Here Come De Conservative Judges - 15

The New Exceptionalism

Our protection from domestic enemies now applies to the DOJ ("department of just us").

If we are "accidentally" scooped up ...

at church ... 

at school ...

at work ... 

or just while walking the dog down our local street, we better hope that no "golden age of America" event ("such as an administrative mistake") happens. 

Because without any due process, if we are secretly and quickly sent to a vermin infested prison in a "sh*thole country", our lives then depend on the meaning or the lack thereof, of the words "facilitate" and "effectuate".

I can't find either of those words in a strict textual reading of the constitution.

But there is a legal word for it: 

"Kidnapping is a crime at common law consisting of an unlawful restraint of a person's liberty by force or show of force. Under modern law, this crime usually only requires that the victim be taken to another location or concealed, but historical definitions required bringing the victim to another state or country. " 

(Cornell Law School).  Lawyers discussed this foreboding development last night on The Last Word:

... Well the breaking news in this country became the
fact that the United States Supreme Court ruled that Donald
Trump's deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia was and
is illegal. In the second sentence of a Supreme Court ruling
on the case Chief Justice John Roberts wrote "Abrego Garcia
was subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal
to El Salvador and that the removal to El Salvador was
therefore illegal." The court sent the case back to the
federal district court judge in Maryland where the case
began, saying that that judge's order quote properly
requires the government to facilitate Abrego Garcia's
release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his
case is handled as it would have been had he not been
improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the
term effectuate in the district court's order is however
unclear and may exceed the district court's authority. The
district court should clarify its directive with due regard
for the difference owed to the executive branch in the
conduct of foreign affairs. For its part the government
should be prepared to share what it can concerning the
steps it has taken and the prospect of further steps. Donald
Trump's solicitor general John Sauer who served as one of
Donald Trump's criminal defense attorneys and argued Donald
Trump's criminal case to the Supreme Court last year had
told the court that the original order by the district
court judge was beyond that court's authority because it
meant that judge was engaging in quote district court
diplomacy. While the United States concedes that the removal
to El Salvador was an administrative error that does not
license district courts to seize control over foreign
relations treat the executive branch as a subordinate
diplomat and demand that the United States let a member of
a foreign terrorist organization into America. Tonight
Arrego Garcia's lawyers told the court "The district
court's order instructing the government to facilitate
Abrego Garcia's return is routine. It does not implicate
foreign policy or even domestic immigration policy in any
case. Mr Obrego Garcia is 29 years old has been living in
the United States since he was 16 is married and has three
children. He's married to an American citizen. He was driving
with his five-year-old son who is autistic and cannot speak
when he was apprehended by Donald Trump's gang hunters who
according to 60 Minutes reporting have filled a Salvador
prison with people who have no known or provable or
findable connection to any gang anywhere. 60 Minutes noted
that 75% of the people Donald Trump has sent to the prison
claiming that they are gang members have shown no evidence
whatsoever of ever having committed crimes of any kind or
being associated with any gang. Mr Obrego Garcia has no
criminal record and is married to an American citizen.
Justice Sonia Solomayor was joined by Justice Elena Kagan
and Justice Katanji Brown Jackson. In a statement she added
to the chief justice's ruling saying "The government now
requests an order from this court permitting it to leave
Abrego Garcia a husband and father without a criminal
record in a Salvadorian prison for no reason recognized by
the law. The only argument the government offers in support
of its request that the United States courts cannot grant
relief once a deportee crosses the border is plainly wrong.
The government's argument, moreover, implies that it
could deport and incarcerate any person including US
citizens. Let me say that again including US citizens
without legal consequence so long as it does so before a
court can intervene. That is exactly what Donald Trump's
former criminal defense lawyer is telling the Supreme Court.
The Trump position at the Supreme Court is: no matter how
wrong or illegal an arrest may be if we get that person
outside the borders of the United States of America no
judge anywhere can order the return of that person even if
that person is a United States citizen. The argument that
Donald Trump's team is making to the Supreme Court is that
the mistake doesn't matter. The fact that it was a mistake
it could be any mistake. It could be the mistake of doing
that to a United States citizen. The Trump argument is we
can seize anyone at any time including American citizens
put that person on a plane sending them to another country
and once that plane leaves American airspace there's not a
single thing anyone in the world can do about it. And so yes
according to the Trump argument to the Supreme Court what
happened to Kilmar Armando Arbrego Garcia who has now been
detained for 26 days in El Salvador could happen to any one
of us. The lawyer who made that argument to the Supreme
Court is the very same lawyer who said last year that
Donald Trump as president of the United States had every
right to order Seal Team Six to assassinate any political
rival of his or anyone anywhere in the world. He actually
made that argument in court in the appeals process leading
up to the Supreme Court for Donald Trump to get immunity
for Donald Trump. And that argument worked in the Supreme
Court. That would include Donald Trump allowing that or
deciding to have anyone in the news media who says
something Donald Trump doesn't like sent off in one of
those planes to El Salvador never to return. And I have to
confess I did not fully understand until tonight what
Donald Trump and his former criminal defense lawyer were
arguing to the courts about this case. I have been drowning
in tariff news and other news other Trump news. And it is
only now very clear to me since I had not read the specific
pleadings in this case until tonight it is only now clear
to me that this case does not just increase the risk of
being seized and deported just for people who are in this
country without documentation or for people who are in this
country on student visas or visas of any kind including a
green card. I knew that I did not know that the argument
made by Donald Trump in this case is a threat to every
