26 March, 2015

The Rise of the Catalina Anti-Eddy

At 12AM yesterday, Wednesday, March 25, 2015, I was watching several episodes of Why Planes Crash, one of my favorite Weather Channel series. You know how, at the bottom of every TWC screen, there's this changing strip that shows the conditons in the local cities? Anyhow, the wind directions shown in Laguna Beach and San Clemente were quite extraordinary to say the least. What were they exactly? San Clemente was showing due-easterly winds at 11mph. Water is transported toward the north in response to winds blowing from a direction like that. Meanwhile, in Laguna Beach, the winds were from the SSW at 6mph. That is a wind pattern that tends to favor anticyclonic gyrogenesis through Ekman transport, as the below diagram demonstrates:


Fast-forward to last night, and the pattern changed. Instead of blowing out of different directions, both were showing due-easterly winds of 11mph and 15mph, respectively, while winds in Irvine were blowing from the WNW. Using Weather Underground's awesome app, I decided to check to see if there was any boundary separating the differing wind directions (usually marked by a dashed line on the map). Sure enough, there was, and it was retreating westward while continuing to intensify.

Then, I checked the sea surface temperature map this morning. Sure enough, the wind vector boundary, combined with the gyre in question, ended up retreating to that region just south of Catalina Island that tends to favor the formation of gyres:


Whereas cyclonic gyres — which is what the famous Catalina gyre typically is — tend to upwell in the middle and downwell around the edges, anticyclonic gyres do the opposite. They downwell in the middle, and this sea surface temperature profile reflects that.

What makes this so peculiar is that when it comes to gyres, whether cyclonic or anticyclonic, it doesn't matter what direction winds come from, they intensify regardless. If the winds blow from the east or southeast, they induce rear-flank downwelling, which speeds up the subsurface rotation, intensifying the gyre, which in this case warms up the ocean through gyre downwelling. If they blow out of the west or northwest, the water is transported past the eastern side of the gyre, speeding up the rotation on the surface, intensifying the gyre, again causing ocean warming. If they blow out of the southwest, the water is transported past the northeast side of the gyre, again speeding up the rotation, intensifying the gyre and causing more ocean warming. And finally, if the winds blow out of the northeast, like they do ever so often during Santa Ana season, the water passes the gyre on the western flank, once again intensifying the gyre's rotation, AND, since those winds are typically dry, they induce more evaporation of the water in the middle of the gyre, resulting in anomalously high gyre salinity, and thus, an ocean warming double whammy.

So now we've got a runaway feedback on our hands. Combine this with a potentially highly active El Niño hurricane season in the eastern Pacific once again, and, yeah, this could get interesting.

05 March, 2015

Evil is Not a "Problem", It's Hard Evidence Supporting Christianity

Ever wonder what the number 1 reason why some people are atheists? Science? Nope, far from it. Intelligence? Again, no. It's actually something far more trivial. It's something that exists (to be sure), but also something whose existence is taken out of context by those who try to argue against us. That something is the evil in the world. They often throw some rather exaggerated claims out there. After all, their arguments do seem valid to some: If evil does exist, why doesn't God do something about it? Why hasn't He? At least, why hasn't He yet? What they don't realize is that without God, evil itself would be good.

That's how you know they're hypocrites. Can you have rust if you don't first have iron/steel for air and/or water to oxidize? Can you have death without first having life? Can you have disease without a host? Pollution without air or water to pollute? No, no, no, and no. Just as rust corrupts metal, just as death corrupts life, disease health, and pollution clean air and water, so too does evil corrupt good. What makes this rather peculiar, however, is that people who go through evil themselves are often the ones to believe those atheist myths.

Atheists love to taunt us in response to that argument by claiming that morals were invented by mankind. Wait, what? Aren't there societies in the present and in the past that actually believe evil to be good? In fact, there are and were. The most prominent example of this is the most evil of evil societies that was Nazi Germany. It was a society in which Hitler made all the rules, and the resulting consequences were catastrophic. Not only did this society lead the world into a war that would dwarf Woodrow Wilson's "war to end all wars" by a factor of 10, but it also would carry out a hellish attempt to systematically exterminate entire races of people, which of course failed since the people that the Nazis tried to exterminate still exist today.

When that war ended and Americans and Brits once again came out on top, a series of criminal tribunals for the heinous acts committed by the Nazi officials began. These became known as the Nuremberg Trials. One by one, the Nazi officials were sent to court and charges were pressed against them. However, these trials couldn't have been more difficult. Why? Why didn't they just surrender? Because the Nazis' moral compass wasn't of God, it was of Hitler.

That's where the refutation to Euthyphro's dilemma comes in. Atheists will often claim that the morality of an act is determined by A, the intent, and B, the effect of that act. But guess what? Having been brainwashed by Hitler, these puppet murderers actually believed that their heinous crimes weren't crimes at all. Nowadays, we actually have an international set of laws against crimes against humanity, such as genocide, along with a UN to enforce them. Back then, however, neither the UN nor the international laws that it legislates/executes existed. Therefore, if it weren't for a divine set of standards to hold those evil people accountable to, the Nuremberg Trials would have been futile. In order to get the Nazis to stop believing that the intent to exterminate Jews and the effect of that intent were good and imbue a sense of guilt into them for their wrongdoings, the argument of a "higher" set of laws at those trials had to be brought up, and at the time, no such code existed except for the one in the Bible.

So, wait, if evil corrupts good as I said above, then why doesn't God constantly work to keep restoring the good in this world? In Revelation 22, He will ultimately "stop" evil. For now, however, He's given us, the church, that job (Matthew 28:16-20). Whether or not that commission is fulfilled depends on how we as Christians act in front of other people. Although we are all human (Romans 3:23), and were saved not by what we do but what Jesus did (Ephesians 2:8-10), the only way we are ever able to save others is by practicing what we preach and not being hypocrites. Otherwise, if we say one thing and do another, we end up setting a bad example to the newbies. Bottom line: Until evil is stopped, it's our job as believers to be the light in the world that the world may see who God is through the example that we as believers set.