The USGS to Prepare Citizens for Magnetic Storms

Clicking to check on any current earthquakes, I come to find this article about Solar flares displayed on the front page of USGS.gov.

While this particular storm had minor consequences on Earth, other large storms can be crippling, Love said. The largest storm of the 20th century occurred in March, 1989, accompanied by auroras that could be seen as far south as Texas, and sent electric currents into Earth’s crust that made their way into the high-voltage Canadian Hydro-Quebec power grid. This caused the transformer to fail and left more than 6 million people without power for 9 hours. The same storm also damaged and disrupted the operation of satellites, GPS systems, and radio communication systems used by the United States military.

Knocked out power for 9 hours for 6 million people, and messed up military instruments... in the 80s.

“These new storms, and the storm we witnessed on Sept 26, 2011, indicate the up-tick in activity coming with the Earth’s ascent into the next solar maximum,” said USGS geophysicist Jeffrey Love.” This solar maximum is the period of greatest activity in the solar cycle of the Sun, and it is predicted to occur sometime in 2013, which will increase the amount of magnetic storms on Earth.

Many scientists are calling for this year's Solar Max to be quite irregularly strong. Dr. Michio Kaku being one of them. I don't feel I need to link that particular interview, as I'm sure most of you are aware.

My purpose in creating this thread is just to point out that this is currently the front page article on the USGS official website. I find it interesting that an agency predominantly charged with the task of monitoring earthquakes would be in such high interest in solar flare activity... this early on in the ascension.

Source: USGS.gov

Article (In case it moves)

Thanks for the post and links. That would be a statement right from the U.S. Government itself saying that magnetic storms from solar activity can be "crippling" as they put it, to the modern infrastructure and society. I guess that pretty much sums it up. Now it's left to see how active the sun really does get and whether we see a repeat of 1859 in our lifetime.

reply to post by Aqualung2012


USGS have been monitoring/reporting geomagnetic activity since October 2010 according to this page...

www.usgs.gov...

Also, the next solar maximum is predicted to be quite small actually...

solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Chadwickus


Odd, this says different.
Link to Opposition

Why do you say "I find it interesting that an agency predominantly charged with the task of monitoring earthquakes"? The USGS is involved with a range of Earth sciences and topics.

About USGS

The USGS is a science organization that provides impartial information on the health of our ecosystems and environment, the natural hazards that threaten us, the natural resources we rely on, the impacts of climate and land-use change, and the core science systems that help us provide timely, relevant, and useable information.

www.usgs.gov...

Many scientists are calling for this year's Solar Max to be quite irregularly strong. Dr. Michio Kaku being one of them. I don't feel I need to link that particular interview, as I'm sure most of you are aware.

Kaku does not call for the next solar maximum (predicted for early 2013) to be particulary strong. Nor do the scientists who specialize in solar science.
solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov...

reply to post by Phage


In your first quote, that's a nice list of things that aren't about the Sun. They may study the Sun as a natural "hazard" to Earth, but there is no argument against saying they "predominantly study and record earthquakes."

In your second quote, you've re-linked the same article as mentioned in a prior reply. Also, please click this video with Dr. Kaku and skip to :50.

Or perhaps this one at 1:30??

reply to post by Aqualung2012

Geomagnetic activity is affected by Solar activity but it is a process intimately connected to Earth. That is where the "geo" part comes from. Perhaps you can explain why you say the USGS studies earthquakes predominantly.
www.usgs.gov...
www.usgs.gov...


Yes, I've heard the interview. Kaku is quite the showboater. It's quite dated (from several years ago) the solar predictions have since been updated. Early predictions for cycle 24 indicated a high sunspot number (not particularly strong activity, there is no means of predicting that). It is now predicted that there will be a lower than average sunspot number and that prediction is proving to be correct. There is still no way of predicting the intensity of any activity. There may be a massive geoeffective CME next month, next year, or not for 100 years.

reply to post by Phage


Okay, I'll give a bit. The USGS is responsible for an array of geological matters, not only earthquakes. I'll also give you the fact that we do NOT have a comprehensive means of predicting the intensity of any particular CME or flare.

But my question still applies (if it is not amplified) in light of your points: Why is this front page reading? Why is that article even being published if, (as you say) the maximum is to me "minimal" this time around?

Just to make things clear.
The event that took place in 1989 had basically zero impact on our daily routine.
In fact, despite whats written on our liscence plate, no one remember.
Sure thing that today, having the same kind of event, people would be shocked losing facebook for a day.

