. Can a correlation between coronal mass ejections or any other electromagnetic radiations from the sun be correlated to fog creation globally?

ChatGPT said:​


Correlating coronal mass ejections (CMEs) or other solar electromagnetic phenomena with fog formation globally is an intriguing idea, but it is a complex and multifaceted question. Here's an analysis based on current knowledge:


1.​

Fog primarily forms when air becomes saturated with moisture, leading to the condensation of water vapor into tiny droplets. Key factors include:

  • Temperature: Cooling of air near the surface (e.g., radiative cooling at night or advection of warm air over cold surfaces).
  • Humidity: High moisture content in the atmosphere.
  • Particulate Matter: Aerosols and particles act as condensation nuclei.

2.​

Solar phenomena like CMEs and other solar emissions can impact Earth's atmosphere in several ways:

  • Geomagnetic Storms: CMEs can cause geomagnetic disturbances by interacting with Earth's magnetosphere, leading to changes in ionospheric conductivity and geomagnetic field fluctuations.
  • Cosmic Ray Modulation: Solar activity influences the flux of galactic cosmic rays reaching Earth's atmosphere. These rays can enhance ionization and potentially contribute to cloud and fog formation via aerosol creation.
  • UV Radiation and Ozone: Variations in solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation affect ozone production, which could influence atmospheric heating and cooling rates.

3.​

While the mechanisms above can influence atmospheric dynamics, the connection to fog formation is not direct and would likely involve:

  • Indirect Effects on Aerosols: CMEs might alter the production or distribution of aerosols through geomagnetic storms, which could affect condensation nuclei availability for fog formation.
  • Regional Temperature and Pressure Effects: Solar-induced changes in atmospheric circulation could influence local conditions conducive to fog, such as radiative cooling or moisture accumulation.

4.​

Studies exploring correlations between solar activity and lower atmospheric phenomena like fog are limited. However:

  • Research has shown some correlations between solar activity and cloud cover, which could indirectly affect fog formation.
  • A global analysis of fog events against solar activity indices (e.g., sunspot numbers, CME frequency) could help identify patterns.

5.​

  • Time Scales: Solar activity varies over short (solar flares) and long (11-year solar cycle) timescales, whereas fog formation is a local and transient phenomenon.
  • Data Resolution: High-resolution global data on fog events, aerosols, and solar activity are necessary for robust analysis.
  • Confounding Variables: Atmospheric fog dynamics are influenced by myriad factors (e.g., topography, urbanization), complicating isolation of solar activity effects. [...].

ChatGPT seems to think there could be a correlation, but there are a number of confounding variables. FWIW.

Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.
 
Ellipse, and anyone else for whom this may be useful: part of the underlying ethos of this forum is to come to a more objective view of what goes on in our reality. That goal is not served by actively looking for confirmation of things we believe, regardless of how accurate we think out beliefs are (and here I'm talking mainly about the beliefs based on the Cs cosmology, because that is, after all, the source of most of our beliefs).

Instead, we should always and everywhere be looking to DISPROVE our beliefs. NOT because we want to get rid of our beliefs necessarily, but because;

a) we should not ever 'believe too hard' because we must always stay open, and

b) by actively attempting to disprove our beliefs and challenge our tendency towards confirmation bias, we give ourselves a far better chance of being left with whatever real, close-to-objective, evidence there may be to support our beliefs.

So it's whether or not we just 'want to believe' or if instead we want to KNOW.

If we just want to believe, then we'll have a tendency to jump at any and all evidence that tends to confirm our belief, and we'll never know if our belief is true or not.

If we want to know, then we will always question our assumptions, never rely on our first "blink", and always stop and think and question and research and at the very least come up with more than one possible explanation for any given topic. We will, do that extra legwork in advance of posting here on the forum, because in that way we add to the quality of our posts and thereby increase the quality of the body of information on this forum.
This is extremely well put. In response to the bold bit at the end, I would add that it is also helpful, having done that legwork, to include some of it in our posts, even our "blinks". Sometimes our blinks will be good, other times wildly off course, kind of like remote viewing. It's also helpful to everyone to see what the alternative explanations we have considered are, and what is the evidence for and against them. Doing so can also open our thinking processes up to feedback. Sometimes we will miss an alternate explanation, or give too much weight to the conclusion we have reached and the handful of datapoints that support it, even if the supporting evidence is ambivalent, i.e. it can just as easily be incorporated into competing explanations. Sometimes we will be convinced that a piece of evidence suggests one thing and eliminates others, even if it doesn't.

