Comments on: First sunspot in weeks is still related to solar cycle 23

By: ------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------ - Page 294 - The Environment Site Forums

------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------ - Page 294 - The Environment Site Forums — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:48:04 +0000

[...] changed yet… the fact that we are categorizing sunspots as ‘old-cycle’ sunspots is ridiculous. Calling cycle 24, calling cycle 24��where are you? Old Solar Cycle Returns Recent news: NASA moves the goalposts on Solar Cycle 24 again Sunspots [...]

By: H.Oldeboom

H.Oldeboom — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 23:28:27 +0000

Did anybody hear about a reconstruction of Galileo’s telescope so we can compare actual sunspot observations with that old telescope and with modern instruments and satellites? Then we can have an idea about the translation of sunspot activity in old and modern days.

By: H.Oldeboom

H.Oldeboom — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 11:28:39 +0000

The risk a colder period will soon arrive is for my feelings much greater than an increase in global temperature. The effects of a decrease in global temperature will certainly destroy an important part of the agriculture production followed by an decrease in economic activity and general global impoverishment. Anyhow, In Europe they are still going to spend billions an billions of Euro’s to fight a coming warmer period in stead of using that money to be prepared for colder temperatures.

By: Ed Zuiderwijk

Ed Zuiderwijk — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 12:48:45 +0000

About sunspot observations: you are quite right about observations of sun spots during the Maunder minimum. Observations were done without instruments by looking at the sun early in the morning through morning fog. That’s how the discovery was made in the first place (by monks undoubtedly, who had to get up early; observations are also known from China). But you can only see the largest ones. However, the varying solar activity leaves its marks in C14 deposited in trees and other radiotopes as well, i.p. Berillium. These are used as proxies to reconstruct the solar activity in the past and go back a few thousand years.

By: The Carden Chronicles

The Carden Chronicles — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 07:19:33 +0000

End to Global Warming? Return of An Ice Age?

Last week, articles began to surface discussing how the US National Climatic Data Center was reporting that January’s temperature was 0.3F BELOW the average temperature from 1901-2000. Additionally, the Arctic sea ice, that the Global Warming Fana…

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 07:03:45 +0000

Is it associated with the dying cycle or with #24?

By: Jerker Andersson

Jerker Andersson — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 21:53:17 +0000

You may be up to something about those small sunspots.
Today 2007-03-02 a very small sunspot was reported on http://solarcycle24.com/
It is in the middle of the sundisk and is so small that it probably wont even get a number.

By: Evan Jones

Evan Jones — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 15:34:58 +0000

Though the English are effete,
They’re quite impervious to heat

By: kim

kim — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:14:37 +0000

Solar flux back under 70 again. Check out Erl Happ’s latest on the Svalgaard #3 thread at CA.

The sun is very sultry and we must avoid its ultry-violet rays.

H/t Noel Coward.
===========

By: Doug

Doug — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:19:41 +0000

Sunspot 942 was on 22nd Feb last year. We have just had sunspot 983 – so in around 12 months we’ve had approx. 40 sunspots – on average 1 every 9 or so days – no wonder the world is cooling. If you look at the last 6 months we’ve had around 14 sunspots (sunspot 969 on 25th August 07) – or one every 13 days.

By: Magnus A

Magnus A — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:07:32 +0000

Philip_B: “Rapid glaciation on large scale (continental) can’t happen. It takes ice accumulation over millenia.”

I agree. Massive migration from Scandinavia from glaciers is BS even if we have a new Maunder Minimum. But a cooling occasion like that will be very influential on many people’s life, and in poor countries it will mean a large catastrophe!

Also glaciers expand at the occasions of little ice ages. The slow path to a new ice age, within maybe 15000 years, has to consists of lots of small ice ages during some centuries and intermediate warmer periods.

(The fast climate change is the eding of a large ice age, when tremendous amounts of ice is melting very rapidly for only a few thousands of years.)

The CO2 fixation and dogma I think can be tremendously harmful, since main stream media refuse to report facts about the sun. They’re not even report this delay for SSC-24. No politician seems to be interrested either, and maybe a harmful thing is that no preparation for large famines is made? (Politics for biofuel has btw already wiped out lots of rain forest without a media storm.)

By: Magnus A

Magnus A — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:38:56 +0000

Here is an interresting article, suggesting that sunspot cycle 24 has not started yet:

http://solarscience.auditblogs.com/2008/02/04/solar-cycle-24-false-starts/

By: austin

austin — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:23:04 +0000

So the P38 crashed in 1942 and fifty years later it was covered with 268 feet of ice.

That is 5 feet of ice per year or about 60 inches of water equivalent.

Mountain zones in the temperate regions can get 200 inches or more of water equivalent, but 30-60 is a good number most years.

Here are the current Cal numbers.

http://cdec.water.ca.gov/misc/RealPrecip.html

Glaciers in Canada advanced 2-4 Meters/year during the LIA in this study.

http://hol.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/5/2/149

Some more discussions of geological and geographic effects:

http://academic.emporia.edu/aberjame/ice/lec19/holocene.htm

By: Shaun Bourke

Shaun Bourke — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:32:08 +0000

Philip_B (20:25:43) :

” Rapid glaciation on large scale (continental) can’t happen. It takes ice accumulation over millenia. What may occur is rapid cooling or warming. ”

I beg to differ…… 50 years+slight warming trend=268 feet of ice…….

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/aerospace/archives/115992.asp

And of this current winter the rate of accumulation in Greenland is accelerating.

” Well, we don’t know how fast climate can warm or cool over 1 or 2 years. Exstrapolate the cooling of the last few months out a couple of years and you will get a truly alarming number with unimaginably catastrophic consequences. ”

Actually we do, and from the recent geological past, and from which the areas affected have yet to recover……

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/fit/chapter1.asp

I would speculate here that the time frame involed is a couple of hours and it was replicated in the Southern Hemisphere at the same time.

By: Philip_B

Philip_B — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 04:25:43 +0000

Rapid glaciation on large scale (continental) can’t happen. It takes ice accumulation over millenia. What may occur is rapid cooling or warming.

There is a general assumption on both sides of the debate that climate change happens slowly. Even in the warmist rhetoric, when they talk about rapid warming they mean decades.

Well, we don’t know how fast climate can warm or cool over 1 or 2 years. Exstrapolate the cooling of the last few months out a couple of years and you will get a truly alarming number with unimaginably catastrophic consequences.

This isn’t rhetorical excess: I think the collective failure of the media, government, scientists, etc to recognize and plan for this eventuality will be viewed by future generations as an appalling crime.