Solar System Passing Through Highly Magnetised Interstellar Cloud

Originally posted by McGinty

Quantum physics has it's own formulations for this micro-universe, but here we seem to have a similar concept in the macro: Solar Systems have a surface tension formed by magnetic forces emanating from the nucleus/Sun, but no doubt effected, if not manifested by the planets and other heavenly bodies. Like a skin it separates the inside from the out.

Makes you wonder where the similarities end...

Is a Galaxy a cluster of Atoms?

Is a Universe a Molecule? If so, then a Molecule of what?

Fun post!

If a solar system is an atom, and there are hundreds of billions in a galaxy, what if they make up basic Molecules, and those molecules in that galaxy are actually part of a living cell, a galaxy that is a single cell in a living organism, with a black hole as the nucleus of that cell, that consumes the molecules for it's life force, and all of the galaxies (cells) in our universe are simply cells that make up a spec of brain tissue in a living being who is right now thinking the same things in its own universe?

Maybe the big bang was conception?

It is an interesting observation that a cloud of hydrogen and helium gas at the border of our solar system has a magnetic signature. What it means is another story. I would guess the signature appears for lack of other matter overwhelming its observation. I wonder if the atoms are aligning north south to create a perceptible magnetic field.

Reading the posts reacting to this observation is also interesting to a degree. The topic rapidly expands in scope.

Off topic ideas:

It doesn't surprise me that two objects in proximity can have widely different spectral signatures, however I don't see how this disproves other theories quite yet. It is interesting that these objects can be measured with such precision. If there was no big bang, then it seems they are wasting an awful lot of money looking for the higgs particle.

The electric universe. I wouldn't throw out gravity yet. It seems there are a variety of forces working together in the universe if you include the nuclear forces too. If hydrogen and helium gas clouds polarize it does show another organizational force at work besides gravity.

As far as I know the sun is the biggest source of cosmic radiation in our region, and the earth is protected from this stream by its magnetism. So cosmic radiation from outside the solar system should also not get by this shield either. There was some talk on Climate Audit that trees grow better when cosmic radiation is higher. I guess a change in the magnetism of the earth or intensity of the sun's output could account for this.

Back on topic.

My thought is that the gas giants could get a little bigger from passing through these clouds. I would suppose Jupiter might eventually collect enough gas someday to light up some day.

Another thought is that if the earth passed through a denser hydrogen cloud we might get a lot of rain, the hydrogen would combine with oxygen in the atmosphere. The plants would be okay but us oxygen breathers might face a problem. Ah, maybe we would only expand water by a few tons.

[edit on 26-12-2009 by A52FWY]

[edit on 26-12-2009 by A52FWY]

[edit on 26-12-2009 by A52FWY]

A cluster of supernovas exploded, scientists say it it shouldn't exist, Highly magnetized, Super High heat, white cloud, HMM you know what fits, Orme, a giant cloud of orbitally rearranged molecular elements. star dust baby, the real deal.

The reality is that we don't understand electrical force any more than gravity. It is all explained by small force and big force concepts.

We know that gravity seems to extend across the galaxy, it only makes sense that electrical forces including magnetism would also extend across the galaxy.

If two star systems have different potentials, than there would be a voltage pull between the two. In the vast extent of space it would be extremely hard to measure any current, especially from our limited perspective.

There is this Universal Force theory that claims that gravity and electricity are just manifestations of this universal force that holds the universe together. This theory does do a good job of explaining the famous two slot theory of pattern developments for ions.

www.commonsensescience.org...

This derived version of the electromagnetic force law incorporates the effects of the self-fields of real finite-size elastic particles as observed in particle scattering experiments. It can account for gravity, inertia, and relativistic effects including radiation and
radiation reaction. The non-radial terms of the force law explain the
experimentally observed curling of plasma currents, the tilting of the orbits of the planets with respect to the equatorial plane of the sun, and certain inertial gyroscope motions.