Originally posted by eagleeye2
Just to make things clear.
The event that took place in 1989 had basically zero impact on our daily routine.
In fact, despite whats written on our liscence plate, no one remember.
Sure thing that today, having the same kind of event, people would be shocked losing facebook for a day.

I believe the outcome would be far more sever than that.

the economic impact to the United States from a storm of the same size in today’s society could exceed $1 trillion as a result of the technological systems it could disrupt.

Imagine something even larger? (Which, the minimal numbers of sunspots are an indicator of stored energy on the sun... pressure building.)

reply to post by Aqualung2012

Because the USGS monitors geomagnetic activity? Because they like to keep people interested and informed in what they do?

Two weeks ago this was the lead article:
www.usgs.gov...

Before that it was this:
www.usgs.gov...

www.usgs.gov...

www.usgs.gov...

".......with the Earth’s ascent into the next solar maximum."


it sounds so epic.

reply to post by Aqualung2012


It probably was thought to be big back in 2006, that was 6 years ago.

My source is from January 2012.

Still only a prediction, but with 6 more years of data added to it.

reply to post by Frankenchrist


doesn't it? haha... it is sort of epic. It was epic seeing the Aurora Borealis in Chicago for the first time last year. That's why this is of particular weight and interest to me. We ARE seeing massive flares already, and we are still early in the swing of the maximum.

reply to post by Aqualung2012

Imagine something even larger? (Which, the minimal numbers of sunspots are an indicator of stored energy on the sun... pressure building.)

Where did you come up with that theory.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Aqualung2012

 

It probably was thought to be big back in 2006, that was 6 years ago.

My source is from January 2012.

Still only a prediction, but with 6 more years of data added to it.

This is true, and a valid point. I don't know... I just smell that smell you smell when they say something fishy.

And I didn't come up with that theory. I read it, and it makes sense to me.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Aqualung2012

 

Because the USGS monitors geomagnetic activity? Because they like to keep people interested and informed in what they do?

Two weeks ago this was the lead article:
www.usgs.gov...

Before that it was this:
www.usgs.gov...

www.usgs.gov...

www.usgs.gov...

edit on 1/28/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Funny that none of your headlines contain "USGS Prepare Citizens"

reply to post by Aqualung2012

You're right. I guess they don't care if we get run over by a reindeer.

I don't get it. You have a problem with the USGS explaining how geomagnetic storms can be a problem? Or is it that you think they are hiding something? If that's the case, why say anything at all?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Aqualung2012

 

You're right. I guess they don't care if we get run over by a reindeer.

I don't get it. You have a problem with the USGS explaining how geomagnetic storms can be a problem? Or is it that you think they are hiding something? If that's the case, why say anything at all?

edit on 1/28/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

I do not have a problem with the explanation. What I am pointing out is simply: They are talking about it, front page. Yet, "most solar scientists" say it will actually be small. There are conflicting accounts.

USGS is supposed to be "official," trust worthy. And THEY say to be prepared, and they are writing (supposedly) speculative articles for their website. While NASA, on the other hand says the 2012/2013 maximum will be relatively small.

All the while, I have you telling me they cannot predict anything, while you post articles trying to do just that... and from an equally reputable source.

The reason I say anything at all is because I saw a "reputable" source which said something I found to be of importance to the ATS community. And the reason they would say anything at all is because of freelance researchers and thinkers such as ourselves. They are giving us enough to think they are on our side.

reply to post by Aqualung2012

You are confusing two separate issues. The sunspot number, and the intensity and likelihood of geomagnetic activity.

The cycle 24 sunspot number is predicted to be low. In 2006 it was predicted to be high. This demonstrates how limited the predictions are. It's like predicting weather. Long term forecasts are often very inaccurate but the 24 hour predictions can be pretty good and the 4 hour predictions are much better.

While the sunspot number can be predicted (somewhat) the intensity of the activity cannot be predicted at all. Nor can it be predicted if any CMEs will be geoeffective. The chance is always there but because there is more activity at solar maximum than at other times, the odds are greater that the Earth will be affected by any given outburst, large or small. That is why there is more interest and publicity as solar maximum approaches. It should be noted that the Carrington Event, the strongest geomagnetic storm ever recorded, occurred well after solar maximum.

Yes, the USGS is reputable. Yes, it is of interest. But there is no more reason to expect a devasting geomagnetic storm this year or in 2013 than there was in 2001.