'Major Result' on Sunspot Cycle to be Announced Tuesday

Originally posted by Fromabove
The low solar output along with the increase of volcano activity will speed the mini ice age along. At first all you'll notice is a little cooler weather, early winters etc, but then some places will have severe droughts while other places will have too much rain, yet it means crops will be affected, and that's the start.

You mean...what's going on now?

They can blame "extreme" weather on global warming, but with warming you'd expect pretty nice conditions. All these tornadoes and such are caused by cooling landmasses but the oceans are still fairly warm. It takes awhile to cool a few quadrillion tons of water, after all, and we are currently in a La Nina.

In a really big nutshell, weather is just the Earth's attempt at equilibrium. The tropical oceans are the primary heat stores, and as the planet tries to get that warm air to the poles, we get weather. The bigger the temperature gradient between the poles and the equator, the worse the weather is.

Originally posted by Sky watcher
So they went from warning us that this cycle will be a major event to oh its gonna hardly be nothing, nothing to see here move on lol.

If you put faith in NASA your nuts.

I'm going to defend NASA here, and as I recall the sunspot predictions came from NOAA anyway. In any case, this is a relatively new science. At least these scientists are admitting they don't know everything. They, unlike their counterparts in climate science, will physically observe the sun and revise their theories as needed.

Real life observation. Who'da thunk it?

reply to post by HappyBunny

Indeed. And this "Major Result" has already come under fire (and there is bound to be more). It is based on less than 2 cycles worth of little understood data. Douglas Biesecker, a solar scientist at SWPC thinks that Frank Hill, et al don't have enough data to predict an extended period of reduced activity.
Biesecke r critique

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

Indeed. And this "Major Result" has already come under fire (and there is bound to be more). It is based on less than 2 cycles worth of little understood data. Douglas Biesecker, a solar scientist at SWPC thinks that Frank Hill, et al don't have enough data to predict an extended period of reduced activity.
Biesecke r critique

edit on 6/15/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I'm going to be a smart a** and say that if he wants to rebut, he needs to do it in the peer reviewed literature. That's what the scaremongers always tell the skeptics, after all.

I'd have to read the whole thing, but we also have 400 years worth of historical data, and that data says that when there are fewer sunspots, the weather is cooler if not downright cold. That's a testable, refutable, and reproducible hypothesis. And unlike the warmista's hypothesis, we won't have to wait a hundred or a thousand years to see if it pans out. Not that their hypothesis hasn't been hoisted by its own petard several times over, of course.

reply to post by HappyBunny

The peer review process will occur. Count on it.

I don't see the climate/sunspot data quite so cut an dried as you make it out to be. But, as I mentioned early in this thread, if we are on the verge of a Maunder Minimum, it will provide an opportunity to determine just how much the fluctuations in solar activity affect climate. Unlike last time, we have a much better quiver of tools and knowledge.

So did they make some earthshattering announcement or not?

Is it this?


www.myweathertech.com...

Well today in a major announcement the American Astronomical Society has dropped a bomb on the astronomical, meteorological, and political field. In their annual meeting taking place the following has been stated:...

As this chart clearly shows, the Earth has cooled and warmed several times over the last 400,000 years. The ironic part is methane has jumped up and down several times with carbon dioxide over that same time span. So common knowledge would indicate that when the Earth warms carbon dioxide and methane begin to rise in response. When the Earth begins to cool, carbon dioxide and methane begin to drop off in response. Well if that is the case, the “Carbon Dioxide Argument” goes up or should I say down in defeat....

I will say this though, in my humble opinion, it is ice not fire that everyone will be worrying about in twenty to thirty years from now. For so long, warming and disaster and chaos would come via a warm planet but when you sit down and think for just one minute you soon realize ice is a far more grave outlook then warmth could ever be.

By Weather Specialist Josh Ketchen

Not By Fire, But ICE!!! An impending ice age?

reply to post by Phage


Not only do we have a much better opportunity to study the effects this time around, but we're also benefited by the fact that this has occurred before. If this were the first event of its kind in recorded history, then any potential association between the solar cycle and the earth's climate could be written off as coincidental (as they sometimes are in the case of the Maunder Minimum). But, if the same course of events occur this second time around, it would provide a stronger correlation.

