It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sun's Fading Spots Signal Big Drop in Solar Activity

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   
This is a pretty interesting article suggesting that the next 11 year sun spot cycle could be much less active than in years past. The article also suggests that the next cycle may even be eliminated.


Link to article on www.space.com




Some unusual solar readings, including fading sunspots and weakening magnetic activity near the poles, could be indications that our sun is preparing to be less active in the coming years. The results of three separate studies seem to show that even as the current sunspot cycle swells toward the solar maximum, the sun could be heading into a more-dormant period, with activity during the next 11-year sunspot cycle greatly reduced or even eliminated.



The 11 year sun spot cycle is the most noticeable of all the solar cycles that effect the Earth over time, obviously because it is only 11 years. The other cycles happen between 21,000 years and 100,000 years, depending on what cycle you are talking about.

I wonder what effect this will have on the global warming/cooling debate.



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.






A photo of a sunspot taken in May 2010, with Earth shown to scale. The image has been colorized for aesthetic reasons. This image with 0.1 arcsecond resolution from the Swedish 1-m Solar Telescope represents the limit of what is currently possible in terms of spatial resolution. CREDIT: The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, V.M.J. Henriques (sunspot), NASA Apollo 17 (Earth)




posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 06:50 AM
link   
I hate to be "that guy", but this was posted yesterday.

I only mention it because there was a pretty huge discussion about it, and I'm sure you'll wanna read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I read the article prior to your reference here, and found it interesting that they tied solar activity to the Earth's temps. Yet, said that the cooling would not be enough to offest man made global warming.

In the same article, so called "man made" global warming hadn't increased since the sunspot activity had declined over the last 10 years...which tells me that "man made" warming is a bunch of hooey...global warming, which I don't doubt, is a result of SOLAR activity...NOT MAN MADE activity.

We may even enter the same "mini-ice age" of the 1500s-1600s.... which was aggrivated by the increase in volcanic activity...kinda like now...Iceland, Rim of Fire, Italy, S America-Chile...

Which was further aggravated by the collapse of major empires and regional conflicts...

Hello 21st century Dark Ages...........



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
I read the article prior to your reference here, and found it interesting that they tied solar activity to the Earth's temps. Yet, said that the cooling would not be enough to offest man made global warming.

In the same article, so called "man made" global warming hadn't increased since the sunspot activity had declined over the last 10 years...which tells me that "man made" warming is a bunch of hooey...global warming, which I don't doubt, is a result of SOLAR activity...NOT MAN MADE activity.


The obvious conclusion from that is that global warming is being offset by the decreased sunspots. For now.

It's pretty simple. If you are naive enough to believe that NO amount of greenhouse gases would change Earth's temperature, it's not worth having a discussion with you. If, however, you believe "well we haven't released near enough to affect it" where's your proof? Where's your science?

We have a planet next door, its name is Venus. I suggest you visit there for a while and get back to me about whether your opinion of CO2 affecting global temperature has changed at all.

Here are the facts. Anyone who doesn't believe all of these is simply ignorant. And/or brainwashed. And they have a lot of company.

1.) CO2 and methane are greenhouse gases
2.) A civilization of 7 billion humans releasing the amount of CO2 and methane they release on a daily basis is unprecedented in human history
3.) The Earth has gone through warming/cooling cycles both in human history and before it
4.) Small effects can produce large results over time, due to climate feedback loops (reflectivity of ice, among others)
5.) Large catastrophies (i.e. a supervolcano) can also produce large results, in a short time
6.) We currently have only 1 planet to live on (barring alien intervention)

As a society, we shouldn't be asking "how much damage can we get away with?" but rather "how can we not only prevent damage caused by our civilization (and thus TO our civilization), but set up contingencies to protect damage to our civilization FROM external sources like solar cycles, etc."

It's like... what is it that you're not seeing. What is it that you're not comprehending. Your right-wing masters have sold you on the idea of infinite capitalism as religion. Just do whatever the hell we want and nothing bad will happen? As many people as we want on Earth? Oh wait, we've already passed the limit on that. Take as much water as we want? Passed that too. And what water we do have is being poisoned daily by Fukushima.

The evidence clearly says we have a problem with global warming. In a vacuum, where we may not be sure, we still have to err on the side of caution since, again, this is our only planet.

THAT SAID -- would evil people use global warming for their own agenda? Of course! That's the horrible truth of it all! Even given all of the above, and my belief that global warming IS happening, I would vote against any kind of international legislation telling people what their CO2 emissions can be. Why? Because our government is absolutely corrupt, because the bankers are trying to usher in the NWO, and this is one of their tools to do it. So my premise is this -- if we the people cannot wrest control from the corrupt this time, I don't see that we ever could in the future. The evil have far too much power, far too many advanced weapons and brainwashed soldiers to do their criminal deeds. So, if freedom dies, so should humanity die.



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 07:34 AM
link   
It gets hot...then it gets cold...then it gets hot...then it gets cold. Archeology, geology, in fact all manner of sciences have shown us this. The one constant is not man, it is not SUVs, it is not incandesent light bulbs, or coal power plants....

It is the Sun. In relative terms..it has always been there and always will.

Dinosuars didn't gas grill theirselves out of existance... Cromagnon man didn't cease to exist because of too many cows flatulating for mcDonald's sake....

The Sun...temps on our neighboring planets were going up at the same time we were...WERE...experiencing global warming. Now the sunspot activity is on the decline and so are our temps....

Possibly...and I know it is a stretch...but possibly all of the adverse climate phenomena we are experiencing are tied to the former solar maximum and now solar minimum. Maybe even the increase in extreme weather and geological events is caused by solar influence.... maybe?

