WIRED – Two sunspots are visible on our star’s face for the first time in more than a year, possibly ending an unexpected lull in solar activity.
Solar flares rise and fall on an 11-year cycle, so scientists thought sunspot activity would pick up some time in 2008. It didn’t. And this year has been quiet, too. No sunspots have been visible on the sun for 80 percent of the days this year.
Sunspot activity is correlated with the total amount of energy we receive from the sun. If the sun’s activity were to change remarkably, it would have an influence on global climate. So, in the context of climate change, the fact that the current solar minimum has been the longest and deepest in more than a century has been of special interest.
In May, a big sunspot seemed to augur a return to normal, but it faded away and sunspotless days returned. The latest activity might not mark the end of the solar minimum, however. People have been counting sunspots since Galileo first observed one in the early 17th century. Through the 28 documented cycles, stretching from 1745 to today, some variation in cycle length has been observed.
Maybe NOW we can get a little of that global warming… and winter won’t suck after all.
Cq Cq Cq dx
Raff – Agreed, but you have to admit that the lack of sunspots has made the top band very interesting.
Amazing – all that CO2 traveled all the way to sun and created sun-spots. Al Gore is a genius.
Thanks for showing yet again why we do nothing about climate change. It’s because morans think that this is relevant. Peer reviewed papers show that the level of solar activity of the solar maximum was responsible for between 5 and 15% of global warming. Remove that, and we’re still left with humans as the cause of the other 85-95%.
Wait!!
Before some idiot claims that the earth has been cooling since 1998, better check a real graph. Unless your definition of cooling is different than mine, temperatures rising indicates continued warming.
http://tinyurl.com/86ezyy
Or, for those who don’t like wikipedia, try NASA:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/
http://tinyurl.com/6d7b9t
This lull in solar activity and reduction in chromosphere is indicative of an excess of gain in the cycle. This is much more serious than most people can imagine. A group of Nasa scientists is predicting a massive CME (coronal mass ejection) for the year 2012. Such an event could destroy earth’s fragile technological infrastructure. Say good-bye to life as we knew it.
ha! don’t get your hopes up.
1026 won’t make it across the disk
and 1027’s penumbral area is already
forgetting what it means to be “a penumbral area” and may not make it across either..
we’re in the middle of a century class minimum and the fat lady is not even on the stage yet..
it’s going to be a cold winter with more clouds to come..
Also, It would be nice if NASA would stop with the (f’n) altering of solar and magnetosphere data.
There has been some really crazy stuff happening with (and around)
the sun the past four months. How long do they think they can keep a lid on it?
I’d love to see how many scientists
at NASA have a roll of duct tape wrapped around their mouths (and/or pink slips taped to their foreheads)in regards to what has
been happening recently.
-hey nasa, it’s an electric universe
that drives our electric weather, out with it already. (or russia will beat you to it)
-s
#8 – soundwash,
Got some real data to back that up? Please don’t send me to a wacky blog or ExxonMobil site either. Try google scholar if you don’t want to sound like a blithering idiot.
#8 – soundwash,
Got some real data to back that up? Please don’t send me to a wacky blog or ExxonMobil site either. Try google scholar if you don’t want to sound like a blithering idiot.
http://scholar.google.com/
Go forth and google. You just might learn something. (Oh wait … that might be too scary for you.)
While sunspots have been at historic lows, there have been several sunspots/sunspecks this year. August is the only month without a sunspot…
Pestilence… I have the old school tech plus liscence, (tech with 5 wpm) So the only HF I get is 10 meters.
Misanthopic Scott,
Your country used to be under a hundred meters of ice until 10 thousand years ago. It also re-emerged briefly from the ice 100 thousand years before that. Please don’t try and tell me CO2 caused this like Al Gore does. All CO2 increases in the past have followed temperature increases with a lag of 800 years.
So what about this? (I apologize in advance for the long post)
“Uncertainties in Solar Measurements.