Now this last comment fits in with my own personal theory of force, which is that the electron is a long thin strand with a elasticity where it seeks to exist at a particular curve. Protons are much smaller particles in length but are much thicker giving them more mass, and have a great deal more strength in the spring of their curve. Thus you have small force and strong force. Neutrons are gummy things that act like an atomic level glue, or mud, or clay.

In my theory space is primarily held together by very long strands of single electrons and protons combining together creating massively long lines of flux in a giant universal type of spider web.

reply to post by poet1b

In my theory space is primarily held together by very long strands of single electrons and protons combining together creating massively long lines of flux in a giant universal type of spider web.

Wow now that is a novel idea, that would sort of explain entanglement, not so much a case of electrons communicating with each other but rather the same electron elongated through space/time.

My head hurts, gotta think about this!

reply to post by kennyb72


I believe the approach would be to develop a mathematical system where things are considered on a scalar format. Where an electron or neutron would be referred to as one scale, a molecule as another scale, a grain as yet another, then you would consider larger quantities where you consider cubic centimeters and grams, to liters and kilograms, metric tons and cubic kilometers, up to planets, and then solar systems and on and on.

Something that has an effect on an atomic level might not matter on a granular level, or might have an effect on a solar system.

Essentially, when we are working mathematical equations, we should have a way of noting whether or not we are talking about one electron, one grain of sand, one planet, one star system, one galaxy, or such on and on.

All this makes me want is for us to start putting probes and satellites into permanent "orbit" around the sun in the heliosphere.

Probes, cameras, even a hubble. Two. Perhaps. One facing "out" and one facing "in."

reply to post by Aeons


I think that would be a great idea. Have a satelite on the other side of the sun so that we are able to see what is going on behind the sun. A telescope outside of Earth's plasma sphere could probably see even more details about space, and record clearer signals from space.

The more I think about it, I wonder how you'd get one into an orbit "up" and "over" and "down" the elliptical plane. So that instead of just having one "behind" the sun in comparison to us, one "Over" and another "Under."

Then you could measure the fluctuations and how objects enter and leave the heliosphere. Watching how natural objects move would give a far better idea on how to emulate that for later.

Why reinvent what a floating rock can show you?

reply to post by Aeons


Yeah, I think you are right cover the 3d spacial area of the sun.

We may find that space is extremely different perpendicular to the our solar plane. How much could this type of information benefit us?

reply to post by ChemBreather


You're dead wrong. If you actually did your homework and respected science, sound skepticism, and the ACTUAL DATA, you'd find that AGW is very strongly backed up. In fact, you say it's been debunked royally, but you're blowing hot air to save your own butt... the fact is that denier arguments have been debunked "royally" and you guys just won't admit defeat, you're too ignorant and stubborn, you're chasing ghosts because you don't like Democrats. AGW is not a political issue, it's been turned into one and scientists are not in that business, the vast vast majority of Climate scientists are in agreement about AGW and so is the peer-reviewed research.

And you actually video-quoted Michelle Bachmann?!? That killed your argument right there.

so what are you tring to say by this post, that our uk crap weather is bad and gettin worse because of a magnetic field???

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Actually you're wrong, solar radiance/output has DECLINED over the past few decades. Sunspots have almost died off completely, yet we still see warming.

Also, I've researched the potential effects of "interstellar dust" and cosmic radiation affecting our climate and there's very weak evidence that it may play a role, but scientists say the role is negligible in the global warming effect and the effects of human emissions far outweigh any kind of cosmic explanation. Put simply- there is no hard evidence that the cause is solar/cosmic.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Read:

www.universetoday.com...

www.wired.com...



Watch:

reply to post by ChemBreather


Actually she is wrong in one thing, CO2 constitutes 0.038% of Earth's atmosphere. It is a trace gas because it is nowhere near 1% of Earth's atmosphere. Water vapor on the other hand constitutes from 1%-4% of Earth's atmosphere. water vapor levels are not only higher than CO2, but water vapor retains more radiation per molecule than CO2 does, or will ever do. Not to mention the fact that CO2 also shares some of the bands of absorption of radiation with water vapor which means CO2 retains even less radiation. The "greenhouse effect" of CO2 is neglegible.