I see this coming several years ago:

That information like this will get the anti-global warming conservatives to say, "lets now develop the earth even the more and make lots of money and not be concerend with earth
stewardship".

but the hell of all of this is that maybe if the Coroporate people do *NOT* return to a previous "lets not care about the envirnment, carbon, global warming, way of life", we all could have a small ice age where millions of people could be at risk for hunger and some countries will go to war over this..."nothing more to lose, lets shake the missile spears"!

[one definition of "hell" when someone utterly disagreeible to your beliefs, turns out to be right, but invalidating much of what you feel to be true! Then you have to now "Embrace" his way of thinking, for the good of everyone around you!]

freestone

what did they announce, I cant find anything on this anywhere?

reply to post by j3tlif3


I posted above. They believe an ice age is coming. Mini ice age?

History shows the Earth to be a cold planet most of the time with brief warm periods. This one is about over and we will again slip into the freeze. Only this time we won't have to do it with spears and stone knives.

reply to post by aarys

Well done, i need to follow this since it seems it is all coming together.

Has this announcement been made? If so CAN SOMEONE EMAIL me the link?

I'm an astrologer and I know the real deal on this stuff... i.e Mayan Sunspot Cycle connection to Dooms day.

Thanks!

Its on page 4 mate.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

The peer review process will occur. Count on it.

I don't see the climate/sunspot data quite so cut an dried as you make it out to be. But, as I mentioned early in this thread, if we are on the verge of a Maunder Minimum, it will provide an opportunity to determine just how much the fluctuations in solar activity affect climate. Unlike last time, we have a much better quiver of tools and knowledge.

Totally agree. This is a huge learning opportunity for a lot of disciplines.

Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by j3tlif3

 

I posted above. They believe an ice age is coming. Mini ice age?

Well, we've been in an ice age for about the last 35 million years, give or take. And we're at the tail end of the mean period for interglacials. The temperature trend for the last 5,000 years has been downward, and this interglacial is colder than the last one.

Having lived through the last "Ice Age Cometh" scare and the "global warming"...oops, climate change...oops, global climate anomaly...scare, I take any predictions as extreme as an Ice Age or Death by Fire with a grain of salt. The climate fluctuates and that's that. We can't change it, so we have to adapt to it.

The "coolers" from the 70's, who are the SAME people pushing the "warming" scare, can always say they were right all along and the brief warming surge masked the cooling trend.

People I'm only new here and this is my second post. I've been reading the threads on ATS for a while now and this one would have to be the most informative and productive thread I've seen. There is a significant "lack" of BS and scepticism and, rather than slam each others' input to the topic, it's refreshing to see that (nearly) everyone's input to the discussion has been positive and cooperative.

P.S Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" is the best marketing tool I have ever seen. This tool convinced sooooo many sheeple about GW. It absolutely astounded me at how convincingly it was presented. Put all science and fact aside, it was a brilliant piece of entertainment.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by HappyBunny

 

Indeed. And this "Major Result" has already come under fire (and there is bound to be more). It is based on less than 2 cycles worth of little understood data. Douglas Biesecker, a solar scientist at SWPC thinks that Frank Hill, et al don't have enough data to predict an extended period of reduced activity.
Biesecke r critique

edit on 6/15/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Hmm, very interesting paper.

I like how it takes the approach of "wait and see" before jumping to conclusions based on a short period viewing of the poleward flow slowing. Solar science is still in its infancy, which makes cycle predictions a very 'iffy' supposition indeed.

There's no doubt about it, these past couple of cycles and the approaching cycle 25 have been and will be highly educational to say the least.

Everything is tied in like a nifty giant spider web cut one string the others feel it. In due time I believe that the solar flares are corespondent to the activity that is happening before our very eyes. Which is why it should be the job of NASA to inform us of such things. Yet overall I would not be surprised if they just play out the "We didn't know **** scenario of the day".