Interplanetary “Day After Tomorrow?”

reply to post by yets777

As I said, I haven't seen Venus only increasing in brightness. It's been changing as it always has.

I did not say it is proven that the next solar maximum will be less than average. I said it is predicted to be. The activity so far in the solar cycle indicates that the prediction is correct. I do not recall NASA saying the next solar maximum will be cataclysmic. Perhaps you can provide a source.

Magnetic north is wandering. It has been for as long as we have been tracking it (about 200 years). The equinoxes have nothing to do with magnetic north and they still occur on March 20 (or 21) and September 23 (or 22). Just like they always have. The exact time of the equinox varies a bit, just like it always has.

People may be noticing stars they haven't noticed before. I haven't. Astronomers haven't. I haven't noticed the sky being 10% more southeast. Astronomers haven't.

The Moon. Do you mean this?
arxiv.org...
I'm not equipped to "debunk" the paper and I really don't have any reason to try. It is unrelated to anything in this thread. The paper talks about the eccentricity of the Moon's orbit changing by a very, very small amount ( 0.00000000001 each year). If you are aware of astronomical concepts you should understand that that is not something you would notice in 10 years (or 1000 years) by watching the Moon. You would also understand that it has nothing to do with the "tilt" of the Moon.

"Every" volcano is active? I hadn't heard that. Is Mauna Kea active? Is Mt. Fuji erupting? Is Haleakala erupting? Is Mt. Shasta erupting? There have always been earthquakes, volcanoes, and tsunami. Is it OK? Not if people are living nearby. Is it normal? Yes.

I recall reading some thing about the Mayans. The Mayan prophecies by Gilbert and Cotterell. And they were interested in Venus. Perhaps this is what they were on about. The changes that we are witnessing or seeing, in regards to Venus.

reply to post by Phage


Realy. im starting to think some of us are watching different versions of the cosmos , ive never been able to see "big dipper from my yard ; it has always been north ,circling the polar star with cassiopeia (visable from the front side of my house) , now i see it in my backyard facing east . to my regular senses thats a big change without having to go to technical in this observation.

reply to post by Phage


www.youtube.com... this is the fox newsreport on it

reply to post by yets777

If you are seeing Ursa Major (the Big Dipper) in the east something strange is happening in your part of the world.

At this time of year it rises (in the NNE) at about 3:00PM. I see it in the northeast at about 8:00PM, right where it should be.
www.wunderground.com...

Is it possible you are mistaking Pegasus for Ursa Major? Pegasus is "with" Cassiopeia (on the same side of Polaris) and does appear in the east just before sunrise. Ursa Major is "opposite" Cassiopeia.

reply to post by yets777

Fox News said NASA said. Surprise. Fox News got it wrong. In 2009 they were using a prediction from 2007, a prediction for which there was no consensus. Some of the panel said the cycle would be of greater activity, some said of average activity.
www.swpc.noaa.gov...

The 2009 prediction was for lower than average activity.
www.swpc.noaa.gov...

Neither NASA nor any solar scientists make any predictions about the intensity of future solar activity or CMEs, only the number of sunspots and the timing of Solar Maximum.

reply to post by Phage


Thank You all for posting..

this was meant for information and entertainment only...


please NO wagering .....

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by yets777

 

If you are seeing Ursa Major (the Big Dipper) in the east something strange is happening in your part of the world.

At this time of year it rises (in the NNE) at about 3:00PM. I see it in the northeast at about 8:00PM, right where it should be.
www.wunderground.com...

Is it possible you are mistaking Pegasus for Ursa Major? Pegasus is "with" Cassiopeia (on the same side of Polaris) and does appear in the east just before sunrise. Ursa Major is "opposite" Cassiopeia.

Im 100 % sure its ursa major , its about the same distance away from polaris as cassiopeia but on the other side, hoping some other observers from countries around belgium to confirm this change. polar star is much higher now then before and this one should always be at same point unless there's a change in the wobble earth has. Might be wrong on this next interpretation and ill try as best as i can in english to explain what i reason . If earth turns around it's axis and magnetic north and south make the vertical line around wich the earth turns . then if magnetic north moves i.m.o. the equator will be adjusted to another point and we should notice this in to where we see things set and rise .

The magnetic north pole does not effect the earth's axis, the geological 90º north is and always was 90º north. However the earth does wobble slightly with the proximity of the moon and sun. A magnetic shift does not 'flip the earth over', and a magnetic reversal has happened on earth an estimated 700 times. The earth was always tilted 23.5 degrees in relation to it's directional orbit around the sun, or tilted 66.5º from it's orbital plane, hence, seasons.