The response from the Democrat to what she was saying of course has been shown to be wrong time and again... there is no such "concensus of scientists, and many scientists, thousands of them have been trying to show this to the world, but noone it listening to them. Instead everyone wants to believe in the IPCC, and the policy makers, and politicians, as well as environmentalists who are trying to further their agendas through the AGW SCAM.

It was also shown, and even the scammers are admitting that they used false information to push for their globalist agendas.... Yet there are people who still want to belive in them?....

reply to post by NoHierarchy


Sorry to tell you that you are wrong.... Even the scientists/scammers who were part of the scam are coming clean and admitting they have had to use FALSE information to keep the AGW claim alive...

There is no concensus of scientists that all believe in AGW, and sorry to tell you this had been shown in many threads in these forums....

Anyway, scientists have known for some time, at least since 1978, that the Solar System was going to encounter a new interstellar cloud, and even back then they speculated that extreme Climate Changes could occur at some unspecified time in the "near future."

Title:
Is the solar system entering a nearby interstellar cloud
Authors:
Vidal-Madjar, A.; Laurent, C.; Bruston, P.; Audouze, J.
Affiliation:
AA(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AB(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AC(CNRS, Laboratoire de Physique Stellaire et Planetaire, Verrieres-le-Buisson, Essonne, France), AD(Meudon Observatoire, Hauts-de-Seine; Paris XI, Universite, Orsay, Essonne, France)
Publication:
Astrophysical Journal, Part 1, vol. 223, July 15, 1978, p. 589-600. (ApJ Homepage)
Publication Date:
07/1978
Category:
Astrophysics
Origin:
STI
NASA/STI Keywords:
....................
Abstract
....................
Observational arguments in favor of such a cloud are presented, and implications of the presence of a nearby cloud are discussed, including possible changes in terrestrial climate. It is suggested that the postulated interstellar cloud should encounter the solar system at some unspecified time in the near future and might have a drastic influence on terrestrial climate in the next 10,000 years.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

As time has come and gone we have found more evidence of what these changes in the Solar System would do.

ESA sees stardust storms heading for Solar System

PRESS RELEASE
Date Released: Monday, August 18, 2003
Source: Artemis Society

Until ten years ago, most astronomers did not believe stardust could enter our Solar System. Then ESA's Ulysses spaceprobe discovered minute stardust particles leaking through the Sun's magnetic shield, into the realm of Earth and the other planets. Now, the same spaceprobe has shown that a flood of dusty particles is heading our way.
...........
What is surprising in this new Ulysses discovery is that the amount of stardust has continued to increase even after the solar activity calmed down and the magnetic field resumed its ordered shape in 2001.

Scientists believe that this is due to the way in which the polarity changed during solar maximum. Instead of reversing completely, flipping north to south, the Sun's magnetic poles have only rotated at halfway and are now more or less lying sideways along the Sun's equator. This weaker configuration of the magnetic shield is letting in two to three times more stardust than at the end of the 1990s. Moreover, this influx could increase by as much as ten times until the end of the current solar cycle in 2012.

www.spaceref.com...

Like a wounded Starship Enterprise, our solar system's natural shields are faltering, letting in a flood of cosmic rays. The sun's recent listlessness is resulting in record-high radiation levels that pose a hazard to both human and robotic space missions.

Galactic cosmic rays are speeding charged particles that include protons and heavier atomic nuclei. They come from outside the solar system, though their exact sources are still being debated.

www.newscientist.com...

We also know that since 1840 the Earth's own magnetiuc field has been fluctuating wildly, and weakening, and it is now weaker than it has been for many tens of thousands of years, which amplifies the effecs of the influx of charged particles, plasma, radiation, interstellar dust, etc.

Magnetic Field Weakening in Stages, Old Ships' Logs Suggest
John Roach
for National Geographic News

May 11, 2006

Earth's magnetic field is weakening in staggered steps, a new analysis of centuries-old ships logs suggests.

The finding could help scientists better understand the way Earth's magnetic poles reverse.

