It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If the models prove accurate and the trends continue, the implications could be far-reaching. "If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we'll see for a few decades," Hill said. "That would affect everything from space exploration to Earth's climate."
"This is highly unusual and unexpected," Hill said. "But the fact that three completely different views of the sun point in the same direction is a powerful indicator that the sunspot cycle may be going into hibernation."
Currently, the sun is in the midst of the period designated as Cycle 24 and is ramping up toward the cycle's period of maximum activity. However, the recent findings indicate that the activity in the next 11-year solar cycle, Cycle 25, could be greatly reduced. In fact, some scientists are questioning whether this drop in activity could lead to a second Maunder Minimum, which was a 70-year period from 1645 to 1715 when the sun showed virtually no sunspots.
You're still holding on to the idea that we, mankind, is at fault here, and we must drastically change our behavior to "save the planet". You're adhering to an idea that was political from the start. Not science. I understand you've held this belief for some time, and to give it up is difficult, but I'm sorry to say you have been conned.
Real science welcomes dissent. In fact a true scientist invites his peers to tear his theories apart, to try to find where it is wrong. A real scientist does this himself. They look for "exceptions to the rule", where their theory "might not work" or "might not apply". The last thing a true scientist is looking for is "consensus". Consensus is not science. He is looking for opposing thoughts. Now, of course, if after all this dissent and trying to punch holes in his theory it holds up to be true, great. But the current crop of "climate scientists" decry dissent to their theories, mock those who would question their assertions, and do their best to destroy those who simply question their ideas and motives. This is not science.
Ask yourself this: if the "climate scientists" (those who "believe" in AGW) are so correct, and so sure of themselves, why do they object to their work being questioned? Why do they become "emotional" about it. Why do the spokespeople for these theories attack those who simply question their data? if the date WERE true these people would be glad to have others try to prove it wrong. They would have nothing to hide. Think about it.
Anyway, no one is saying we should pollute the air, the water, or the planet, but the fact that we, by driving our cars and living our lives, are causing the planet's climate to change is not proven, and in fact the evidence is overwhelming that we don't have the ability to appreciably change the climate. The sun is the source, and has been, of any significant climate change.
So I know the definition of science, and a true scientist looks to "prove himself wrong" and if a "scientist" does not welcome this scrutiny, and in fact fights it, then my guess he is trying to foist off a lie on us. He has something to hide.
It's amazing that the article waited until the last sentence before mentioning the 800 lb gorilla sitting in the middle of the room.
Originally posted by amazing
So what is everyone's consensus here?
It seems to me that we "may" be heading for a mini ice age and perhaps one of longer duration. Can we really predict the sun that well though? If the prediction and announcement is true what does that mean? specifically---how does that effect space travel and climate? Is it possible that the earth is going to warm anyway and that space travel will not be effected?
Originally posted by heineken
reply to post by amazing
during a planetary ice age i think that most of our machinery will fail...it will be hard to extract oil, fly planes, harvest crops, ship goods...a stand still pal
i cant see one would care about space travel any longer
and as i demonstrated..ice age is a cycle..a pattern...it happened before..it will happen again...and not at a random time...and the time is now
edit on 15-6-2011 by heineken because: (no reason given)edit on 15-6-2011 by heineken because: (no reason given)
By comparing the pattern of this past climate with global environmental conditions today the scientists conclude that, without human influence, we could expect the present warm period to last at least another 15, 000 years.
Dr Eric Wolff, from British Antarctic Survey says: "It's very exciting to see ice that fell as snow three-quarters of a million years ago. These results tell us that we won't have an ice age any time soon.