single person in the United States every citizen every
noncitizen every single one of us. And it was not until I
read Justice Sotomayor's clarification of that very point
tonight that I finally understood where we all stand
tonight in Donald Trump's eyes. He believes and his former
criminal defense lawyers in the Justice Department are
telling him or certainly telling the court and they must be
telling him what they're telling the court that he has a
right to deport anyone from this country including citizens
and deport is not the correct word to use because that is a
legal term that can apply legally in some procedures with
non-citizens. Deportation has nothing to do with American
citizens. That's not the word for what we're talking about
here. And so to clarify the language of this this is how
broad this is What Donald Trump's former criminal defense
lawyer is saying to the Supreme Court in effect is that
Donald Trump can now have any person seized at any time
anywhere in their homes anywhere throw them onto an
airplane send them to El Salvador put them in the prison
that Donald Trump is renting down there and leave them
there forever. That is the actual Trump argument to the
Supreme Court. And so the stakes in the Abrego Garcia case
could not possibly be higher for him for his family and for
everyone of us every one of us. In a separate ruling in a
separate case the Supreme Court has said that legal
deportations cannot be carried out without proper due
process in each case with each person threatened with
deportation being allowed to present their case and be
heard before they are deported. Justice Solomayor said that
there is nothing unusual about a judge requiring someone to
be returned to the United States. She wrote quote "It has
been the government's own well established policy to
facilitate an alien's return to the United States if the
alien's presence is necessary for continued administrative
removal proceedings." So no it is not an intrusion into
foreign policy to return Mr Obrego Garcia to the United
States. It is according to Justice Sonia Sotomayor routine.
Leading off our discussion tonight is Andrew Weissman
former FBI general counsel former chief of the criminal
division in the Eastern District of New York. He's also an
MSNBC legal analyst. Andrew thank you very much for joining
us tonight on this important breaking news case and I have
to say as you've just heard that I really didn't realize
until I saw Justice Sotomayor laying it out in her
supplementary finding to the Chief Justice's ruling today
that what they're arguing is that they can do this to any
one of us. So you know a lot of times people accuse the
media of hyperbole. There is no hyperbole here. It is
everything that you said and it's actually more because in
the case of Mr Garcia he actually had a court ruling that
he could stay here. That had been adjudicated and so this
was in violation of that court order. So yes it's
absolutely true that the position is that but if you put
the two cases together the government was arguing they
could snatch anyone, anyone in this country remove them
without due process. And even if it's a mistake. This is the
callousness even where it's a conceded mistake that person
can rot in jail as a result of the United States making
mistake. And they would have no obligation to lift a finger.
So this is both as we now know from the Supreme Court in
two unanimous losses for the Trump administration that that
is not the law of this country. These people are and
anyone is entitled to due process to a hearing. And in this
case if you make the mistake you have to facilitate of
course. What any decent human being would automatically
think to themselves, which is how do you rectify that. I
can't get over that this is beyond just the law point which
is what kind of human being sits in their office realizes
this mistake happened, and remember Mr Garcia is still in
jail in El Salvador, because of our mistake and the
Department of Justice's position is we're not lifting a
finger unless the court actually requires us to. That
is what is so remarkable when you think about what it means
to be an American in this country. Well yes, nd what we
don't know is if in the end of this process the court
backed by the Supreme Court orders the return of this one
person we don't know that the Trump government will follow
that order. And there will be absolutely nothing nothing
that any judge in this country can do to force Donald Trump
to get that person out of that prison. Well this is what I
would say with respect to that eventuality. This
administration wants to say that they are all powerful and
they have so much clout around the world but they can't get
this person back from El Salvador. We're paying that prison
to house these people. They're going to actually take the
position in front of a court that they the almighty Trump
administration doesn't have the power to effectuate his
return. I mean that seems pretty laughable you know.
Let's wait and see but it that's going to have to be their
position if they don't want to return him. So what do you
make of the chief justice's remand his his specific
instructions in effect to the district court judge so you
know one of the things that a district court judge can do
here um in light of that is ... remember the district court
judge didn't have a factual hearing. And the district judge
can say I want to have a factual hearing If you are saying
I can only take these steps and not more let's have a
factual hearing. Let's hear from the people Let's hear from
Marco Rubio. Let's hear about the ex all the like why it
is that Christine Gnome could go there what kind of
contract do you have with them i mean all of the things
that are very public that don't get into foreign relations
and have a hearing about it I mean this is one where it
it's so unbelievable that you wouldn't think that a humane
person and an adult in the room wouldn't say "Somebody is
in jail because of my mistake. How do you fix it?" But also
I think at this point they'd really have to lie through
their teeth um in order to try and convince a judge that
they don't have the power to effectuate his return. And so
you know I'm what I would say is cautiously optimistic that
it would be quite a hard road. It's not that I won't put it past
them but I think it would be very very hard not to say, you
know unconscionable, to take the position that you
couldn't effectuate his return We're seeing one of the
differences here between the first Trump presidency and the
second Trump presidency. In the first Trump presidency there
were people down the chain of the command from the
president including frequently in the White House chief of
staff's desk who would not do what he wanted them to do He
they absolutely would not do it. And here you have
apparently straight down the line people who will do
exactly what he wants to do. And one of the Trump principles
is you never admit you were wrong. You never admit it was a
mistake. In fact they have fired the Justice Department
lawyer who admitted in an earlier proceeding that this was
a mistake. You get fired for that.