The planet's magnetic field flips—north becomes south and vice versa—on average every 300,000 years. However, the actual time between reversals varies widely.

The field last flipped about 800,000 years ago, according to the geologic record.

Since 1840, when accurate measures of the intensity were first made, the field strength has declined by about 5 percent per century.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

All of the above facts hace consequences for the climate of Earth, as well as the fact that we know that every planet and Moons with an atmosphere is going through dramatic Climate Changes, and even the Sun is going through some drastic changes.

Even when we have known that the Sun's overall activity has been down toa crawl scientists found that other natural factors were causing changes to Earth, and have been warming Earth's atmosphere at a time when the Sun's activity is down.

Surprise In Earth's Upper Atmosphere: Mode Of Energy Transfer From The Solar Wind

www.sciencedaily.com
"Its like something else is heating the atmosphere besides the sun. This discovery is like finding it got hotter when the sun went down," said Larry Lyons, UCLA professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences and a co-author of the research, which is in press in two companion papers in the Journal of Geophysical Research.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Recently it was also discovered that this new interstellar cloud that the Solar System has encountered is highly magnetized, and physics says such a star could not exist.

Voyager Makes an Interstellar Discovery
12.23.2009

December 23, 2009: The solar system is passing through an interstellar cloud that physics says should not exist. In the Dec. 24th issue of Nature, a team of scientists reveal how NASA's Voyager spacecraft have solved the mystery.

"Using data from Voyager, we have discovered a strong magnetic field just outside the solar system," explains lead author Merav Opher, a NASA Heliophysics Guest Investigator from George Mason University. "This magnetic field holds the interstellar cloud together and solves the long-standing puzzle of how it can exist at all."
............
"The observed temperature and density of the local cloud do not provide enough pressure to resist the 'crushing action' of the hot gas around it," says Opher.

So how does the Fluff survive? The Voyagers have found an answer.

"Voyager data show that the Fluff is much more strongly magnetized than anyone had previously suspected—between 4 and 5 microgauss*," says Opher. "This magnetic field can provide the extra pressure required to resist destruction."
.......

science.nasa.gov...

We even know that there is research and evidence that sugest geomagnetic determinism, or the fact that changes in the magnetic field of the Earth, and any area of space which the Solar system encounters which is highly magnetized causes Climate Changes.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Title:
Climate determinism or Geomagnetic determinism?
Authors:
Gallet, Y.; Genevey, A.; Le Goff, M.; Fluteau, F.; Courtillot, V.
Affiliation:
AA(Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, 4 Place Jussieu, Paris, 75005 France ; [email protected]), AB(Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musees de France, Palais du Louvre, Porte des Lions 14 quai Francois Mitterrand, Paris, 75001 France ; [email protected]), AC(Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, 4 Place Jussieu, Paris, 75005 France ; [email protected]), AD(Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, 4 Place Jussieu, Paris, 75005 France ; [email protected]), AE(Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, 4 Place Jussieu, Paris, 75005 France ; [email protected])
Publication:
American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2006, abstract #GP51A-0940
Publication Date:
12/2006
Origin:
AGU
AGU Keywords:
1503 Archeomagnetism, 1521 Paleointensity, 1605 Abrupt/rapid climate change (4901, 8408), 1616 Climate variability (1635, 3305, 3309, 4215, 4513)
Abstract Copyright:
(c) 2006: American Geophysical Union
Bibliographic Code:
2006AGUFMGP51A0940G

Abstract

A number of episodes of sharp geomagnetic field variations (in both intensity and direction), lasting on the order of a century, have been identified in archeomagnetic records from Western Eurasia and have been called "archeomagnetic jerks". These seem to correlate well with multi-decadal cooling episodes detected in the North Atlantic Ocean and Western Europe, suggesting a causal link between both phenomena. A possible mechanism could be a geomagnetic modulation of the cosmic ray flux that would control the nucleation rate of clouds. We wish to underline the remarkable coincidence between archeomagnetic jerks, cooling events in Western Europe and drought periods in tropical and sub-tropical regions of the northern hemisphere. The latter two can be interpreted in terms of global teleconnections among regional climates. It has been suggested that these climatic variations had caused major changes in the history of ancient civilizations, such as in Mesopotamia, which were critically dependent on water supply and particularly vulnerable to lower rainfall amounts. This is one of the foundations of "climate determinism". Our studies, which suggest a geomagnetic origin for at least some of the inferred climatic events, lead us to propose the idea of a geomagnetic determinism in the history of humanity.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

