Michael Ronayne writes:
To the right of the burned out pixel, a second Sunspot group, with two spots, is forming which can be seen in this image:
The burned out pixel between the two groups is a fairly common issue with SOHO, and they routinely “bake” the sensor to get rid of them. Sometimes people mistakenly interpret them as sunspots in this new age of counting sunspecks.
The way to determine if it is a burned out pixel or not is to look for other off-colr pixels immediately arround it. If the pixel stands by itself, it is a burned out pixel.
So far these have not been assigned a number. They are just barely what one would call sunspots and my bet is that much as we’ve seen before from SC24 specks, they will be short lived, probably 48 hours or less.
Haha… all we need is for a Sunspot Cycle #23 to also emerge next and sink the head lines of this subject.
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime/mdi_mag/512/
isn’t showing much.
OT, this is just brilliant (sarcasm) they have lost the plot..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2009/may/31/kingsnorth-defence-lawyer
From the moment I took on the case I was confident of the acquittal. A conviction of these defendants would have been as perverse as a policy to build new coal-fired power stations. And it doubtless would have been sold by politicians as showing public approval of government policy. A conviction would have given more power to both E.On and the police who each, in their own way, already have too much power.
• Michael Wolkind QC is the barrister who acted for the Greenpeace activists who were acquitted of causing £30,000 of damage to Kingsnorth power station last year.
With the magnetic field so weak, they shouldn’t grow much or last that long.
Where are the big spots of previous cycles?
Wow! Two at once! That may be a first for 2009!
(Sorry for all the exclaimation points!)
OT: Now HERE is an instance of “NON AGW” climate change !!!!!
Volcanic Eruption Caused Ancient Mass Extinction, Study Says
Share | Email | Print | A A A
By Ryan Flinn
May 28 (Bloomberg) — One of the Earth’s largest extinctions was likely caused by a massive volcanic eruption that occurred in what is now southwest China more than 260 million years ago, according to a study.
The eruptions, which spewed about 500,000 cubic kilometers (120,000 cubic miles) of lava over half a million years, killed more than half of the life on the planet in the Middle Permian period, said Paul Wignal, lead author of the study in tomorrow’s edition of the journal Science. That loss of life is called the Guadalupian mass extinction.
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=aLYx3ji.OiD0&refer=home
These are not spots and should be ignored as they would not have been seen by early observers using equipment of that day.
These spots, though a pixel wide, will be celebrated indeed by the ghost spots seekers…
At the fringe of being only perceived by ESP (extra sensorial perception)!!
They are no bigger at this point than the dead pixel.
Pixies.
I knew it. I knew it. A piece put up on the sun yesterday.
The WATTs EFFECT.
Those are some tiny spots indeed.
Seems like cycle 24 isn’t getting off the ground much, but sunspots are counted even if they’re this tiny.
Hey arent those the same magnetic regions from last round?
Mike Ramsey (10:05:00) :
The mag image I see is a couple days stale and is timestamped 2009/05/29 14:24. Sigh.
O/T
New type of cloud?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/5411412/New-type-of-cloud-found.html
Pixel dust…
Chu’s White Paint Brush
This past week the Obama administration’s energy secretary, Steven Chu, suggested that one solution the nations of the world should take to reduce global warming is to paint roofs and roadways white. The premise being that white colored roof would reflect insolation whereas a darker colored roof would absorb it. Chu elaborates further
Sounds like a sweet deal. A little white paint here, a little more over there and before you know it, all the cars in the world suddenly have no effect on global warming because their emissions will be offset. Does this mean someone that paints their roof white will get a carbon tax exempt card for being a good soldier in the fight against global warming? Does it even matter that painting one’s roof white will only reduce cooling costs when it’s hot outside? What about when it’s not hot and sunny? What good is your white roof doing when it’s snowing or when it’s cloudy, cool and damp?
Continue reading at Skeptic’s Corner.
I’m pretty sure there’s also a measure of percentage of the solar disk covered by the darkened cores of sunspots and I believe the SC24 max is forecast to ~2.5%. Is there someone out there with any follow up to this or know of where this data can be found?
pkatt (11:36:59) :
If they are, it would be from 28 days ago.
SOHO MDI Magnetogram is on the fritz (why I don’t know)
Use a
GONG http://gong.nso.edu/Daily_Images/
instead.