Despite all that scientists have learned about solar irradiance over the past few decades, they are still a long way from forecasting changes in the solar cycles or incorporating these changes into climate models. One of their biggest obstacles has been technology. Because even the smallest shifts in solar energy can affect climate drastically, measurements of solar radiation have to be extremely precise. Instruments in use today still are subject to a great deal of uncertainty.
The sensors … disagree significantly in the decadal average level of the TSI—up to 6 watts per square meter. This difference is larger than the total variation in solar irradiance in the past 500 years, so a more accurate assessment is needed to study the Sun’s impact on climate change.
This large uncertainty in absolute calibration of the instruments means that any possible trend from one 11 year cycle to the next, the most important change for global warming, is not known accurately enough to even decide whether the trend is positive, negative, or zero. With such data, scientists have a good approximation of the 11 year cycle, but no real insight into more subtle changes that may occur over many decades and centuries.
Even larger uncertainties exist for measurements of the amount of solar radiation that is absorbed by the Earth’s atmosphere, ocean, and land. As of now, researchers know that the atmosphere absorbs between 20 and 25 percent of the TSI and that the land absorbs 45 to 50 percent. With solar radiation, a 5 percent difference is huge. A difference of even 1 percent would completely throw off climate models of global warming and scientist’s understanding of convection (warm, upward moving air currents) in the atmosphere.”
So apparently we are still guessing.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/SORCE/sorce_05.php
I have been waiting for the Ionisphere to get excited again..so 100 watts will let me get into just about any country… even with my Omnidirectional groundplane!!!
CQ DX…….
And we minght cool down a bit!!!
Oh the sky is falling, the sky is falling! I know it’s true because McCullough said so in his science post.
To get some clear headed perspective, type in Jan 01 2002 in the link.
For some History of Sunspot Observations go here.
It’s sunspotapalooza, time.
LOL -you [will] make a great Battery.
Everything you need to discover the truth is in my post.
We live in a mirror image of True Reality. -flipped, inverted, call it what you like, it’s the opposite
of how things actually work.
If YOU want to learn something,
the first thing you might try is getting as far away from anyone or anything “scholarly”
Academia, like our sciences, have
been peddling the same dogma for 80+ years. -longer. it’s utter crap.
Nothing is what it seems.
It comes down to a simple, red-pill,
blue-pill choice:
You can either learn to teach yourself
the truth, -or, you can continue to let others spoon-feed what they want you to believe is the truth.
The choice has always been yours.
One of these days, your going to have to make it.
-s
# 17 soundwash,
You sound highly self taught, self published, self employed, self loved, and just by your self.
Well, that must be the height of all things real and true, if you don’t say so your self.
Good luck with that.
You do raise a question. How many people would like colder winters? Is it worth a couple of thousand extra every year to you?
#12 sweatysock,
Actually, exactly one temperature rise came 800 years before CO2 rise. Check your facts.
Also, since you brought up ice ages in the relatively recent past, you may be interested to know (but only if you care about humans and a great many other species) that we and many others alive today have survived ice ages. We have NOT survived periods significantly warmer than today.
Check the temperature record. There is a 5 degree celcius difference between the last ice age and today’s temperature. The last time we had a period 5 celcius degrees warmer than today was 55 million years ago. And, it was only when the planet began to cool from that period that the number of species recovered after the comet that killed off at the non-avian dinosaurs at the K/T boundary.
Another really warm period, even a tad warmer than that at about 6 celcius degrees warmer than today, caused the extinctions at the P/T boundary 250 million years ago. So, beware, warm periods, not cold ones, are associated with mass extinctions. And, large warm blooded species (like humans) fare very poorly during mass extinctions.
http://tinyurl.com/ydpm6gd
#17 – soundwash,
Everything you need to discover the truth is in my post.
So, you’re just another damn troll unwilling to back up your claims. Thanks for clearing that up.