Possible impact of the Earths magnetic field on the history
of ancient civilizations

Yves Gallet a,⁎, Agnès Genevey b, Maxime Le Goff a, Frédéric Fluteau a,c,
Safar Ali Eshraghi d

a Equipe de Paléomagnétisme, Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, 4 place Jussieu, 75252 Paris cedex 05, France

b Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musées de France, UMR CNRS 171, Palais du Louvre, Porte des Lions,
14 quai François Mitterrand, 75001 Paris, France

c UFR des Sciences Physiques de la Terre, Université Denis Diderot Paris 7, 2 Place Jussieu, 75251 Paris cedex 05, France

d Geological Survey of Iran, Azadi sq., Meraj blvd., PO Box 13185-1494 Tehran, Iran
Received 30 November 2005; received in revised form 3 April 2006; accepted 3 April 2006
Available online 19 May 2006
Editor: R.D. van der Hilst

Abstract
We report new archeointensity results from Iranian and Syrian archeological excavations dated from the second millennium BC.
These high-temperature magnetization data were obtained using a laboratory-built triaxial vibrating sample magnetometer.

Together with our previously published archeointensity results from Mesopotamia, we constructed a rather detailed geomagnetic field intensity variation curve for this region from 3000 BC to 0 BC. Four potential geomagnetic events (“archeomagnetic jerks”), marked by strong intensity increases, are observed and appear to be synchronous with cooling episodes in the North Atlantic.

This temporal coincidence strengthens the recent suggestion that the geomagnetic field influences climate change over multi-decadal time scales, possibly through the modulation of cosmic ray flux interacting with the atmosphere. Moreover, the cooling periods in the North Atlantic coincide with episodes of enhanced aridity in the Middle East, when abrupt societal changes occurred in the eastern Mediterranean and Mesopotamia.

Although the coincidences discussed in this paper must be considered with caution, they lead to the possibility that the geomagnetic field impacted the history of ancient civilizations through climatically driven environmental changes, triggering economic, social and political instability.
© 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

www.ipgp.fr...


And then we have the anomalies in the Solar System which took another turn with the recently found secular variation of the AU, or distance between the Sun and the planets, which has increased and cannot be explained.

Which I first reported here.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Anomalies in the Solar System
Dittus, Hansjoerg
37th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. Held 13-20 July 2008, in Montréal, Canada., p.717
Several observations show unexplained phenomena in our solar system. These observations are e.g. the Pioneer Anomaly, an unexplained constant acceleration of the Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft, the Flyby Anomaly, an unexplained increase of the velocity of a series of spacecraft after Earth gravity assists, the recently reported increase of the Astronomical Unit defined by the distance of the planets from the Sun by approximately 10 m per century, the quadrupole and octupole anomaly which describes the correlation of the low l contributions of the Cosmic Microwave Background to the orientation of the Solar system. Lacking any explanation until now, these phenomena are still investigated intensively. In my talk I will discuss the present status of those investigations and the attempts to find reasonable explantions.

adsabs.harvard.edu...

