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.
A major solar flare measuring X4.9 was just observed around returning sunspot 1967 (newly numbered 1990) at 00:49 UTC. This just proves that you cannot judge a book by its cover. Despite appearing to be in a state of decay, the active region remains magnetically potent. A 10cm radio bust measuring 3700 sfu and lasting 85 minutes was associated with the event. The sunspot is not yet in a good geoeffective position for Earth directed eruptions. The flare is the 3rd largest X-Ray event of the current solar cycle. More updates to follow regarding a possible CME.
CME Update: As expected, a large coronal mass ejection (CME) is associated with the X4.9 Solar Flare. Click HERE for an image by LASCO C2. The plasma cloud is directed mostly to the east. Once more imagery is available, I will be able to put together an animation to determine if there is an Earth directed component.
Char-Lee
reply to post by westcoast
Could bump up the earthquakes.
Char-Lee
reply to post by westcoast
Could bump up the earthquakes.
Shhhh... someone will come along and tell you that there is no scientific link between the sun and earthquakes
Scientists assembled historical records of the Sun’s interaction with Earth, looking at sunspots, solar wind, and magnetic storms. They then compared these with historical records of earthquake occurrence. They found no significant pattern between solar activity and more or larger earthquakes. There is no demonstrated way to use space data to predict future earthquakes.
Just because one might think that a pattern exists does not mean that one actually exists. We need clear evidence to be convinced.
The result?
"Across a range of earthquake magnitude thresholds, we find no consistent and statistically significant distributional differences. We also introduce time lags between the solar-terrestrial variables and the number of earthquakes, but again no statistically significant distributional difference is found."