Just wait for the earth’s magnetic field reversal. We will be regretting sunspot activity when our magnetic field collapses in spots during the shift that can take 50-100 years.
Certainly there is global [warming] [colling] (pick one).
But has it been due to human activity?
There is no data to back that.
Earth climate cycles probably span thousands or maybe hundreds of thousands of years. NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE. We simply have not enough data to make any assumptions.
Best documented case:
Greenland thawed out slightly more than 1000 years ago (hence the name *Green* land) yet froze again merely couple hundred years later.
If you believe it were Vikings and their “industrial” activities responsible for such quick and drastic climate change, you’re as gullible (or plain stupid) as Al Gore is.
#24
“Our” environment has never been any “constant”.
It has been always changing, sometimes faster, sometimes slower. There never have been any longer than mere few years – perhaps a decade at most – “constant weather” period.
I.e. ancient Egyptians have watched the weather closely longer than we do (we = the western civilization).
They haven’t found any constants in a weather patterns, and they were surprised by sudden “global warming” and “global cooling” seasons as much as we are today.
#7 An extended lull doesn’t necessarily mean a catastrophic increase will follow. The Sun does operate by Wall Street’s rules. People say the same thing about Earthquakes. Not enough little ones, will surely lead to some huge one, some day. That’s just a load of Hollywood fiction. An extension of the “David and Goliath” story.
As for how this may or does effect earth climate, I have this question? How is any legislated environment edicts going to effect what the Sun throws at us? How come CO2 only reflects heat back to earth? But not away from it, back into space. Maybe having a little extra CO2 will end up saving us from being fried to death.
#27 Glenn E.
>> How come CO2 only reflects heat back to earth? But not away from it, back into space.
Simple (and explained in simple terms just for you): The wavelength of the heat radiation put out by the sun is transparent to CO2, but that radiation warms the earth, creating a completely different wavelength that CO2 is not transparent to.
>> Maybe having a little extra CO2 will end up saving us from being fried to death.
It is interesting that you bring that up, because there is no argument that certain forms of man made pollution were destroying the upper atmosphere ozone layer that protects the earth from specific wavelengths of radiation. A global agreement to stop that pollution has led to a reversal in the ‘ozone holes’. Of course, many claimed back then that the holes in the ozone were natural processes, and that the economic costs of fixing the problem would be too great.
(excuse the long post, however,
it is very educational..)
Unwilling? -Hardly.
Seems to me you are the unwilling one..too lazy teach yourself anything, -definitely a blue
pill guy.
allow me a minor rant before
the “lesson” -yes?
The Theory of the Gravity based universe is the fraud of the 20th century and an abortion of the classical sciences in the extreme.
It is a world built upon the convoluted imaginations of theoretical mathematicians, where unproven theories are plucked from the sky and written as fact before even one observation is made.
Should someone from academia suggest
that a theory is rubbish, or worse,
-show that an “established” theory
does not fit observations, they
will be banished from the planet,
have their tenure revoked and their
name stricken from history!
Mind you it has been over 50 years and Gravity’s elusive Graviton has yet to be found, and the theory yet to be proven. (it never will be)
It is Heresy to even *think* the
theory might be wrong.
The 21st Century will finally see
the true physics of the Universe,
-that of Electromagnetism, Plasma
Physics and the Physics of Resonance,
take it’s rightful place in the minds
of humanity.
The deception will finally end.
Want an innocent, everyday example
of how modern science has been deceiving humanity for centuries?
Do you remember the explanation
given when as a kid you asked,
How come clouds stay in the sky?
(and the tons of water in them)
Here is a common answer i found
all over the web:
sounds about right, yes?
I believe that is what all the
meteorologists and atmospheric scientists are taught as well. (definitely IPCC’s)
What if i told you it was a complete
load of CRAP.