Secular increase of the astronomical unit and perihelion precessions as tests of the Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati multi-dimensional braneworld scenario
Lorenzo Iorio JCAP09(2005)006 doi: 10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/006


PDF (313 KB) | HTML | References | Articles citing this article



Lorenzo Iorio
Viale Unità di Italia 68, 70125, Bari, Italy
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract. An unexpected secular increase of the astronomical unit, the length scale of the Solar System, has recently been reported by three different research groups (Krasinsky and Brumberg, Pitjeva, Standish). The latest JPL measurements amount to 7 ± 2 m cy−1. At present, there are no explanations able to accommodate such an observed phenomenon, either in the realm of classical physics or in the usual four-dimensional framework of the Einsteinian general relativity. The Dvali–Gabadadze–Porrati braneworld scenario, which is a multi-dimensional model of gravity aimed at providing an explanation of the observed cosmic acceleration without dark energy, predicts, among other things, a perihelion secular shift, due to Lue and Starkman, of 5 × 10−4 arcsec cy−1 for all the planets of the Solar System. It yields a variation of about 6 m cy−1 for the Earth–Sun distance which is compatible with the observed rate of change for the astronomical unit. The recently measured corrections to the secular motions of the perihelia of the inner planets of the Solar System are in agreement with the predicted value of the Lue–Starkman effect for Mercury, Mars and, at a slightly worse level, the Earth.

www.iop.org...

Whatever is causing these anomalies has also been affecting our satellites. Some of you might remember the pioneer anomalies, but what you might not know is that whatever it is has also been affecting comets, pushing them faster towards the inner Solar System, and making them arrive a few days earlier than they are supposed to.


[edit on 4-2-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

The Solar System is passing through a new region of space that is highly magnetized, and as I have shown there is evidence that shows changes in the magnetic field of Earth, and changes in the space through which the Solar System goes through do cause Climate Changes, as well as the increase in seismic, and magmatic activities we have been seeing.

There is also an increase in radiation in space which is 19% higher than at any time since at least we started observing space weather, and there are scientists who sugest observational evidence seems to point to the possibility that the radiation could increase even to 30%.

As I also shown scientists also found that even when the Sun's activity is down, other NATURAL factors are warming the Earth's atmosphere, and it seems to be because the weakened solar wind is bringing more charged particles, plasma etc into the Solar System, and are affecting the dynamics of every planet, including Earth.

What a coincidence that when the Sun's activity began to weaken GLOBAL temperatures dropped, but then the more it weakened it allowed for other NATURAL factors from outside the Solar System to influence the dynamics of the planet, and to warm Earth's atmosphere...

Sorry buddy, but AGW has been shown to be a scam, and scientists who participated in the scam are coming clean...

[edit on 4-2-2010 by ElectricUniverse]

So is this just a once off thing?

Has it happened before? / Will it happen again?

Everything seems to be much more 'unknown' than majority science says they are.

Originally posted by MissMegs
So is this just a once off thing?

Has it happened before? / Will it happen again?

Everything seems to be much more 'unknown' than majority science says they are.

Similar things have happened in the past. the thing is though, there ae many natural factors which are merging to cause the ongoing Climate Changes, and the increased seismic, and magmatic activities which we are seeing.

Despite some people wanting to claim the contrary even NASA research has shown that until recently the Sun's activity has been at the highest for at least the past 100 years in more than 1,000 years.

Research by Wilson who is a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York., found an increasing trend in total solar irradiance of 0.05% per decade in the 24 years covered by his research.

This particular research started in 1978, and ended in 2002, and until that last year Wilson found the increase in solar irradiance.

NASA Study Finds Increasing Solar Trend That Can Change Climate
Mar. 20, 2003

Since the late 1970s, the amount of solar radiation the sun emits, during times of quiet sunspot activity, has increased by nearly .05 percent per decade, according to a NASA funded study.

"This trend is important because, if sustained over many decades, it could cause significant climate change," said Richard Willson, a researcher affiliated with NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and Columbia University's Earth Institute, New York. He is the lead author of the study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters.
...............
In order to investigate the possibility of a solar trend, Willson needed to put together a long-term dataset of the sun's total output. Six overlapping satellite experiments have monitored TSI since late 1978. The first record came from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Nimbus7 Earth Radiation Budget (ERB) experiment (1978 - 1993). Other records came from NASA's Active Cavity Radiometer Irradiance Monitors: ACRIM1 on the Solar Maximum Mission (1980 - 1989), ACRIM2 on the Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite (1991 - 2001) and ACRIM3 on the ACRIMSAT satellite (2000 to present). Also, NASA launched its own Earth Radiation Budget Experiment on its Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS) in 1984. The European Space Agency's (ESA) SOHO/VIRGO experiment also provided an independent data set (1996 to 1998).