I think when posting our conclusions or "takes" we should also be careful not to present them as sure things. There's always a chance we're wrong, that our reasoning isn't perfect, and that alternate explanations can account for evidence either just as well or better than the one we have come to. It's of little use to stay open, only to then believe too hard in the conclusion we come to and close ourself off from continuing to stay open to new evidence and better interpretations. It might also be the case that the stronger the belief or conviction (in at least some cases), and the stronger we present it as having to be true (and everyone who disagrees is an inferior moron), the weaker it will actually be. There's no need to be right, or to be right right away. It's perfectly acceptable, and probably preferable (IMO), to be uncertain and only consider possibilities or probabilities. And it's not other people's job to prove us wrong, e.g. "I'll be convinced my theory is true until someone convinces me it's not." Better to be aware of the potential weaknesses of whatever conclusions we come to from the beginning.

This leads to one last thing: even if we have done the legwork and come to what we think is a close-to-objective take, it is always good to consider, "What new evidence would cause me to change my mind? Is it possible such evidence exists, and I just don't have access to it at this moment? What if it comes out in a month, a year, or 5 years? Will I have egg on my face?" We never have access to all the data, and even a single piece of new evidence can invalidate something we were certain to be true. By always being open to the idea that there could be evidence disproving our current pet theory, we can avoid holding on too hard and coming to premature conclusions about the way things "must" be.
 
One thing I've noticed over the years is the very high rate of thyroid and respiratory problems. Clearly related to the industrial pollution, though not officially acknowledged (we joke that the local meteorological service is sponsored by the nickel plant!).
Here are the mental illnesses and the rates of attempted and actual suicide.

Something that is also hidden by the authorities and the media.
 
This is extremely well put. In response to the bold bit at the end, I would add that it is also helpful, having done that legwork, to include some of it in our posts, even our "blinks". Sometimes our blinks will be good, other times wildly off course, kind of like remote viewing. It's also helpful to everyone to see what the alternative explanations we have considered are, and what is the evidence for and against them. Doing so can also open our thinking processes up to feedback. Sometimes we will miss an alternate explanation, or give too much weight to the conclusion we have reached and the handful of datapoints that support it, even if the supporting evidence is ambivalent, i.e. it can just as easily be incorporated into competing explanations. Sometimes we will be convinced that a piece of evidence suggests one thing and eliminates others, even if it doesn't.

I think when posting our conclusions or "takes" we should also be careful not to present them as sure things. There's always a chance we're wrong, that our reasoning isn't perfect, and that alternate explanations can account for evidence either just as well or better than the one we have come to. It's of little use to stay open, only to then believe too hard in the conclusion we come to and close ourself off from continuing to stay open to new evidence and better interpretations. It might also be the case that the stronger the belief or conviction (in at least some cases), and the stronger we present it as having to be true (and everyone who disagrees is an inferior moron), the weaker it will actually be. There's no need to be right, or to be right right away. It's perfectly acceptable, and probably preferable (IMO), to be uncertain and only consider possibilities or probabilities. And it's not other people's job to prove us wrong, e.g. "I'll be convinced my theory is true until someone convinces me it's not." Better to be aware of the potential weaknesses of whatever conclusions we come to from the beginning.

This leads to one last thing: even if we have done the legwork and come to what we think is a close-to-objective take, it is always good to consider, "What new evidence would cause me to change my mind? Is it possible such evidence exists, and I just don't have access to it at this moment? What if it comes out in a month, a year, or 5 years? Will I have egg on my face?" We never have access to all the data, and even a single piece of new evidence can invalidate something we were certain to be true. By always being open to the idea that there could be evidence disproving our current pet theory, we can avoid holding on too hard and coming to premature conclusions about the way things "must" be.

All good points to keep in mind and follow, IMO. In a nutshell, it's called 'networking'!
 
Myerstown US PA. January 5th 2025 around 02:30 UT


LARGE BOLIDE #SPMN100125G RECORDED OVER #PALENCIA THIS AFTERNOON at 21h08m15s UTC (22h08 CET). So bright that it was captured through the clouds by Miguel A. Furones @MAFurones@ChaikaTeam. Coming soon to the list, updated daily from @ice_csic:➡️https://ice.csic.es/news/citizen-s
 
Tests where done on samples of fog residue in Naples Florida. A bacteria was found which is said to be a parasite. This was a very limited test and maybe others will be done for other chemicals and nano tech etc..




1. **Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs)** - Common in patients with urinary catheters.2. **Respiratory Infections** - Particularly in ventilated patients or those with underlying lung conditions.3. **Wound Infections** - Especially in surgical wounds or in those with open injuries.4. **Bacteremia** - Bloodstream infections, which can be serious and life-threatening.5. **Endocarditis** - Infection of the heart valves, more common in intravenous drug users or those with pre-existing heart conditions.Serratia marcescens is also associated with nosocomial infections (hospital-acquired infections), making infection control in healthcare settings crucial.


