Comments on: Sun still blank, no sign of cycle 24

By: danny lafoote

danny lafoote — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 08:18:31 +0000

10xcsn, the name says it all. No sun spot activity. Decreased solar magnetic activity.
ice age, more or less

By: lance kupchyk

lance kupchyk — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 13:44:07 +0000

What an excellent scientific site you have here!
The graph which shows the noticeable drop in solar activity is very, very troubling !!
The pure global warming heads have it wrong, the sub obviously has an impact on global climate. Anyone care to look at worldwide temperature readings since that week or so in 2005 when the sun
“downshifted” . One of the warminghead sites was showing that most of 2008 so far is about 1.8 F degrees BELOW AVERAGES.
NOT GOOD, NOT GOOD. When global food production is stressed to the limit, now we have potentially a shorter growing season WORLDWIDE…..Even the global warmheads are sheepishly admitting that WARMING IS DELAYED AT LEAST A DECADE due to
occurrences on the sun and elsewhere that over rule human actions.
What worried me as an enviromentalist is that the REAL PROBLEMS ARE BEING IGNORED DUE TO THE GLOBAL WARMING REVIVAL MEETING SPIRIT.
REAL SCIENCE IS SHOWING A DANGEROUS LOWERING OF OCEAN PH, WHICH IS SHOWING UP IN THE ANIMALS THAT BUILD SHELLS OUT OF CALCIUM. The PH is getting low enough that in certain areas, the shellfish aren’t really shellfish anymore. The change in the ocean PH is the really scarry thing. Protecting food sources
from mankinds activity should be a high priority. It food is not available from the normal sources, then people are encouraged by self preservation to clear cut,(think Indonesia, Brazil, African continent),to grow what they can. Unfortunately , these tracts are very marginal for food production and last a few years before they can grow nothing, then more land is cleared and the process repeats itself.
MY BIG CONCERN IS THAT GLOBAL WARMING HAS BEEN OVER SOLD, WHEN THIS IS PROVEN , THEN THERE WILL BE A BACKLASH AGAINST ANY REAL ENVIROMENTAL SCIENCE.
Hey, Al , you can take that Nobel Prize and put it where it will keep any methane gas from escaping into the atmosphere…If YOU ARE REALLY Concerned about the earth and not just wanting to hear yourself talk…….

By: Still no apparent sunspot activity « HoodaThunk?

Still no apparent sunspot activity « HoodaThunk? — Sun, 18 May 2008 13:58:06 +0000

[...] Watts over at Watts Up With That? continues his vigilance and analysis of sunspot activity and what that could mean for our global weather. Complete with graphs and whatnot, the short story [...]

By: Gary Gulrud

Gary Gulrud — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 14:26:26 +0000

Significant note of Dave Archibald at warwickHughes:

http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/?p=150#comment-16787

Cloudiness, and albedo, may not be implicated in Maunder.

By: MattN

MattN — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:49:49 +0000

There was a very small spot yesterday, that has all but disappeared. It looked to be on the equator, meaning it was a cycle 23 spot. There have been no cycle 24 spots since the one small, short lived reversed high-latitude one in January. The magnetic flux has flatlined at 70. The recent trend seems to be occasional very small, short lived spots still associated with cycle 23. No sign of #24 picking up anytime soon.

By: Gary Gulrud

Gary Gulrud — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 13:58:40 +0000

Speaking of plateauing, this months SSN seems to be repeating February’s. Still no further cycle 24 spots.

By: anomdebus

anomdebus — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:44:52 +0000

The 2005 anomaly might be an indication of something, but at that point, wouldn’t the sun be coming down from a higher point to a lower point in its cycle? So having it plateau near the bottom may not be surprising.

By: David

David — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:50:31 +0000

Ok, I have a couple of dumb questions. Do we measure all the sunspots, or just the ones visible from earth? In other words, are there sunspots that appear and disappear on the other side of the sun before we can ever view them?

REPLY: Only what can be observed earthside. This should give you some insight:

http://www.spaceweather.com/glossary/sunspotnumber.html

How Sunspot Numbers are Computed Today

An observer computes a daily sunspot number by multiplying the number of groups he/she sees by ten and then adding this product to his total count of individual spots, same way that Wolf did. Many refer to the sunspot number as a Wolf number or count (or as a Zurich Sunspot Number). Results, however, vary greatly, since the measurement strongly depends on observer interpretation and experience and on the stability of the Earth’s atmosphere above the observing site. Moreover, the use of Earth as a platform from which to record these numbers contributes to their variability, too, because the sun rotates and the evolving spot groups are distributed unevenly across solar longitudes. To compensate for these limitations, each daily international number is computed as a weighted average of measurements made from a network of cooperating observatories.

By: Gary Gulrud

Gary Gulrud — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:40:37 +0000

Earl Koskie: Astute post.

By: DR

DR — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:37:41 +0000

This may be of interest:
IS OUR CLIMATE CHANGING? A STUDY OF LONG-TIME TEMPERATURE TRENDS
http://www.mediafire.com/?mmdzl0uwrdj

Someone else sent me that, not sure where it originated.

By: SteveSadlov

SteveSadlov — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 19:29:15 +0000

Anyone up for doing some Fourier Transforms on these waveforms?

By: sonicfrog

sonicfrog — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:38:43 +0000

This weekend I overheard Al Gore saying: “I rememmmmber a friend telllll me, that if the Sun looooooses its ability to make sun-spots, that is a suuuuure sign of global warming. Our CO2 emmmmissions are killing the Sun. It has a cold and we neeeeeeed to do something about it…”.

By: Diatribical Idiot

Diatribical Idiot — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:19:51 +0000

I just noticed that the period at the end of the link I provided changed the actual location it sends you. Sorry for the confusion. I was trying to point here:

http://landscheidt.auditblogs.com/archives/17

By: Bruce Cobb

Bruce Cobb — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:52:34 +0000

Hmm, I'll try posting that link again: It's: New Little Ice Age Instead of Global Warming? Hope I got it right that time. It's from the link Diatribical posted above. REPLY: works this time, thanks.

By: Bruce Cobb

Bruce Cobb — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:56:15 +0000

Well, as Kristen Byrnes said, perhaps we should indeed
Ponder the Maunder. here
is as good an explanation I’ve seen of what is going on.
I fear mankind may be in for some tough sledding ahead, especially if he doesn’t stop this C02 madness.