Simply, you failed to adequately answer virtually any Atmospherics question put to you; further, your speculations on same were <i>wrong</i>. Not understanding how a fine dust (effectively an aerosol) and water vapor in the form of clouds can be distinguished via even monochromatic remote-sensing? Simply absurd. No one with even a basic understanding of Atmospheric Physics, Physical Geography, Remote Sensing, would make such an error.<br /><br />I ceased to reply to you previously as my single request for further information to your "Atmospheric Scientist" claim was met by an Ad-Hominem. Frankly, that set a tone for conversing with you; clearly this was your choice, as I in no way made a single comment that required or deserved an Ad-Hominem as a response.<br /><br />Oh, I might add here that you do not appear to suffer from any major difficulties either reading or typing. Therefore I must consider your misspelling of my username as deliberate. Just as with Ad-Hominem, this is forbidden by our rules.<br /><br />So. You do not fail to answer multiple questions placed to <i>you</i> during over 800+ posts by multiple other members here, yet then demand <i>I</i> answer your questions.<br /><br />What questions do I ask? What your actual experience is? Can you respond to the fact that we all sincerely disbelieve NOAA would have a 97 year old on it's payroll? The lack of specific scientific knowledge in fields you claim expertise in? Perhaps it's the constant reminding us of your "age."<br /><br />Very well. Here's a few questions relating to Atmospheric Physics I'd very much like you to answer:<br /><br />What is Number Density, and how does it relate to Atmospheric Physics? Hint: 1/2718...<br /><br />What is CLAVR utilized for?<br /><br />How about NDVI?<br /><br />What, specifically, is Rayleigh Optical Depth, and how is it actually calculated?<br /><br />Simple questions. I await <i>your</i> responses. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis: </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>