Operation Sea-Spray was a 1950 U.S. Navy secret biological warfare experiment in which Serratia marcescens and Bacillus globigii bacteria were sprayed over the San Francisco Bay Area in California, in order to determine how vulnerable a city like San Francisco may be to a bioweapon attack, killing at least one American and sickening at least 10 more.


Report from lab on test results: Dropbox
 
By Joe Rao published January 9, 2025 Snip:

One of the brightest comets in 20 years, Comet 2024 G3 (ATLAS) returns for a close encounter with the sun — but will we be able to see it?
VxdcBee9e88rWy6ZaRb2sV.gif
In this animation by French optical engineer and amateur photographer, Nicholas Lefaudeux, the sun is surrounded by a glow that represents the area of the sky affected by twilight. As the comet whirls around the sun, take note of the changing orientation of its blue gas tail and curved, white dust tail.(Image credit: Nicolas Lefaudeux)
The brightest comet in nearly 20 years — comet G3 ATLAS (C/2024) — is expected to reach its peak brilliance later this week into early next week.

The only question is: "Will you actually be able to see it?"

This celestial paradox belongs to Comet 2024 G3 (ATLAS), which was first sighted on April 5 of last year by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) survey, in images obtained with a 0.5-meter (19.7-inch) reflector telescope located in Rio Hurtado, Chile. At the time of discovery, the comet was 407 million miles (655 million km) from Earth and shining at an exceedingly faint magnitude of +19. That's roughly 158,000 times dimmer than the faintest star visible to the naked eye.

Returning after 160 millennia

A preliminary orbit for this comet indicated that it was going to pass exceptionally close — less than 9 million miles (14 million km) from the sun in mid-January 2025; only about one-quarter the distance of Mercury, the closest planet to the sun. However, these initial calculations also suggested that G3 ATLAS was a new comet coming directly from out of the Oort cloud, a vast bubble composed of countless billions of icy objects encircling our solar system, located perhaps 10 trillion miles (16 trillion km) from the sun. Small sun-skirting comets originating from the Oort Cloud, making their first approach to the sun, often disintegrate before reaching perihelion (their closest approach to the sun).

But after G3 ATLAS’s orbit was refined, it was determined that it was actually a dynamically old comet, having made at least one previous close approach to the sun, with an orbital period of roughly 160,000 years. This provided hope that — having survived a prior close encounter with the sun — this comet could survive its impending close brush and possibly put on a bright display after the start of the new year.
Unfortunately, to date, the predicted path of G3 ATLAS has only favored those in the Southern Hemisphere. Practically the entire predicted track of this comet lies through constellations well south of the celestial equator. For those in the Northern Hemisphere, the comet’s path over the past month has taken it through the southern constellations of Lupus and Scorpius, and it currently resides in Sagittarius.

the path of the comet is overlaid over the night sky, showing where the comet is visible at particular times of the year.

The path of Comet G3 ATLAS across constellations -- primarily of the southern skies --is depicted by Japanese comet expert Seiichi Yoshida. (Image credit: Seiichi Yoshida)

This means that for observers north of the equator, the comet has been positioned much too low on the southeastern horizon and perpetually obscured by the glow of bright morning twilight.
However, as the comet is now coming down the “home stretch” before it whips around the sun, it has begun to brighten dramatically. For a relatively short time, its path will curve just far enough north to give those north of the equator a fighting chance to glimpse it.

Breakup avoided?

Recent observations collected on the Comet Observation database (COBS) suggest that, on Jan. 2, 2025, G3 ATLAS experienced a sudden outburst, showing a nearly four-fold increase in apparent brightness. However, John Bortle, a well-known and highly reputable comet observer, expressed ambivalence about this unexpected brightness spike. In an email to Space.com, Bortle noted:

"The apparent instability exhibited in the recent magnitude increase usually can be interpreted as a bad sign that the comet is showing evidence of breaking up, but some other unusual features that have been reported such as the 'shadow of the nucleus' is a classic feature of any large comet near perihelion, and not a sign of disruption."

Still, Bortle is uncertain about G3 ATLAS's ultimate fate, "I think chances of its survival are about 50:50," Bortle noted.

Another noted comet observer, Nick James of the British Astronomical Association, also commented on the comet’s latest surge in brightness.

"The sudden jump in brightness was significant. This could have been an early sign of disintegration, but since then, the comet is still brightening. It looks as if this outburst has not been fatal," James told Spaceweather.com.

