The calm before the solar storm? NASA warns 'something unexpected is happening to the Sun'

And this just in...........a few hundred years of faltering human scientific understanding was shocked today by its inability to accurately predict the behavior of its nearest star, even though only 5% of the universe is actually observable or understood.

Here's Tom with the weather...................

reply to post by eXia7


I appreciate NASA's efforts in understanding the solar system, our galaxy and the universe.

How ever I find it incredibly odd, Man is so bold to make claims about something that has been around many billions of years longer than us. We as humans have not been observing the suns activity very long, in accordance with it's life.

I know, over the years we have, we have come up with this 11 year cycle, but is it not possible these cycles are not a constant? It seems a little early into the cycle to claim activity has been low as well. What about all the gaping triangle shaped holes ATS exploded over in 2012? I may just be interpreting what they are saying wrong myself, but the sun hasn't been that inactive. It is some what unpredictable after all.

Just my thoughts.

reply to post by siliconpsychosis


NASA is being incredibly honest with us. We can all view the sun at the SDO

with clear and up to date photos.

BTW, there is an underground bunker at Denver International Airport. It's just another

contingency plan for TPTB. Global Cataclysms

reply to post by siliconpsychosis

Has anyone (who has been following this thread and is of sound, logical mind) noticed how ANY space news that is "marginally" unexpected or out-of-the-ordinary somehow gets twisted to fit the bullcrap facts spouted by the new-agers, "feel"-ers, Nibiru-ers and NASA-lies-about-everything-ers?

Now that you mention it, yes. There is still a mysterious thing I'd like answered and never did hear one to explain. There was a sudden, entirely unexpected and quite potent geo-magnetic storm hit last year which came with a nice display of aurora that hadn't been expected. The sun had been quiet but that came from somewhere and I'm afraid if the mystery had been solved, I missed the follow-up.

I'll bet for those working in the field, that's just the most high profile of things that happen to make them scratch their heads and adjust models to show new realities.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

The sun had been quiet but that came from somewhere and I'm afraid if the mystery had been solved, I missed the follow-up.

Yes. It came from the Sun and it wasn't really a mystery. A CME is not required to produce geomagnetic activity. What occurred was that a high speed wind from a coronal hole took a south turn. It isn't uncommon.

reply to post by eXia7


Yeah, we did get a couple of Aurora Borealis up here in Quebec - these I haven't seen since the last cycle, 11 years ago.

I think it's just doing its thing all right.

reply to post by Phage

Phage.... It turns out I may have been confusing memory with another space event last year for the one I mentioned, but as for it not being uncommon when this happened?

C'mon.... You're debunking of everything lately is getting a little extreme. Links to the points you make might even help understand and learn about what your saying is debunking a point. The storm and aurora I was thinking about were seen in Arkansas. Although I missed seeing it..as usual it seems.

"When these charged particles [from the ejection] go by our own magnetic field, it's like dumping gasoline on a fire," Joe Kunches, a space scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said in an interview with The Times. "Everything gets a lot hotter."

And that translates into a gorgeous aurora display that drips over the Canadian border and down into the continental United States.

Still, Kunches said, it is highly unusual for the northern lights to venture as far south as Arkansas.

Source

Again, I was confusing this with another thing, my bad on that, but the coverage of this at the time was interesting. I'd say unusual would be a fitting term, actually. Not unique, but most definitely not usual.

old news this has been known for a while now nasa has been keeping it quiet

I am not fully sure what this means.


Therefore...DOOM!!!

-ATS Gold Member..thank you-

Originally posted by zedy63
old news this has been known for a while now nasa has been keeping it quiet

LOL! how can NASA have been keeping this quiet if the data is freely available?

I meant to add this link to my last post about the prolonged disappearance of Sunspots, (circa 2020) I thought the Daily Mail's science page would be appropriate given that this thread is also from there,

www.dailymail.co.uk...

reply to post by smurfy

Good link. "Scientists don't know why the sun has gone quiet."

They have however discovered an Earth warming / cooling relationship with our sun.

No kidding.

Without the sun Earth would be an icy rock with an overall temperature of -273 degrees

Celsius.

Originally posted by dizziedame
I have the answer. Now to find a good programer.

First we need to find the origional directions for operating the sun then get a new program and apply it to the computer that contains the old program.

Oh my I almost forgot, we can not control the sun,
We can make scary pictures to use as a tool for perdicting the suns actions.

There is no scamatic for the sun.
We can speculate concerning what it may do at any certain time but that is all.

Yes, I am being a bit scarastic but I do not worry about something I can not change.

Look on the bright side and keep waking up with the sun as it shines again tomorrow, well hopefully shines tomorrow.

That is true and also operating under the assumption that everything is a cycle. If that is the case, i am waiting for myself to turn good looking again.

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
reply to post by Destinyone

 

I hope not I say this because of a feeling I have had since a child. I have always had a fear that man does not understand our sun as well as we think. I have always feared that something catastrophic will happen to it in my lifetime. This has nothing to do with logic its a feeling.

IMHO the processes in our Sun is a series of random events which result in a continious state of energy flux. In relation to how we experiance time I always considered the 11 years cycle theory a bit thin to predict the behaviour of the Sun.

reply to post by SaturnFX


NO no no..........

My point was

Everybody is using the Sun for a purpose it was not meant to be used for.

That being Solar Weather prediction.

Originally posted by ChesterJohn
My point was

Everybody is using the Sun for a purpose it was not meant to be used for.

That being Solar Weather prediction.

D'you not mean the Daily Mail?

reply to post by siliconpsychosis

I'd rather have a quiet sun than a spotty sun..

Would you? Would you really? I see you got lots of stars fro your comment but obviously this was from people who, like you, have little knowledge of the sun and it's behaviour. No sun spots is NEVER good.

If, as is very likely, we go into a Maunder type minimum and are in for the next 30 years or so, then it will get very cold my friend. There will not be any 'global warming' and the fact that it has got colder will not have been caused by global warming either.

You could do worse than read the Layman's Sunspot Count and the various links off that with regard to solar maxima and minima.

We passed the peak of the solar cycle in Feb 2012 as far as I can see and I do not believe there will be a 'double peak'. NASA got it wrong and they just don't want to admit that. 2014 it starts to get colder and colder. Not long to wait to see if the theory is wrong then.

There is a very slim chance that it could tip to the next stage, another ice age, but we won't worry about that just yet. 2060 it will be ramping up again and a new batch of warmists will be out there wringing their hands and extracting their taxes.

Quite simply, all this proves to me: Nasa, nor anyone know anything that much about the sun.

reply to post by PuterMan


We have solar activity data going back by what, 400 years? that is a drop in the ocean of time for how long the sun has been there. Who knows what it was doing 1000 years ago? even farther back? Im fairly sure the energy output difference of a calm vs stormy sun is negligable considering the size of the thing. How exactly does this tie in with your "ice age" theory? ??

And your theory (and mine) is only a guess based on the available short-term data.

I had a look through the website you linked to, again that word "theory" is prevalent.

So, what would your definition of the "normal" activity of the sun be? and how active does it have to be to be precisely "safe" in the minds of the doomers, for there seems to be no consensus on the matter.

Stars, Flags, Postcount, flashy avatars - not bothered at all