(The Last Word, transcript, emphasis added, Youtube link below). 

The previous post in this series is here.

---

---

The Saturation Chronicles - 8

Mesopelagic

I. A Short History of Instruments

Analysis results in oceanography research vary depending on the instruments used to measure temperature, salinity, and depth.

The World Ocean Database (WOD) contains records collected using several types of research instruments (Access to World Ocean Database Time Sorted Data). 

Today's graphs calculate saturation data taken from gld, osd, apb, uor, pfl, drb, and ctd instrument types (xbt, mrb, and mbt were not used).

Note that there are variations in accuracy among the different instrument types:

Epipelagic

"Nansen bottle casts served as the main oceanographic instrumentation type for more than a century since the establishing of the technique in the late 1890s. Between the end of the 1960s and the end of the 1990s Nansen cast technique has been gradually replaced by electronic sensor profilers (CTD). Both instrumentation types are considered as the most accurate among other oceanographic instruments and are often used as the unbiased reference." 

(On the Consistency of the Bottle and CTD Profile Data). The authors cite to Improved estimates of ocean heat content from 1960 to 2015 as an attempt to improve upon in situ measurements they estimate could be made slightly more accurate.

II. A short History of Miscalculations Of Instrument Data

But their paper and the ones cited in it do not even mention the official oceanographic standard method of calculating ocean heat content (OHC).

From the data produced and placed into the WOD, we should calculate OHC using the TEOS-10 official methods:

 "This site is the official source of information about the Thermodynamic Equation Of Seawater - 2010 (TEOS-10), and the way in which it should be used.

TEOS-10 is based on a Gibbs function formulation from which all thermodynamic properties of seawater (density, enthalpy, entropy sound speed, etc.) can be derived in a thermodynamically consistent manner. TEOS-10 was adopted by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission at its 25th Assembly in June 2009 to replace EOS-80 as the official description of seawater and ice properties in marine science.

A significant change compared with past practice is that TEOS-10 uses Absolute Salinity SA (mass fraction of salt in seawater) as opposed to Practical Salinity SP (which is essentially a measure of the conductivity of seawater) to describe the salt content of seawater. Ocean salinities now have units of g/kg."

(TEOS-10, emphasis added). Or as Wikipedia puts it:

Bathypelagic

"TEOS-10 (Thermodynamic Equation of Seawater - 2010) is the international standard for the use and calculation of the thermodynamic properties of seawater, humid air and ice. It supersedes the former standard EOS-80 (Equation of State of Seawater 1980). TEOS-10 is used by oceanographers and climate scientists to calculate and model properties of the oceans such as heat content in an internationally comparable way. "

(Wikipedia, emphasis added). The reason for the new TEOS-10 standard is and was the inaccuracies that were prevalent in calculations using the antiquated EOS-80 standard.

III. If We Don't Know What OHC Is We Are Not Likely To Find It

Multiple Depth Layers

The old EOS-80 was two orders of magnitude off concerning OHC, which is now, in the modern TEOS-10 nomenclature, called "potential enthalpy":

It is usually the case that when you don't know what you are looking for you are not likely to find it.

