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.

 

U.V. Rays at record High...

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Now I am just your average everyday redneck. You know go out in 100+ degree heat doing construction to make ends meat along with blackjack and dog breeding as well as making large magnet rakes and takin them on the sides of the back roads and highways down here. I also do a couple of other things, but that is neither here nor there in terms of being your business.

Anyways I have always been a red neck mother trucker. Working out in the scorching southern sun. So I have worked up a pretty thick skin that does not get easily sun burned, and has not blistered since I was a young buck. First construction work I had to do this year was today. Leveling out the ground in a 20x20 spot in 30 minutes for a patio extention. Then poured mesh poured mesh poured. and finished. $1600 less than 4 hours of work. I got burnt and I only did 30 minutes of work while I supervised in the truck. Like I said I always work in stuff like this all my life and never in the past 20 years have I been this burnt. Out in the sun for only 30 minutes.

Those solar flares are doing a lot more damage than TPTB are telling us. They cant destroy the magnetic field but they probably can weaken it for long extended periods of time. And our ozone has to be wide the truck open. I used to say well we been punching holes in the atmosphere for coming up on 75+ years. But now I think astroids been punching hundreds of thousands if not millions or billions of holes in the atmosphere for billions of years. And from what I understand there were already satellites up there before "We" being modern man before we launched our first.???


Not that surprising if you think about it though




posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


First construction work I had to do this year was today.

So no tan at all then. A tan does provide some protection from burning.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


You are correct up to the point where you say that asteroids punch holes in the atmosphere. This sentence is inexact. You can't punch holes in water. It's the same with atmosphere and especially magnetosphere.
Good thread anyway! It's good to see you again.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
I think you're on to something, mother trucker.


There have been posts here in the past few months in which people are saying the sun feels hotter. I am one of those people who got a sunburn at the beginning of January here in west Texas, when the sun was rather low in the sky. I am olive-complected, so I'm not lily white. I was stunned that I got burned on my arms just sitting on the porch for a little while.

Naturally there are naysayers who say that it is just in our imaginations, or that that's what the sun is supposed to do, but I've been here in the southwest long enough to know better. This past year is different, and I stand by that statement.

I notice that the people who were naysayers were in the southern hemisphere (Australia, New Zealand). Perhaps this is a northern hemisphere phenomenon. Either way, I don't have the equipment to measure UV rays. I only have my skin, and common sense.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
There may be some truth to what you say, but it wasn't in the title.

Yup. tptw need to focus on turning us against each other, since they don't want anyone looking at them.

Does nasa withhold information? Most likely. As long as no one is aware of what's being hid, while data are being collected simultaneously, then we are in the darkest of Dark Ages. Pretty easy to see why this is so, if you weigh the knowledge, against the trickling of information. Then factor in skynet apps. Military might, used
against...whatever they like.

I don't know where you get off saying, in the title, record UV rays. Source?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


You are right, it is EXTREME on the scale in many locations. we also got burned after being outside a very short time yesterday and was very surprised by it.

www.nws.noaa.gov...



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 

Below is a historical plot of the number of "Extreme UV" days each year since 1995 at the Denver, CO EPA monitoring site.

Now you have some data to backup your claims. YES, the number of Extreme UV days each year appears to be increasing.

Best regards,
Z



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


First real work I had to do outside this year yes. I have been in the sun and everything and was even toned, so I had some tan. I had been outside in just as hot weather for longer, so that is how I know the u.v. rays or what ever are working in overdrive right now.

So what type of dangers are we going to see, and are there non apparent benefits.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by DrZrD
 

That's interesting. Can you provide a link to the source of that chart? I wonder if other locations show a similar pattern.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

I manually entered the data from the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center UV Index archive available online (link below) into Excel to create this chart just for ATS members.

NOAA UV Index

The EPA then reports NOAA UV data here.

US EPA UV Index

Best regards,
Z
edit on 6/8/2012 by DrZrD because: add chart source



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


In the UK today we have had monsoon weather
Heavy rain seventy mph winds which is unusual for this time of year
So there is no chance of a suntan here
Did you have these a kid




Cran



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


Hi, hope you'll slap on some sun block if your doing more outside work and clothes with UV protection and don't forget good sunglasses (protect against cateracts), skin damage increases the risk of skin cancer.. so worth taking extra care...and I know doing a mole / blemish inventory (photo's would be good), so you can keep an eye out for suspicious changes, early detection = life saved.