Want to hear the correct (electrical) reason? (this is how I describe it)
As you know, the Water molecule, has one of the most unique properties, in that it can be found naturally occurring in all three states of matter on the planet.
Another rather unique property is that it also is a polarized electric dipole, or an electrically polarized
molecule.
ie: in the presence of an electric field, the water molecules will rotate to line up with the electric field. -big whoop you say?
Wait, -there’s more.
The Water molecule also has the
uber nifty property of Diamagnetism.
Dia-what?
Diamagnetic properties means the water molecule itself, will create
a magnetic field in opposition toany externally applied
magnetic field (!)
(the external field here would be Earth’s magnetic field) 😀
In English:
It will create a repulsive effect that will make the water molecule(s) want to push away from the Earth!
(and Earth’s magnetic field)
This is in fact how those clouds
stay aloft even in ice cold air
Pretty cool eh?
Here is the really fun part:
In just one thread:
I Ripped up the theory of Gravity
(and tore it a new a new A-hole)
Proved atmospheric scientists have
NO CLUE as to what their talking
about. (do they ever mention
electric weather?)
Taught you the real reason why clouds float. (ya!)
Demonstrated that Gravity is in
part, an electromagnetic effect.
Demonstrated that NATURE knows
Anti-Gravity like the back of her
hand.
(omg, I Demonstrated Anti-Gravity too!)
AND MOST IMPORTANT…
I Introduced you to
The Electric Universe Model!
(woot!)
(::whew::)
Now, i left out a few details for
simplicity’s sake. However, this is how I taught myself the theory to explain it to others.
(Biefield-Brown Effect comes into
play during rain creation-i think)
Take it to a “real” non-academia
physicist, they’ll know its legit.
(academia ones won’t have a clue)
To get the full explanation from the
head Electric Universe Guru himself,
Wal Thornhill. Go to his full explanation of
“Electric Weather” here:
http://holoscience.com/news.php?article=9eq6g3aj
Also, be sure to visit the Thunderbolts Picture of The Day (TPOD) (EU’s sister site)
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00archive.htm
At TPOD, every day the Electric Universe (EU) Group of scientists posts a new topic and picture and quote the standard, gravity based definition, then show the EU model
sees the data. its shorts sweet and very enlightening.
If you click the Subject link, you will get a listing of all explanations by subject. (handy)
There are 700+ entries going back to 2004. go check it out, it does not disappoint.
-no big bangs or black holes required.
Tada!
Final thought: If we are being *duped
(from childhood) about a simple little thing like how the clouds float, just imagine how much more of the science we all were taught as kids is being misrepresented..?
Study the EU Model. It is only the tip of the Iceberg, but i guarantee,
you will see anything the same ever again.
-s
The Earth is warming – Good. It’s too damn cold here. I’ll contribute whenever I can.
#30 soundwash
At the magnetic poles, the field lines are (almost) perpendicular to the surface of the earth; at the magnetic equator they are parallel to the surface. What does your theory have to say about the behavior of clouds at these two locations?
Scott, your temperature graphs don’t show what you think they show. Look at the year by year numbers, and you see that 1998 is warmer than 2008.
Only by smoothing the graphs to take 5 year averages can they make things look warmer. Yes, adding 1994-1997 to 1998’s number will make 1998 look cooler. This smoothing is sometimes rigged to make things look even worse. For example, in the Copenhagen Report, they changed the smoothing levels to keep it from looking like temperatures are getting cooler. When asked about this at RealClimate, the moderator deleted the question outright(Did you use a 14 year smoothing?),
though later they admitted they used 15 years.
This was actually a retraction of their peer-reviewed paper from 2 years ago where they used 11 year smoothing, and the same people were criticizing their methodology. They ignored the critics, then changed the methods when needed to make temperatures look worse.
http://tinyurl.com/nz26s9
Even RealClimate is hedging their bets, and put up a guest post that maybe temperatures will level off for 30 years(at which point global warming will come back stronger than ever).