So, here is a link and a quote from it that has been posted here previously:

 "Potential temperature is used in oceanography as though it is a conservative variable like salinity; however, turbulent mixing processes conserve enthalpy and usually destroy potential temperature. This negative production of potential temperature is similar in magnitude to the well-known production of entropy that always occurs during mixing processes. Here it is shown that potential enthalpy—the enthalpy that a water parcel would have if raised adiabatically and without exchange of salt to the sea surface—is more conservative than potential temperature by two orders of magnitude. Furthermore, it is shown that a flux of potential enthalpy can be called “the heat flux” even though potential enthalpy is undefined up to a linear function of salinity. The exchange of heat across the sea surface is identically the flux of potential enthalpy. This same flux is not proportional to the flux of potential temperature because of variations in heat capacity of up to 5%. The geothermal heat flux across the ocean floor is also approximately the flux of potential enthalpy with an error of no more that 0.15%. These results prove that potential enthalpy is the quantity whose advection and diffusion is equivalent to advection and diffusion of “heat” in the ocean. That is, it is proven that to very high accuracy, the first law of thermodynamics in the ocean is the conservation equation of potential enthalpy. It is shown that potential enthalpy is to be preferred over the Bernoulli function. A new temperature variable called “conservative temperature” is advanced that is simply proportional to potential enthalpy. It is shown that present ocean models contain typical errors of 0.1°C and maximum errors of 1.4°C in their temperature because of the neglect of the nonconservative production of potential temperature ... and potential temperature, rests on an incorrect theoretical foundation ... it is perfectly valid to talk of potential enthalpy, h⁰,as the 'heat content' ..."

(Potential Enthalpy: Trevor J. McDougall, 2003, emphasis added). Two decades later the science is still there:

Abyssopelagic

"While in situ temperature is an observed variable, its dependence on pressure (even for adiabatic variations of pressure at constant salinity) and its non-conservative nature under turbulent mixing processes have led to the adoption of Conservative Temperature in order to approximate the 'heat content' per unit mass of seawater."

(McDougall, T. J., Barker, P. M., Feistel, R., and Roquet, F.: A thermodynamic potential of seawater in terms of Absolute Salinity, Conservative Temperature, and in situ pressure, Ocean Sci., 19, 1719–1741, 2023).

(In Search Of Ocean Heat - 15). Using EOS-80 concepts to improve upon instrument measurements is a faulty endeavor.

IV. Saturation Hypothesis Estimates 

This Dredd Blog series has focused on degree of "saturation" based on the WOD maximum and minimum temperature and salinity tables detailing maximum and minimum values at various depths (The Saturation Chronicles).

Previous saturation analysis was also based upon 19 ocean areas without regard to the in situ measurement collection instruments.

I noticed that the graphs from these instruments show that the Abyssopelagic depth level is becoming more saturated than the Bathypelagic level above it.

This is to be expected when using modern concepts of quantum oceanography that includes photon science and TEOS-10.

Camera instruments can take snapshots of limited events in a movie, but since the movie is more complex than that, analysis using snap-shot photographs is immature.

Analyzing the "photos" of oceanographic instruments that only take snapshots of the ocean "movie" is haphazard too because OHC is constantly on the move from warmer seawater to colder seawater (second law of thermodynamics ... "warm flows spontaneously to cold").

The trend line of graphs tells the more accurate plot of the movement of OHC, so, "get the picture" is less accurate than "get the plot" in constant movement and change environments (The Photon Current, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 , 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

We can't find the photons using science of the days when photons hadn't been discovered yet.

But, worst of all the authors write:

"The first efforts to construct global ocean heat content (OHC) time series from ocean profile data revealed the impact of the systematic errors in the data from expendable bathythermographs (XBT) (Gouretski and Koltermann 2007)" 

(On the Consistency of the Bottle and CTD Profile Data, link above, p 1869). This is patently false for OHC purposes because the XBT does not measure salinity, which is required for OHC calculations.

The paper cites papers authored by Viktor Gouretski who points out that XBT cannot be used because it does not measure or record salinity:

"... data types normally report both temperature and salinity ... As both of these parameters are required for the spatial interpolation on isopycnal surfaces, the expendable (XBT) and mechanical (MBT) bathythermograph data were not used." 

(Gouretski, V.: World Ocean Circulation Experiment, Ocean Sci., 14, 1127–1146, 2018). And note "An XBT probe is a less sophisticated instrument ... only measuring temperature as it descends through the water column" (Comparison of XBT vs CTD Data, PDF).

V. Closing Comments

The graphs today do not contain updates of recent years  or of 19 ocean areas like these do, so I am adding three additional graphs (see Appendix below).

These show that saturation has increased in the Epipelagic and Mesopelagic depth levels in recent years.