Also animals face the same risks, especially lighter colored ones, dark pigments provide more protection.

It's true fluctuations in the magnetosphere could lead to UV spiking in certain parts of the planet, and we have seen more odd activity in our "magentic shield" ..magenetic pole reversals do occur every once in so many hundreds of thousands of years so this is probably only going to get worse as time goes on.

However the other big problem is Ozone depletion in our upper atmosphere due to pollution, ozone protects us from the bad UV rays from the sun, we banned the CFC's in aerosols, but scientists think it'll take another 50 years to get the gases that caused the problem back to were it was before the Northern hemisphere started making this mess.

environment.nationalgeographic.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DrZrD
 

Ok. So those are values from the forecast. I wonder if the pattern could represent changes in the forecast model or the use of improved data.

Currently, the tropospheric aerosol loading is derived from a semi-annual climatology. When daily observed and forcasted aerosol loading values becomes available they will be included in the forecast computation.

www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov...



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

The NOAA link I provided earlier contains both the NOAA forecast and measured "Clear Sky" UV data sets. I used the measured "Clear Sky Extreme UV Day Count" column to produce this chart (below is the complete data set for Denver in Excel I manually created).



Note that the NOAA UV forecast also shows an increasing trend for the number of extreme UV days each year. I have not looked at other cities yet, but at least for Denver, the increasing UV level trend is found in actual UV measurement data.

The UV Index is calculated as a weighted average of wavelengths from 400 nm to 250 nm as follows:



Understanding which wavelength band is most responsible for the increase in extreme UV days will help us better understand the possible mechanisms involved. I am working on this research now.

Best regards,
Z



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by DrZrD
 

Here's what the source of your data says:

Graphs of the UV Index forecast and "clear sky" UV Index forecast over the course of a year are available.


Here is what the readme for the data says:

Not every day is recorded so beware of gaps in coverage.

If days are missing the data is no good for the purpose you put it to.

edit on 6/8/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

You could be right that I have mistaken a clear sky UV calculation for measurements, I will investigate further.

The NOAA-EPA Brewer Spectrophotometer UV and Ozone Network has two stations in Colorado. Here is a link to the web-site.

NEUBrew Network

Direct measurement data should exist that should settle everyone's concerns.

Regarding your question about missing data points, column H in my Excel spreadsheet shows the number of data points for each year. As the plot below shows almost every year is missing a few data points but no general trend is noticeable.



A statistical analysis comparing the earliest 5 years of data against the last 5 years may also be helpful to learn if the extreme UV day trend is significant compared with measurement uncertainties. As I said, an ongoing project.

Best regards,
Z



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


They make us sick too. Did you know radiation exposure is proved to cause diabetes? (Not just mutations?)

Interesting.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by DrZrD
 


As the plot below shows almost every year is missing a few data points but no general trend is noticeable.

There certainly is for 2008-2010. It may be instructive to see at what time of year the missing days occur as well.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

My hardware firewall is currently set to block TCP port 21 preventing me from accessing the ftp site that is claimed to contain the daily data sets. Once I fix this issue I should be able to answer your question regarding when missing days occurred in each year.

Regarding the 2008-2011 trend toward fewer missing data points, I do not currently believe it is significant. Even if it was assumed that the years between 1997-2007 all missed 10 extreme UV days per year (highly improbable), the 15 year trend of increasing extreme UV days per year remains as shown below.



Note that the R squared is very poor suggesting a bimodal distribution, that is, different processes at work 15 years ago compared to today. To some extent we expect this because of the ~11 year sun-spot cycle. Hopefully I can locate long term data that should answer the "has something changed" question on everyone's mind.

Best regards,
Z



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ringlejames
 


Ok, I agree that the sun has been excessively powerful lately or at least it seems like it, but there are a lot of things you said that put holes in your story. First off, it's your first day back on the job this summer so it's to be expected that you would burn a little easier since you hadn't had a chance to really build up a tan yet. Although, I'll grant you thirty minutes is a short amount of time for even the palest people to get a burn of any significance. There is nothing that proves that asteroids leave holes in the magnetosphere/atmosphere as they pass through, and as far as I know there is no evidence that satellites were ever in orbit around the earth prior to man...at least not mechanical satellites. Perhaps there were natural satellites like rocks or say, the moon, but I've never heard of a mechanical satellite orbiting the planet prior to humanity doing such.



new topics




 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join