Yas, yas. Ftb gave an eg. of daily cycle of extreme radiative heat gain/loss, I thought the Arctic qualifies for the same in an annual cycle. Probably variation of this annual cycle is more impactful over the planetary weather/climate though than daily cycle on desertic areas.
Well you thought wrong, the annual arctic cycle is not "more impactful" and if you think otherwise, plese substantiate.
Im not good at rhetoric, I leave that to you.
deserts have the same albedo in daytime than 40 years ago, Arctic does not, it absorbs much more heat in its daytime (summer). Deserts lose similar heat during night than they used to 40 years ago. Arctic night (Winter) is very complex, some winters it acts as an alleviation of the record heat accumulated in summer; some recent winters, however, the venting has been blocked by excess humidity, leading to a poor ice recovery in winter.
FTB gives a good example. But you want to convince who of what? Of course the Arctic radiative heat cycle is more important for climate, at least as a manifestation of its change but also cause it feeds back in atmospheric and oceanic changes.
Just look at Fall temperatures in Alaska for the last 40 years and STFU.
Gandul, we are getting somewhat off-topic here.
I am not trying to convince anybody of anything. But I read Feeltheburn's original posting and had nothing to add, I thought it sounded very sensible.
You did not, fair enough, but instead of saying so in your own words, you took Feeltheburn's words and posted as your own, but with an important change. So you used a dishonest method to imply disagreement, rather than saying so directly, posting no evidence of your own and giving no arguments for your position.
Your above posting is disjointed, without any real substance, illogical as well as rude. So let's stop this silly off-topic argument, and I hope that when next I see a posting from you, it will be both polite and well considered.