Something like that.

Originally posted by Firefly_
To deny humans are not responsible for the mess we have created due to solar system wide changes is just plain irresponsible and typical. You cannot deny that human activity has significantly altered this planet, regardless of what the sun is up to. We are currently, will probably discover a lot harder what our affects have had.

Maybe its because of our activities down here the sun is behaving strangely. There is so much more going on than we are aware of. The universe is alive, stars could be living, conscious entities.

edit on 15-3-2011 by Firefly_ because: (no reason given)

This is ego at its best!
To think that human activity is changing the composition of the sun -- in the 300 years or less that the industrial revolution even started - is ridiculous!

We are not as important to the universe as you all seem to think.

It has been around for billions upon billions of years and will continue to exist long after Earth has vanished altogether in another few billion years.

Do you know have many ice ages have plagued this planet?
Do you know have many impacts are evidenced on the surface of our planet?
Do you what the temperature was at the time of the dinosaurs?
Do you know how many mass extinctions this planet has had?

You really think all of that was caused by our dependence on oil, coal, and nuclear? Seriously?

Yes, the universe and our planet are changing.
Just as it has throughout its entire history -- long before the first human was anything more than an amoeba!!!!

These changes have to occur in order to keep life on this planet going and advancing. After every mass extinction event, new, advanced species were formed and flourished until the next changes arrived.

I don't think much has changed in our solar system in the last 4 billion years, I think our detection and analyses of data has changed drastically in the last 300 years though.

Originally posted by Phage
Neither NASA nor any solar scientists make any predictions about the intensity of future solar activity or CMEs, only the number of sunspots and the timing of Solar Maximum.

edit on 3/15/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I have been reading various calculations formed by an author / researcher named Patrick Geryl that you may or may not have heard of. I have been following his predictions, and although I certainly don't subscribe to all of his theories, some of which I believe were exaggerated to simply sell books, his latest work on CME prediction has me interested.

Any thoughts?

His theory:

Not only the Solar Flux is down, but also something else has emerged that will have a large impact on Solar Cycle 24 and on our civilization. There is a new wave of sunspots that behave quite differently from the norm. We call them Negative Sunspots.

His first prediction regarding the next solar storm was this:

This is how Patrick had calculated the next solar ejections to be on October 27, 2010 at 10pm UTC.

Source: Prediction

This happened:

Spaceweather.com reports:
“Space Weather News for Oct. 28, 2010

SUN TWISTER: Earlier today, NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) recorded a spectacular eruption on the sun’s northeastern limb. An unstable magnetic filament hundreds of thousands of kilometers long pirouetted and launched a fragment of itself into space. Earth was not in the line of fire, but the SDO movie is worth seeing anyway. Visit spaceweather.com for cinema.”

OK...well Geryl was off by about 3 hours. Certainly not perfect.

He has made two other predictions that have come to fruition as well.

I was wondering if you could share any flaws in his method. I have not included additional information since it's rather doom and gloom and I am only interested in whether his CME predictions are correct and not his desire for a cataclysm in 2012.

His entire theory can be found here:
Complex Negative Sunspots

The dates for his predictions and some videos authenticating when they were made can be found here:
Are the Solar Flares Following the Maya Predictions?
Earthquake-Solar Activity Relation

I am, for the first time since becoming a member of ATS, bumping this thread in the hopes that someone can answer my question in the post above.

If anyone could take a look at the links and subsequent data, I would appreciate it.
Thanks in advance.

reply to post by Fox Molder


fox mulder that was so awesomely put! lol

About the OP title and the interplanetary "Day After Tomorrow", did you read about Immanuel Velikovsky's work?
He was a psychiatrist that wanted to see if there were any trauma left in the human psyche about past catastrophes, like the Gaul being afraid of "the sky falling on their head".

He first published in the 50's and was considered a fraud and charlatan, but now, you see many scientists presenting his former ideas in their own words and making them theirs...

I think he was the first to combine studies from different fields to be able to postulate his hypotheses.

reply to post by darrman


It's called science, it kinds of evolve and increase in knowledge. Astronomy is young, we have no data to work on. There is no mystery, it's science.

reply to post by Phage




clink the link for the enterprise mission and scroll down you will see this

An Enterprise Mission Hyperdimensional Report
Richard C. Hoagland
David Wilcock

Those 3 lines above tell you its BS without having to look elsewhere.