As the article indicates...maybe we are in for weather conditions similar to the "Middle Ages" and even the "Time of Enlightenment".... what were the "cause and effect" of such a scenario 500 years ago?

Will we see them played out again in the modern day?



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProjectBlue
I hate to be "that guy", but this was posted yesterday.

I only mention it because there was a pretty huge discussion about it, and I'm sure you'll wanna read.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


and I even did a search before I posted... at least I included a pretty cool picture!



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by ProjectBlue
 


loool i was going to be "That Guy" and just didnt feel like...

congratz for you courage



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
It gets hot...then it gets cold...then it gets hot...then it gets cold. Archeology, geology, in fact all manner of sciences have shown us this. The one constant is not man, it is not SUVs, it is not incandesent light bulbs, or coal power plants....

It is the Sun. In relative terms..it has always been there and always will.


It's the sun. It's also volcanoes, comets, oh and by the way, SUVs, power plants, and cow farts. It all contributes. Stop suckling off of Ann Coulter's breast and wise up. Or, hey, just be another example of why the human race doesn't DESERVE to survive. That's fine too.



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Observer99
 


I'm sorry...I thought we were having an intelligent debate about sunspot and solar activity influencing earth's temps...

I see you have added insults and innuendo to your not so academic toolbox... OK.

Again, the Earth was covered by swamps and giant bugs and lizards a few million years ago...and then it got really cold...what some people cal the "ICE AGE"...it did that a few more times on and off through what historians call collectively..."millenia"

These climatic changes have always happened and will continue until the earth ceases to be.... there has been more particle pollution added by the active volcano in Chile than by man's actions over the last 5 years...

And as stated, the warming peaked at the same time as the solar maximus...and has declined in relative terms equal to the decline in solar activity.

I do not like Ann Coultier...I do not read her books...and i do not seek her opinions... you are making assumptions and generalizations. Why such a thinking will have you believing that man causes global warming.



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
It gets hot...then it gets cold...then it gets hot...then it gets cold. Archeology, geology, in fact all manner of sciences have shown us this. The one constant is not man, it is not SUVs, it is not incandesent light bulbs, or coal power plants....

It is the Sun. In relative terms..it has always been there and always will.

Dinosuars didn't gas grill theirselves out of existance... Cromagnon man didn't cease to exist because of too many cows flatulating for mcDonald's sake....

The Sun...temps on our neighboring planets were going up at the same time we were...WERE...experiencing global warming. Now the sunspot activity is on the decline and so are our temps....

Possibly...and I know it is a stretch...but possibly all of the adverse climate phenomena we are experiencing are tied to the former solar maximum and now solar minimum. Maybe even the increase in extreme weather and geological events is caused by solar influence.... maybe?

As the article indicates...maybe we are in for weather conditions similar to the "Middle Ages" and even the "Time of Enlightenment".... what were the "cause and effect" of such a scenario 500 years ago?

Will we see them played out again in the modern day?



I agree... which is why I created this thread. I believe that Man Made Global Warming is a hoax



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by AlreadyGone
 





In the same article, so called "man made" global warming hadn't increased since the sunspot activity had declined over the last 10 years...which tells me that "man made" warming is a bunch of hooey...global warming, which I don't doubt, is a result of SOLAR activity...NOT MAN MADE activity.


So if tempuratures don't decline over average, say next 30 years, does this confirm the Global warming hypothesis? If the mini-ice age doesn't appear, do the climate change crowd claim victory?

Or is there another hypothesis as to why tempatures wouldn't mirror those of the Maunder Minimum, despite the deep solar minimum that is forecast?

I know, alot of question marks, but what do you think?



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by AlreadyGone
 





Now the sunspot activity is on the decline and so are our temps....


Do you have any links for this information? I mean the decline in temps. Seems last I heard, avg global temps were on the rise.

But maybe I'm wrong...



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


Funny, just read this on Space, search here and whamo, already posted.

I think it will be interesting to see if temps trend or even mirror those of the Maunder Minimum. There is corrolation between the suns activity and what happens here, and if we do experience a 'mini' ice age, we better come up with some plans for the worst, and hope for the best.

On the flipside, if temps (avg) dont fall, does this confirm the global warming hypothesis? Inquiring minds want to know.....

Nice post by the way, well put together.
edit on 15-6-2011 by ErEhWoN because: added 'Nice post by the way, well put together.'



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
It gets hot...then it gets cold...then it gets hot...then it gets cold. Archeology, geology, in fact all manner of sciences have shown us this. The one constant is not man, it is not SUVs, it is not incandesent light bulbs, or coal power plants....

It is the Sun. In relative terms..it has always been there and always will.


It's the sun. It's also volcanoes, comets, oh and by the way, SUVs, power plants, and cow farts. It all contributes. Stop suckling off of Ann Coulter's breast and wise up. Or, hey, just be another example of why the human race doesn't DESERVE to survive. That's fine too.


Co2 which is the only argument for the global warming community is a reaction to warm temperatures not the cause. Man simply doesn't have the SUV's capable of doing harm to the planet. The Sun however is a different story. It is the maker of all Earth weather and climate. Cool that down and we cool down. And why would the human race die from sucking off of Ann Coulters breast ?



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 08:54 PM
link   


I agree... which is why I created this thread. I believe that Man Made Global Warming is a hoax


Its a fact that its a hoax



posted on Jun, 15 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


i gues this could be a technical question

but if the sun is seeing a drop in activity now, does that mean in the future... BAM HUGE ACTIVITY!! .. ?



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join