'Major Result' on Sunspot Cycle to be Announced Tuesday

reply to post by Chadwickus


This
www.space.com...

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."

Also notice how ATS's Climate Forum is labelled "Fragile Earth" Pessimistic isn't it?



Maybe ATS has something against purported Deniers of Global Warming (Climate Change)

Anyone who tries countering an Argument against AGW(Anthropogenic Global Warming(Climate Change)) Is Ostracized.

And since when did science become a consensus or As Al-gore Says " The Debate is Over"

Not really directing this toward you Chadwickus but didn't want to post twice.

Trying to explain and add to the article based on the ramifications this could have on the climate if we do enter another Maunder Minimum Type Solar Age that may last a few decades.

"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.

People with an Open mind unlike most AGW Sheeple might like this comment on the situation.

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.

This one gave me a laugh. Notice how they talked as minimally as they could until the last paragraph in the article about the effect on the Climate.

Probably because they do not have sufficient data to suggest what could happen or were being lazy with the article.

Or the AGW has paid them to leave out anything that disproves and or discredits Al-Gores little AGW(Anthropogenic Global Warming(Climate Change)) Theory.

after all...a de-population agenda may be be truly underway

food problem anybody?




it way better if they start telling us what they mean by MINI Ice Age

Uh, cooling? We had 90 degree days in May here in Indianapolis. That doesn't normally happen. Sure, it has rained a lot, and I'm glad! I'm already tired of the heat. I'm also tired of this boring thread.

Get ready for more earthquakes!

reply to post by heineken


Wow the PTB are shiftier than we thought!

I wonder what kinda deal they made with the sun to keep it in a deep minimum?

reply to post by Chadwickus


sry but i dont think you made sense...(i did not mean the de-population agenda will happen with the Ice Age...it will happen before the Ice Age)

my point is ...

do you believe they care if chadwickus finds food?

do they need a hungry chadwickus on the loose?

so again...its now even plausible to think they might get rid of some of us dont you think

reply to post by heineken


Well the suns influence would be mere coincidence.

You won't like me when I'm hungry.

reply to post by Chadwickus


come on chad...we talked about this before me and you...we knew that an Ice Age was on the way...if I knew...they knew....and they may have prepared

the problem with this announcement is that i dont believe in a MINI Ice Age...but in a full Ice Age...a 100 thousand years one...until we travel through the center of our galaxy...

lemme re-post the Ice Core Temp Graph..






cycles are everywhere in the universe..cant you see the pattern here?

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?

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

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?

I think it doesn't really matter either way. Anyone who will tell you they know for sure will have a 50/50 shot at it. I think the important thing here is that either way, the transition is going to take (at minimum) thousands of years. If they are 'paranoid' enough, maybe this will be the push they need for manned deep space missions. Afterall... we need to get off this bloody rock ASAP. I think that much, is clear.

Don't see it as an end... see it as a new beginning. At this point, I think humanity could use a do-over.

reply to post by darius2025


Afterall... we need to get off this bloody rock ASAP.

mankind wasted too much time with world wars instead of unifying science with one aim...space travel

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)

So what is your take on a timeframe. If we are going into a major ice age, how long will it take to have a major impact. I don't think this year's events if related would count as a major impact. What would those major impacts be?

reply to post by heineken

That's pretty graph but with the scale used it's pretty hard tell what's going on. What do the scientists who actually collected and analyzed the data in detail say about it? All of the data, 740,000 years of it.

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.

www.sciencedaily.com...

The last ice age ended 10,000 years ago approximately, I have seen interviews with climate scientists saying that what we are experience now is just a brief break in a major 100,000 year ice age. Maybe burning fossil fuels is a good idea of this turns out to be true.

reply to post by aarys


What is happening is the sun spot cycle has changed. Moving toward a lull or something of that nature. A little ice age is on the way and that will point to the sun as the source of the weather anomalies and not the day to day activities of the common man. Not good for TPTB. You can't tax sun spots or the lack-thereof and so this research is being leaked now as a pre-emptive strike against "global warming"/carbon emission debunkers. The tag line to their government granted research is that the change in the sun spot activity will not change the impact of the carbon emissions. Funny how they can predict that in advance. How about we wait and see. Windmills are gonna look awkward buried half way in an ice flow.

reply to post by Phage


sry Phage...but you are posting what 1 scientist said..on June 11, 2004...

the baby mammoth found in ice with vegetables still in his mouth just shows that ice ages can happen instantly...

and now in 2011 we are being told that our Sun in entering a hibernating period..something the article you posted had no knowledge of what so ever

we dont need google or yahoo to figure out how important to our climate the sun is...thank you anyway

lets keep in mind that what is effecting our sun...is effecting the whole solar system...we are witnessing a rise in volcanic activity which is a fact...maybe an unleash from a super volcano or two can help to speed up things a little...there are many events which may contribute to fast change in weather pattern