Nevertheless the authors of the paper I am criticizing have shown that using EOS-80 ideology is backwards thinking of the useless kind.

The previous post in this series is here.

---

APPENDIX 

(new files are data added since the release of WOD18)

Updated (using 2018-2023)

Updated (using 2018-2023)

Updated (using 2018-2023)

---

---

The Photon Current - 22

Photon Current

This post deals with an erroneous statement about ocean heat flux:

"Seawater generally forms stratified layers with lighter waters near the surface and denser waters at greater depth. This stable configuration acts as a barrier to water mixing that impacts the efficiency of vertical exchanges of heat ..." 

(Increasing ocean stratification over the past half-century). They don't seem to realize that "heat" in seawater is transferred by infrared photons (you know quantum climatology and Quantum Oceanography, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18).

So, they are substantially wrong (The Photon Current, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 , 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

Heat transfer in the ocean, like all other heat transfers in natural bodies of water, takes place in the space within and between molecules and atoms. 

All such ocean heat transfers are defined and described by the Second law of Thermodynamics:

"A simple statement of the law is that heat always flows spontaneously from hotter to colder regions of matter (or 'downhill' in terms of the temperature gradient)."  

(Wikipedia, emphasis added). "Heat content" in the ocean is also called "potential enthalpy" (it is perfectly valid to talk of potential enthalpy, h⁰,as the 'heat content' ..."; In Search Of Ocean Heat - 15; Patterns: Conservative Temperature & Potential Enthalpy - 4).

Just sayin' ...

The previous post in this series is here.

---

---

Paper Tiger Phenomenon - 2

Ode to the king of the eyesores:

*refrain! ooo whooo*
Gold teeth and a curse for this town
Were all in my mouth
Only I don't know how they got out, dear
Turn me back into the pet
I was when we met
I was happier then with no mindset
And if you took to me like a
Gull takes to the wind
Well, I'd've jumped from my trees
And I'd've danced like the king of the eyesores
And the rest of our lives would've fared well
New slang when you notice the stripes
The dirt in your fries
Hope it's right when you die, old and bony
Dawn breaks like a bull through the hall
Never should have called
But my head's to the wall and I'm lonely
And if you took to me like a
Gull takes to the wind
Well, I'd've jumped from my trees
And I'd've danced like the king of the eyesores
And the rest of our lives would've fared well
*refrain! ooo whooo*
Godspeed, all the bakers at dawn
May they all cut their thumbs
And bleed into their buns 'til they melt away
I'm looking in on the good life
I might be doomed never to find
Without a trust, a flaming field
Am I too dumb to refine?
And if you took to me like
Well, I'd've danced like the queen of the eyesores
And the rest of our lives would've fared well
*refrain! la la la ooo whooo*

Science also degenerates (A century of quantum physics) under some conditions.

But that degeneration does not have the characteristics of a rule of law coup (A Tale of Coup Cities, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14; Will The Military Become The Police?, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13).

Some of the key "genes" of the "DNA" characteristics of a rule of law coup  is: (Follow The Immunity, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) absolute immunity (since the supremes made it so).

Immunity  now (since the January Six pardons) includes a form that includes a pardon by "the king of the eyesores" for political criminal conduct by "the eyesores".

Ergo:

---

---

---

---

The previous post in this series is here.

Paper Tiger Phenomenon

Ye olde Paper Tiger

The events taking place in the US government over the past couple of months indicate that it is a paper tiger when it comes to protecting itself from domestic enemies (Trump Nixed Enforcement Actions Against Nearly 100 Favored Corporate Lawbreakers).

The old song by BB King ("Thrill is Gone") comes to mind:

"In 1970, Walt Kelly’s beloved cartoon character Pogo famously uttered the phrase, “We have met the enemy and he is us.” At that time, the little possum’s observation could be categorized as humor or satire. Today it has been elevated into the realm of prophecy."

(Topping Americans’ new enemies list: The other political party). When one person in one political party can dismantle a government containing the most powerful military on Earth that government is a paper tiger.

Because there are no serious expectations of any internal threat anymore, the paper tiger is plain to see.

Nevertheless, the oath of office indicates that domestic enemies are real, and even requires that all government personnel must be totally aware of that reality:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

(Oath of Office, emphasis added). Many government officials who took that oath are not doing what eventually led to the Civil War in the USA.

That became a time when many domestic enemies waged literal war against other Americans.

So, it remains for the courts to do the job congress and other government officials should be doing (Tracking Lawsuits Against Trump And Musk; A Guide To The Many, Many Lawsuits Against Donald Trump And Elon Musk; Doggett).

