- #36
physicsponderer
- 74
- 10
Your statement was useful. I hadn't noticed those streamers, or rather, hadn't noticed how long they are, nor that their length does suggest atmospheric circulation. I meant, 'That's very useful, could you tell me a bit more about that?'. I've looked at that photo so many times over my lifetime, and I never thought properly about those streamers. Didn't really notice them at all.DaveC426913 said:At this point, I think it would make more sense to pass the conch to you, and ask you explain why - when you are directed to "very long contiguous streamers of cloud banks showing the circular interaction of air masses on the scale of thousands of kilometres, notably between temperate and polar latitudes" - you don't see that as "direct evidence of atmospheric circulation".
Alternately, what is the minimum you would reasonably expect to see in order to accept it as direct evidence of atmospheric circulation?
Having said that, I think 'directly visible to the trained eye' would be more accurate than simply 'directly visible'.