I've seen a video about "15,25 and 50 years of erosion", but is there a way that the difference can be noticable in like a month or several months? Maybe there are stones which tend to be eroded faster than others?

Anyone could help me to understand the previous questions and and what depends on using a certain order in a butterworth filter (I took the order from this article: https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2020JB020065, page 4, second paragraph)? Any scientific article that explain this would be grateful. I attached the pictures.

This is obtained using signal.filtfilt()

This is obtained using signal.sosfiltfilt()

Furthermore, the speed of the Earth's rotation at the equator is approximately 1670 km/h, and the core of the earth - to which objects are said to be attracted, according to scientists, rotates differently - there are even theories that the other way around - than the earth's shell.

That's what I've studied.

And my question is - what forces, and how, cause the fact that an object at a height of up to 36,000 m is still attracted to the same place on the Earth's surface despite all the rotations, i.e. that it exactly copies the rotation of the Earth's surface when it is 36,000 m above it (or 10,000 m for a normal aircraft).

How does sites like ZoomEarth.com make cloud animations? My understanding is:

1. They download images from satellite image providers.
2. Play those images sequentially. Is that correct?

How is the night time imagery handled?

Other reanalyses like ERA5 and MERRA2 have access points that let you write a python script to get what you want (and often subset it on their servers using opendap or similar).

I haven't been able to find an efficient way of downloading the JRA-3Q dataset in such a way. Part of this is the file nomenclature that includes an obscure-looking string (e.g.

https://data.diasjp.net/dl/storages/file/L0pSQTNRL0NsaW05MTIwL0RhaWx5L2FubF9pc2VudHJvcC9hbmxfaXNlbnRyb3BfYnZmMi5jbGltOTEyMC5kYXkwMTA3

Has anyone come up with a way to download quite a lot of data in an efficient way?

I ended up looking at their data for daily sea surface temperature and noticed that all other years substantially overlap with at least several other years in their trend.

The same is true for 2023 until early March, when the OISST data increases rapidly so that by mid-March it no longer overlaps with any other years. In addition, the divergence seems to be continually increasing since then.

Is there something wrong with the OISST data or does this represent an actual change in SST?

I know next to nothing about this topic but I do note that this time period appears to correspond very closely with the Canadian wildfires. Is it possible atmospheric conditions from the fires have skewed the global record?

Will a city like Leicester have a weather recording device, or is it only in these fairly infrequent weather stations that it is officially recorded?

Also, the met office seems to have data for the past 48 hrs, but for no longer than this (excepting special weather events) - why do they only show 48hrs worth?

Probably a hypothetical question, but can weaknesses caused by tidal forces have an influence on the start of a subduction zone? Would this have been more likely in earlier earth history when the Moon's tidal forces where much stronger due to it having been closer?

Presuming the article is not being published because it's so incorrect it doesn't merit peer review, I would like to know precisely and technically why the paper is wrong. The authors are physicists so I would like to understand its flaws from the perspective of climate science if possible.

I am specifically not interested in hearing arguments along the lines of "the IPCC is right and this is incompatible with that so it must be wrong" - again I am looking for a precise and technical rebuttal.

Thanks!

[1] W. A. van Wijngaarden and W. Happer, “Dependence of Earth’s Thermal Radiation on Five Most Abundant Greenhouse Gases.” arXiv, 2020. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2006.03098.

I came across this article that states there's a new or (confirmed) partially melted layer in the athenosphere (upper part of the mantle)

Scientists detect molten rock layer hidden under earth’s tectonic plates

Does this add credence to Hapgood's disproven theory on Earth Crust Displacement? Or is the rock still too thick for plates to suddenly shift?

Taro Takahashi; Jon Olafsson; John G. Goddard; David W. Chipman; S. C. Sutherland (1993). Seasonal variation of CO₂ and nutrients in the high-latitude surface oceans: A comparative study. , 7(4), 843–0. doi:10.1029/93gb02263

Sarmiento, Jorge L. "Ocean biogeochemical dynamics." Ocean Biogeochemical Dynamics. Princeton University Press, 2013.

I am aware that before the draining of the fens there were vast marshes to the North West of the Region.

In doing some more research for a writing project, I came across some web sites that showed the progressive subduction of the Farallon plate (for instance: https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/Farallon.html). I'd never known about that one! These show that all that remains is the Juan de Fuca plate at the north end, and the Rivera and Cocos plates at the south.

So now I'm wondering what has happened to the middle? One web site (and I'm sorry I can't find the link right now) suggested it "folded" and was pushed edge-downward toward the center core. Other sources seem to suggest it broke apart and the remnants fused with the North American plate.

Al of this is in concert with the idea of "the next big one" on the West Coast, where over a hundred years of pent-up friction suddenly releases and the North American and Pacific plates move up to 20 feet. (Common theories bantered about, based on about 2 inches of movement per year, but unable to move that much for over a hundred years. Feel free to correct, please!!)

If the Farallon plate was still solid underneath the NA plate, would it also push the Juan de Fuca, Rivera, and Cocos plates as well? If the three remnant plates are indeed separate and now caught in between the two larger plates moving opposite directions, would they shear apart? Or just individually subduct more (which in itself would be quite a violent movement)?

If the answers are too complex and what I really need is a better basic understanding of the dynamics of plate movements, I would appreciate any resources you can point me towards.

(One terminology question: I keep seeing references to a fault causing earthquakes. It's actually the other way around, isn't it? Plate movement causes earthquakes, which creates faults in the crust up where we are?)

Thank you!!

This statement from Wikipedia struck me as vague and therefore confusing. So in plain, simple English and in general, what was the climate of the Oligocene like in comparison with today's climate?

It's mentioned on Franz Josef Land where it's indicated that the units are km-2/km. I'm curious about how this would be measured.

I've found precious few mentions of this unit in the usual sources.

Thanks in advance!

it is particularly vague regarding the question - What is the tectonic setting for the formation of the Great Dividing Range in Australia?