The trillions of dollars spent on the military does nothing to change a domestic paper tiger which presents no barrier to an internal demise of US governmental strictures:

"The more challenging question is; how does the military defend the literal Constitution from domestic enemies? In his farewell address, President Washington raised the possibility of constitutional enemies rising from within the federal government:  '… ambitious and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People, & to usurp for themselves the reins of Government; destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.' 

He also presented a dilemma by stating earlier in the same address: 'The very idea of the power and the right of the People to establish Government presupposes the duty of every Individual to obey the established Government.'  Members of the military are subordinate to the federal government and are required to obey the laws and orders established by these agencies. There could be a circumstance where an order or law is unconstitutional, in which circumstance the military member could, and perhaps should, refuse to obey the order/law. However, such disobedience puts them at substantial risk if their assessment of the order/law is wrong."

(Military vs Domestic Enemies?, emphasis added). The dangers of the military not being sufficiently aware of how to protect against domestic enemies led to the Posse Comitatus Act:

"Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, or the Space Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." 

(Wikipedia; cf. Will The Military Become The Police? - 13). A coup or insurrection using the military is a crime that should not be improperly pardoned.

Closing Comments

Some citizens are concerned that the current government is in fact a paper tiger in terms of being able to protect against a domestic enemy tiger.

The next post in this series is here.

---

---

---

The Saturation Chronicles - 7

Mesopelagic

Data from the following ocean areas were used to produce the graphs presented in today's post: Equatorial Indian, NW Pacific, Mediterranean, North Atlantic, Red Sea, North Pacific, Persian Gulf, Sea of Okhotsk, Equatorial Pacific, Sulu Sea, North Indian, South Indian, Southern, Bering Sea, Sea of Japan, Equatorial Atlantic, Arctic, South Atlantic, and South Pacific.

The pelagic depth levels are not exact in all publications (compare this to this), so I added the meters of those depth levels to each graph so as to make it clearer.

The issue which the graphs are used to illustrate is the heat saturation (a.k.a. ocean heat content) at various depth levels.

Epipelagic

Those depth levels receive and emit infrared photons a.k.a. potential enthalpy (h^o) pursuant to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.

The basic observation that scientists adhere to is that the photon current a.k.a. heat flux travels from hot/warm molecules to cold/cooler molecules of seawater.

Since the photon current is constantly on the move when seawater temperatures fluctuate, taking the temperature of seawater at various depths is how the photon current is watched and recorded (The Photon Current, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 , 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

Bathypelagic

In the more recent posts of this series I mentioned that my hypothesis is that heat saturation of the oceans could be the cause of the unexpected severe atmospheric heat increases.

That is, since the ocean is known to have absorbed 90-93% of increases in global warming induced temperature, if that percentage of atmospheric temperature absorption decreases (saturation percentage decreases), the atmospheric temperatures will thereby increase accordingly.

There are a lot of factors involved with the phenomenon "when, why, how  is a photon absorbed into an atom or molecule of seawater"?

Multiple Levels: Epipelagic, Mesopelagic,
Bathypelagic and Abyssopelagic

It is not well known what takes place at the quantum physics level in terms of what issues are taking place which must happen to establish quantum level conditions that determine which one of "this photon or that photon" is the one to be ejected out of the atom or molecule (etc) and into a colder one.

We know quite well what takes place at the instances when we are taking the sea water temperatures, because it is a simple exercise of watching warm water lose heat and cold water near it gain heat until equilibrium is reached.

You know, sixth grade experiments with a water bottle.

But, even the professor holding the water bottle and telling us in this "experiment ... fresh water in this bottle expands when we warm it, which proves that the expansion of the vast oceans causes 30-40 percent of the global sea level rise."

Anyway, the graphs are based on WOD in situ measurements from 1950-2023, and are simulated from 1900-1949 based upon those in situ values.

I asked an AI program "what makes photons exit an atom or molecule?"

It replied:

"Atoms and molecules have specific energy levels, or orbitals, where their electrons can reside.

Excitation:
When an electron absorbs energy (e.g., from a photon), it can jump to a higher energy level, becoming 'excited'.

De-excitation:
Excited electrons are unstable and tend to return to lower energy levels, a process called de-excitation.

Photon Emission:
During this de-excitation process, the electron releases the excess energy in the form of a photon.

Energy Correspondence:
The energy of the emitted photon is equal to the difference in energy between the two energy levels involved in the electron's transition.

Spontaneous Emission:
This process, where an electron spontaneously transitions to a lower energy level and emits a photon, is called spontaneous emission.

Other Emission Methods:
Photons can also be emitted through other mechanisms, such as stimulated emission (used in lasers) or when a particle and its antiparticle annihilate.

Generative AI is experimental."