How bright will it be?

G3 ATLAS will always be positioned very near the sun, raising the main question: Will it get bright enough to be readily seen against the twilight sky? Unfortunately, that is difficult to predict. Like snowflakes, no two comets are exactly alike. Astronomers have developed mathematical equations to forecast brightness, but it’s especially challenging for new or long-period comets like G3 ATLAS, where no prior visits are recorded.

On January 4, Daniel Green of the Central Bureau for Astronomical Telegrams in Cambridge, Massachusetts, issued an updated circular on G3 ATLAS, forecasting its brightness based on its development in recent weeks.

The comet is expected to reach perihelion on Jan. 13 at 10:17 Universal Time (UT), at a distance of 8,695,216 miles (13,993,594 km) from the sun. Later that same day, it will come closest to Earth at a distance of 87.1 million miles (140.1 million km).

Green predicts the comet could reach a maximum magnitude of -3.2, placing it between the brightness of Jupiter and Venus, which are prominent in our evening sky. "The comet will be close to the sun when brightest, but it’s becoming difficult now even for Southern Hemisphere observers to see," Green told Space.com. "It’s really hard to call these comets when close to the sun like this, in terms of visibility."

Indeed, although Green's forecast suggests G3 ATLAS will get quite brilliant, its close proximity to the sun makes it rather debatable as to whether a casual observer will be able to pick it out against the bright twilight sky. If the comet were to become brighter, however, it might be easier to see.

For that to happen, we would need to consider forward scattering.

Forward scattering: The 'dusty windshield effect'

Forward scattering in comets is a phenomenon that occurs when sunlight is scattered by dust particles in a comet's tail and coma, causing the comet to appear brighter. This happens when a comet is between the Earth and the sun, or when the Earth-comet-sun angle is high. Forward scattering can make a comet appear significantly brighter, especially when the phase angle is high. It is similar to the effect of driving toward the sun with a dusty windshield.

Forward scattering in comets occurs when sunlight is scattered by dust particles in a comet’s tail and coma, causing the comet to appear brighter. This phenomenon happens when a comet is between the Earth and the sun, or when the Earth-comet-sun angle is high. Forward scattering can significantly enhance a comet’s brightness, especially when the phase angle (Earth-comet-sun angle) is high. It’s similar to the effect of driving toward the sun with a dusty windshield.

In the case of G3 ATLAS, its phase angle is predicted to reach a maximum of 115 degrees late on Jan. 13. How much this will enhance the comet’s brightness is debatable. From my own calculations, I estimate the comet could brighten to a magnitude of -4, putting it on par with Venus. However, others predict an even greater enhancement. The most extreme prediction comes from Dutch amateur astronomer Gideon van Buitenen, who forecasts a peak magnitude of -6, nearly three times brighter than Venus!

Still, the odds of this extreme brightening happening are low.

When to look for comet G3 ATLAS

As of now, there appears to be a three-day window — Jan. 12 through 14 — for observers in the Northern Hemisphere to glimpse G3 ATLAS.

Your first opportunity will come early on Jan. 12. From mid-northern latitudes, the comet will rise about 35 minutes before sunrise and will be positioned 5 degrees directly above the sun at local sunrise. So, beginning about 25 minutes before sunrise, slowly scan/sweep along the east-southeast horizon with binoculars to try and sight the comet.

On the evening of Jan.14 , the comet will set 35 minutes after the sun and at local sunset will be positioned about 7 degrees almost directly above the sun. So, beginning about 10 minutes after sunset, slowly scan/sweep along the west-southwest horizon with binoculars to try and sight the comet. Continued.......


AMS event #213-2025 caught from Sahuarita US Arizona,
Jan 12, 2025
AMS event #213-2025 caught from Oro Valley US Arizona
Jan 11, 2025
 
Mystery fog is coming back.

According to his words, in those days until the Epiphany, we will have an inversion present, an unusual meteorological phenomenon when it will be warmer in the mountains than in the lower regions.

Let us recall that temperature inversion is a natural phenomenon when the air temperature increases with height, while under normal circumstances it decreases.

Fog often occurs in this layer of growth, and the air is very polluted. The air flow is very weak, the pressure is high, and the atmosphere acts as a "lid" and there is no stronger flow to disperse polluting particles and purify the air.

At the same time, in hilly and mountainous areas, the air is very clean during this situation, and the weather is ideal for being in nature. Temperature invasion in our area is a characteristic phenomenon in the winter, i.e. cold part of the year.

Ristić announces the weakening of the inversion for next week, when there will be fewer regions with fog.


I don't remember hearing much about temperature invasion in this area, but now it seems to be a common thing?
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom