Comments on: Megacryometeors: A Phenomenon with No Clear Explanation http://scienceray.com/astronomy/megacryometeors-a-phenomenon-with-no-clear-explanation/ Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:29:46 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: JMF http://scienceray.com/astronomy/megacryometeors-a-phenomenon-with-no-clear-explanation/comment-page-1/#comment-60785 JMF Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:14:18 +0000 http://scienceray.com/astronomy/megacryometeors-a-phenomenon-with-no-clear-explanation/#comment-60785 Hi, Thank you Dr. Brignall. The hydrochemical analysis of megacryometeors demonstrated that the water does not come from a tank of liquid, potable water. Its anionic and cationic chemistry (and hence conductivity) is different, and it matches the rainwater composition of the regions. Tap water of the different regions was also analysed for comparison. There is a last scientific paper here: http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/Journals/EM/article.asp?doi=b718785h In addition, the deuterium distribution mapping withing the ice blocks also reflects isotopic heterogeneity evidencing, as in hailstones, a complex history of formation in the atmosphere (troposphere). In accordance with the maximum and minimum deuterium values within the blocks an "apparent" range of fall was even calculated. Coming from a water tank, the isotopic composition would be practically homogeneous and, however, extremely significant differences in deuterium (up to 25 deltasD withing the chunks) were determined. These hydrochemical and isotopic variations are also reflected by the textural domains which megacryometeors display and even by the structural analysis of the ice by using Raman spectroscopy. Roy Spencer is wrong. Many issues in science require a specific study. He used to speak a lot about many things but, at least regarding megacryometeors, he should make some research before speaking. The tank of liquid water is not the source. Sincerely JMF Hi,
Thank you Dr. Brignall.
The hydrochemical analysis of megacryometeors demonstrated that the water does not come from a tank of liquid, potable water. Its anionic and cationic chemistry (and hence conductivity) is different, and it matches the rainwater composition of the regions. Tap water of the different regions was also analysed for comparison.

There is a last scientific paper here:

http://www.rsc.org/Publishing/Journals/EM/article.asp?doi=b718785h

In addition, the deuterium distribution mapping withing the ice blocks also reflects isotopic heterogeneity evidencing, as in hailstones, a complex history of formation in the atmosphere (troposphere). In accordance with the maximum and minimum deuterium values within the blocks an “apparent” range of fall was even calculated. Coming from a water tank, the isotopic composition would be practically homogeneous and, however, extremely significant differences in deuterium (up to 25 deltasD withing the chunks) were determined. These hydrochemical and isotopic variations are also reflected by the textural domains which megacryometeors display and even by the structural analysis of the ice by using Raman spectroscopy.

Roy Spencer is wrong. Many issues in science require a specific study. He used to speak a lot about many things but, at least regarding megacryometeors, he should make some research before speaking.

The tank of liquid water is not the source.

Sincerely

JMF

]]>