The only bit relevant to the current dispute in Specer's post seems to be this: «Well, notice that what we are left with in this thought experiment is an atmosphere that is heated from below by the ground absorbing sunlight, but the atmosphere has no way of cooling... except in
a very shallow layer right next to the ground where it can cool by conduction at night.»
Just put
a very shallow layer of the litter in the litter box — enough so that the bottom is covered.
In the East Pacific, the warm surface waters are
a very shallow layer on top of the deep cold waters.
Not exact matches
Weak
layers are
very common in arctic snow packs, in part because the snowpack is often
very shallow.
You have an extra
layer of challenge to get three stars in each stage, but it still feels
very shallow.
Doubling the river runoff results to
very fresh waters at the shelves restricting the convection to
shallow surface
layer.
Mugwump, you talk about the «average diapycnal heat transfer of the ocean», but what Douglass» revised model actually requires is the heat transfer out of the upper mixed
layer, which must (according to his ~ 5 month time scale) be
very shallow.
This is still
very early science, and we have some estimates of what may happen to those from modelling studies, from looking at the way in which the heating of the
very upper
layers of the Arctic Ocean is transferred down through the depth of the ocean - even in these relatively
shallow Arctic shelf regions - and then into the sediments that would allow the methane hydrates to destabilise.
Callendar suggested that the top
layer of the ocean, that interacts with the atmosphere, would easily become saturated with carbon dioxide and that would affect its ability to absorb more, because, he thought, the rate of mixing of
shallow and deep oceanic waters was likely to be
very slow.