That does not tell me what I wanted to know: how an atom or incredibly smaller electron, or the other quantum particles alone, or all of them collaborating together in synchrony, have and use quantum thermometers/binoculars, or other quantum detectors that measure and recognize factors which they determine equate to "time to emit an infrared photon" ... 

But I digress.

I have no idea what specific quantum phenomena causes a photon in the photon stream to exit the atom or molecule it is in, having been absorbed there while traveling at the speed of light from a colder atom or molecule, to then head for an even colder one.

Abyssopelagic

I travail in the simple realm of the thermometers (CTD) where heat in the ocean water pushes the thermometer column up and down.

But, that does not mean we can't become alarmed when those thermometer (CTD) values tell us that saturation is growing closer, in many places around the ocean world, to a point on the saturation scale which tells us that the ocean is not absorbing as many solar photons as it once did.

Closing Comments

Which means, if the Dredd Blog hypothesis is not falsified,  that the atmosphere is going to do some surprising things to our atmospheric thermometers that specialize only in atmospheric temperatures.

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

Lyrics here.

---

Ground Beef Control To "Major Tom"

Link

---

Gulp of Amurka Man

---

Space X Slashed And Burned

---

---

"Butt, Butt, Butt

---

---

The Saturation Chronicles - 6

Surf's Up

In the previous post the ocean names were listed but only one graph was used to represent all of the depth levels.

In today's post the individual depth levels each have a separate graph.

Additionally, I am providing the formula for calculating saturation.

It can be applied for all years and all depths, including situations where all depths and ocean areas are presented in one graph and is applied as in the following example:

---

pct1950-2022 = saturation percentage for years 1950 thru 2022
pct2023-2024 = saturation percentage for years 2023 and 2024
ho950-2022 = h^o for years 1950 thru 2022
ho2023-2024 = h^o for years 2023 and 2024

So, let's do that, here is the starting point:

pct1950-2022        pct2023-2024
--------------------- = --------------------
ho1950-2022         ho2023-2024

Now let pct2023-2024 = X

pct1950-2022        X
-------------------- =  ----------------------
ho1950-2022         ho2023-2024

pct1950-2022 * ho2023-2024 = ho1950-2022 * X

pct1950-2022 * ho2023-2024        ho1950-2022 * X
---------------------------------------- =   -------------------------
             ho1950-2022                     ho1950-2022

       pct1950-2022 * ho2023-2024
X = --------------------------------------
                ho1950-2022

---

Fig. 1 All Depth Levels

The way to calculate the "pct" (percent) and h^o (potential enthalpy) parameters is detailed in the first post of this series (The Saturation Chronicles).

Both the year spans and h^o spans can be changed to analyze saturation events  in other situations.

Using that formula structure the individual depth levels can also be analyzed separately from the entire 19 ocean areas (Fig. 1) as I have done in Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5.

Fig. 2 Abyssopelagic

But remember that this is all presented in the framework of a Dredd Blog hypothesis.

Also remember that science based hypotheses must be presented along with a way of falsifying them.

Otherwise they are not "up to snuff" (Proof of Concept - 11).

This brings up the World Ocean Database manual's maximum in situ temperature and maximum salinity settings for each depth which were set forth in a previous post of this series: 

"The HTML tables have a column that shows the WOD manual's maximum (h^o) at each relevant depth level (WOD Manual) [Appendix 11]".

Those maximum values are calculated from the manual's maximum temperature and salinity values (The Saturation Chronicles - 2).

Fig. 3 Bathypelagic

If for some reason those World Ocean Database maximum parameters, which come from www ncei noaa gov, are not "up to snuff" (too small or too large), then that would possibly falsify all or part of the Dredd Blog saturation hypothesis to the extent that the WOD parameters are too large or too small.

Fig. 4 Epipelagic

But any alleged falsification effort would have to not only challenge those parameters, it would have to add a replacement and the replacement's source.

Think for a minute how unsuspecting we have been in our faith that the ocean could never become "overheated".

And think of that as coral reefs die, as plankton diminishes, as whales, sharks, and myriad other sea creatures wash ashore or disappear.

Also, remember the once abundant and inexpensive table foods that are changing in quantity, quality, and price.

Like Atlantic Cod (A Paper From Hansen et al. Is Now Open For Discussion - 3).

Fig. 5 Mesopelagic

Let's consider what the scientist in the video of the previous post postulated, which is that perhaps 20% of the surprise 2023-2024 global warming increases are from a yet unknown source.

Is heat saturation in the ocean, which causes less absorption capacity, that yet unknown source?

The time-warn mantra of recent years is that 90-93% of the global warming induced heat increases are absorbed by the oceans.