In this study, Willson, who is also Principal Investigator of NASA's ACRIM experiments, compiled a TSI record of over 24 years by carefully piecing together the overlapping records. In order to construct a long-term dataset, he needed to bridge a two-year gap (1989 to 1991) between ACRIM1 and ACRIM2. Both the Nimbus7/ERB and ERBS measurements overlapped the ACRIM 'gap.' Using Nimbus7/ERB results produced a 0.05 percent per decade upward trend between solar minima, while ERBS results produced no trend. Until this study, the cause of this difference, and hence the validity of the TSI trend, was uncertain. Willson has identified specific errors in the ERBS data responsible for the difference. The accurate long-term dataset, therefore, shows a significant positive trend (.05 percent per decade) in TSI between the solar minima of solar cycles 21 to 23 (1978 to present). This major finding may help climatologists to distinguish between solar and man-made influences on climate.

NASA's ACRIMSAT/ACRIM3 experiment began in 2000 and will extend the long-term solar observations into the future for at least a five-year minimum mission.

Reference
Willson, R.C., and A.V. Mordvinov 2003. Secular total solar irradiance trend during solar cycles 21-23. Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, no. 5, 1199, doi:10.1029/2002GL016038.

www.giss.nasa.gov...

That research study only covered 24 years, from 1978, until 2002, but we also know that the strengh of the Solar magnetic storms had been increasing until around the end of 2005-2006, and after this the Sun's activity dropped to a crawl and we saw a global temperature drop right after the Sun's activity began to slow down.

Other research has shown that the Sun's activity had been increasing for decades until at least the end of the 1970s, and putting these facts together we know the Sun was the mayor cause for Climate Change on Earth.

We know for a fact that when one factor of the Sun's activity increases, for example magnetic activity, all other factors are also increasing. So when the Sun's irradiance is increasing, it means it's magnetic storms are getting stronger, it's magnetic field is getting stronger, there are more sunspots, CMEs, the solar wind also increases in strength, and this increases in strength the interplanetary magnetic field, all of which affects the climate of Earth, as well as all other planets and Moons with an atmosphere in the Solar System.

Total solar irradiance had been increasing.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5821619030e4.jpg[/atsimg]

The strength of solar magnetic storms were also increasing to levels not seen before the 1900s

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7c0bc3d5e611.jpg[/atsimg]


As for GHGs, it is a known fact that during times of warming, and as the atmosphere warms it can hold more water vapor, and levels of water vapor, and even CO2 levels increase NATURALLY... Mankind wasn't the only one releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.

If there is one thing we can learn from the Earth's geological history is that CO2 does not rule the climate.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/58e5483d1fed.gif[/atsimg]

There have been times when the Earth's temperatures have increased, or decreased and atmospheric CO2 levels didn't change much, such as during the Medieval, and the Roman Warm Periods which were much warmer than it has been in the 20th, or the beginning of the 21st century.

Global temperatures were much greated during the Medieval Warm, and even the Roman warm than at any time in the present.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9be21070709c.gif[/atsimg]

BTW, just in case some members don't understand it the graph above is whoing temperatures from 2000 years ago until 1999 which is shown in the graph as 0. It is backwards.

The above is a temperature graph of the Sargasso Sea until 1999, and we know that 1998 was almost tied to 2005 as two of the hottest years in recent periods, yet temperatures never even got closed to how high temperatures were during the MWP, and RWP.

Here is a graph showing past temperatures relative to the 20th century, and you can see there is nothing exceptional about temperatures in the 20th century, or even the 21st century.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1002ae3ec9e9.jpg[/atsimg]

Mankind does affect the local environment, but the global climate is affected by natural factors which mankind has no control over.

For all we know we could be headed to another Little Ice Age, or even an Ice Age, or the Sun's activity could go back to normal and strenghten the interplanetary magnetic field.



[edit on 5-2-2010 by ElectricUniverse]