Talk:Ferrel cell
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Vote for Deletion discussion
[edit]From VfD:
Incoherent nonsense, but too long for a SD. TPK 23:09, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Entertaining prattle. Kbh3rd 23:35, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. The Ferrel cell is already described in the Atmospheric circulation article without the hysteria shown here. Moreover, even though the Ferrel cell may prove to be as useful a description of reality as phlogiston in the end, it is very much a component of current theory. Denni☯ 00:56, 2004 Sep 16 (UTC)
Redirectto atmospheric circulation. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:42, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)- Merge w/ atmospheric circulation & redirect. On rereading, it looks like the part from In the Temperate latitudes, ground winds are ... through ... it flows outward over the ground as the Polar Easterlies might have some useful content. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:02, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Redirect (and unlink "Ferrel cell" in the atmospheric circulation article). Rossami 07:15, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Comment. I don't know enough to judge intelligently, I'm utterly innocent of meteorology and atmospheric science. The article does not sound all that hysterical to me. It reads as a credible critique, although it certainly is pushing a point of view. Googling isn't much help. Forgive me for asking: are you guys in a better position to judge than I am? If it's not total bunk, it seems to me that maybe Atmospheric circulation needs something in it, anything from a one-sentence throwaway ("some challenge the existence of the Ferrell cell") to a complete merge (a section heading "Criticism of the Ferrell cell concept" or something). If I'm being overly credulous here, please forgive me. (I am old enough to remember when the continents didn't drift. I don't mean "scientists didn't know that the continents drifted," I mean "scientists did know that the continents didn't drift," continental drift being an intriguing but discredited theory in the 1950s). Maybe the current text of this article should be placed in Talk:Atmospheric circulation ? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 13:33, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Copying the current rev to a subpage of talk:atmospheric circulation makes sense. Wile E. Heresiarch 15:02, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- keep but revise. The article is essentially correct: the Ferrel cell doesn't really exist. Or, if that is being a bit too definite, its certainly a valid POV (William M. Connolley 17:33, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)).
- Got any easily-accessible (i.e. web) references that would enable a layperson (i.e. me) to make a judgement about the balance of current professional opinion? Googling on "Ferrel cell" mostly turns up references that assume that there's no question about its existence. Melissa Strausberg, whomever she may be, is on record as saying that "In many ways, the Ferrel cell is a fictitious circulation" but there are an awful lot of articles saying something to the effect that El Niño is caused by titanic battles between the great gods Hadley and Ferrel (That's a joke folks. Insert smiley here). [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:29, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- (William M. Connolley 19:23, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)) Well, by its very nature, pages about the existence of X are rather more common than the non-existence of X. The atmos circ page does hint about lesser status of the Ferrel cell but doesn't make it explicit. But I can't find owt on the web.
- (William M. Connolley 20:00, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)) But try: Image:Atmos-circ-jja.png (original research of course... :-)
- Got any easily-accessible (i.e. web) references that would enable a layperson (i.e. me) to make a judgement about the balance of current professional opinion? Googling on "Ferrel cell" mostly turns up references that assume that there's no question about its existence. Melissa Strausberg, whomever she may be, is on record as saying that "In many ways, the Ferrel cell is a fictitious circulation" but there are an awful lot of articles saying something to the effect that El Niño is caused by titanic battles between the great gods Hadley and Ferrel (That's a joke folks. Insert smiley here). [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 18:29, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- As the author of "the Ferrel Cell does not exist" when I chanced to find the Department of Meteorology Lyndon State College website (as in the folowing links), I emailed the following on Sun 9/19/2004:
Sir,
I am wondering how you can reconcile your diagram on
http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter11/three_cell.html
with that on
http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter11/jet_streams.html
(the little red backflow at the top of the polar front cloud is surely stylistics rather than a part of a sustained major-return-flow to the Horse latitudes)
in view of
http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter11/polar_jet_form.html
I would appreciate an answer in view of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrel_cell
Regards, Hugh Rance
The response I got September 20, 2004, was:
Yes, you are correct, the circulation depicted in the vertical cross section is not quite correct.
Dr. Nolan T. Atkins
Associate Professor of Meteorology Phone: 802-626-6238
Department of Meteorology FAX: 802-626-9770
Lyndon State College email: nolan.atkins@lyndonstate.edu
1001 College Road
Lyndonville, VT 05851
end moved discussion
Merge
[edit]Unless there is more material, examine merging into atmospheric circulation. (SEWilco 1 July 2005 03:13 (UTC))