So, 90-93% decreased by 20% means that only 72% (90*.20 = 18%; 90-18=72) to 74.4% (93*.20=18.6%; 93-18.6=74.4) is now being absorbed.

That decreased absorption rate could easily explain the 2023 and 2024 surprise increase in atmospheric temperatures.

Closing Comments

Singing these blues does not come easy (A thermodynamic potential of seawater in terms of Absolute Salinity, Conservative Temperature, and in situ pressure).

First one must download WOD data in its native storage form, then convert that to CSV format, which is a difficult chore considering there are ~5.5 billion results (WOD Update).

Next, that WOD CSV format is altered into an SQL format (e.g. ocean area, year, depth) and placed into an SQL database.

Then the data is loaded into software programs that use TEOS-10 functions to calculate TEOS-10 parameters.

Graphs and posts are then generated as a public service (The Saturation Chronicles - 5).

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

---

The Saturation Chronicles - 5

Fig. 1 Combined Heat Saturation Percent

Let's consider ocean heat concentration on the average.

The view of heat saturation in 19 ocean areas combined as an average is shown in Fig. 1.

Those individual ocean areas are:

Equatorial Indian, NW Pacific, Mediterranean, North Atlantic, Red Sea, North Pacific, Persian Gulf, Sea of Okhotsk, Equatorial Pacific, Sulu Sea, North Indian, South Indian, Southern, Bering Sea, Sea of Japan, Equatorial Atlantic, Arctic, South Atlantic, and South Pacific.

The percentages are averages of all in situ measurements at up to 33 depths from  World Ocean Database (WOD), SOCCOM database, and Wood's Hole database files.

Fig. 2 Sniff The Waters

The values of all 19 ocean areas are combined at depths up to the maximum depth of each ocean area.

Temperature, salinity, depth, latitude, and longitude are the in situ parameters used in those calculations.

Those parameters are then used in TEOS-10 functions which calculate height (Z), pressure (P), Conservative Temperature (CT), and Absolute Salinity (SA).

The "ocean heat content" (a.k.a. potential enthalpy or h^o) is also calculated using the TEOS-10 C++ library to process those TEOS-10 parameters.

Note that "it is perfectly valid to talk of potential enthalpy, h^o, as the 'heat content' and to regard the flux of h^o as the 'heat flux.'" (Potential Enthalpy: A Conservative Oceanic Variable for Evaluating Heat Content and Heat Fluxes).

On the Fig. 1 graph, the depth data is as follows:

Concerning colors of lines at WOD and Pelagic depths:

WOD depths (L1 - L9) = epipelagic (0 - 200m) [200 m]
WOD depths (L10 - L18) = mesopelagic (201m - 1000m) [799 m]
WOD depths (L19 - L29) = bathypelagic (1001m - 4000m) [2,999 m]
WOD depths (L30 - L32) = abyssopelagic (4001m - 5500m) [1,499 m]
WOD depths (L33) = hadopelagic (beyond 5500m)

The lines are colored as epipelagic,  mesopelagic, bathypelagic, abyssopelagic, and hadopelagic as noted on the graph.

Note that the old belief, written in textbooks and on various websites, that the deeper the water is the colder it is was a myth.

The Fig. 1 graph shows that the highest heat saturation percentages are not based on depth alone.

That graph shows that heat saturation depends on how many infrared photons have been absorbed by the ocean water molecules (The Photon Current, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 , 17, 18, 19, 20, 21).

Closing Comments

Google's AI says:

" 'Heat saturation' refers to the point at which a substance has absorbed the maximum amount of heat it can hold at a given pressure, meaning any additional heat added will cause it to change phase from liquid to vapor (like boiling), and is essentially synonymous with the term "saturation temperature" in thermodynamics; at this point, the liquid is considered "saturated" with thermal energy and further heat input will result in a phase change, not a temperature increase."

(Thank you Mr. AI). Note that for water (not saltwater) that temperature is about 212 deg. F (100 deg. C).

That is not the focus of this series.

What this series uses is the Maximum temperatures the WOD manual sets as the maximum, NOT the evaporation temperature.

We are not focusing on the temperature at which the ocean turns into steam, no, we are focusing on the temperatures of saturation which cause a RESISTANCE to further photon absorption.

The exercise in this saturation context is the percent of the WOD maximums set by WOD officials.

Then, using the historical 90-93 percent rate of absorption set by oceanographers as the amount the ocean has absorbed during the graph's time frame (1950-2023) we can hope to estimate the decline in that WOD maximum historical absorption percentage as the ocean's potential enthalpy or h^o percent increases.

if the hypothesis is confirmed, we can expect the surprising 2023-2024 temperature increases to continue as the ocean's in situ heat saturation percentage rate increases.

Just sayin' ...

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

---

---