REPLY: Looking at that, the spot nearest the rim seems indeterminate in polarity due to the east-west orientation of its poles. – Anthony
mercurior (10:10:55) : From the moment I took on the case I was confident of the acquittal.
From the article:
The defence is sensible. If you see a fire in your neighbours’ garden and you know they are out, you can break down his fence to prevent damage to his plants and to his bouncy castle. The law provides a “lawful excuse” to damage or destroy your neighbour’s fence to put out the fire and save the grass and the earth. The defendants acted to put out the coal fire and save the Earth because so much is in danger and immediate action is called for. Not tomorrow, but now.
And what if I break down my neighbors fence to put out the fire and manage to hose down a nice BBQ lunch with his boss? Hmmm???
Or what if I break down my neighbors fence and discover no fire at all?
It can not be a matter of OPINION that their ought to be a fire; one must exist for ALL to see. Therein is the error. They judged based on what they were told OUGHT to be coming “Real Soon Now”, not what is…
The only benefit to painting everything white would that the UHI effect would be a lot less, then you can just watch the ground station temp. readings go downward as the UHI contamination becomes less and less.
Actually, I would like to see less UHI effect if there’s a way to do that so not only would it help reduce its effect in ground station readings (which is a major reason the results are contaminated) it would give people a better idea of the true temperatures not pushed upward by increasing UHI due to urban growth, which is the world stopped warming years ago.
For a nice example of UHI look at any Wichita station on Weather Underground, the UHI of Wichita often causes urban stations to record temperatures a few degrees higher then the official readings in the smaller town of Newton away from my city’s UHI effect radius.
I shot these images of the spot(s) today (using an 8 inch telescope, as solar filter and a Phillips webcam), it is a small animation showing the variation over 1 hour, the smallest one appeared to fade as I was watching. It is the same spot as the one on the left in the SOHO image.
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/sun_20090531_anim1.gif
The spot was visually “less than easy to see” initially, but once it had been identified it was clear enough.
(sorry for accidentally posting it also to another thread. My mistake)
Nice argument, E.M. Smith.
Recipe for disaster: One wad of pre-sliced data, pinch of reality, place in computer model and bake for a 30 minutes.
Top with hypnotic sauce, minced guilt trip and serve on MSM.
The easternmost group (to the left) appears to be growing; the other one to the west (right) seems to have dimmed to nothing already. Looks like SWPC/NOAA has recognized this and has assigned it a number. Looks like SC24 is finally getting its act together. Now all that remains is to see which of the predictions bears up: 50 – 70 – or 90.
Let’s see, Anthony mentions cycle 24 and we see spots. When tornado chasers look for tornadoes they see nada. Anthony, you need to make more comments about tornadoes so these guys can get some data! Or maybe the radar’s RF is squashing the mesocyclones before they can generate twisters (that’s a joke son).
SC24 may be getting its act together or it may sputter again. The cycle 14-15 low had a 15-month run of mostly spotless months, then in sept 1912 it had a month with only 8 spotless days, then it went right back to an 18-month run of mostly spotless months, then it sputtered a bit for about 6 months before cycle 15 really took off. We’ve had a 17-month run of mostly spotless months. A one-month uptick of activity now followed by another longer period of inactivity would still be well within the observed sunspot patterns of the last 150 years or so…
Ric Werme (12:20:15) :
Mike Ramsey (10:05:00) :
The mag image I see is a couple days stale and is timestamped 2009/05/29 14:24. Sigh.
You are right. I didn’t notice that the latest image was out of date. What’s up with that? 🙂
It’s putting on a show, for now at least.
Just the other day a big flare popped out on the farside.
Question: Was the flare an origin source, and are we seeing the delayed bounce from the blowout (like magnetic-seismic waves) ?
Bunch of Deniers! Accept the Truth. We are defeated! The sun has arisen and shall smite us with spots!
I’m still fuzzy on the N/S poles in spot groups. Is the orientation for a particulart cycle one of east/west, or equatorward? In other words, are we looking for the, let’s say North, pole to be to the right of the South, or on the equator side of the South pole?
As of now, it looks like the lead group is already gone, but the trailing group has picked up some steam. Darn magnetogram is two days old.
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (12:53:44) : Good animation. Mer, takk.
OT: Frost warning for NY
“Local gardeners may want to take special measures to protect their plants this evening as a frost advisory has been issued for much of New York state, including Oneida County.
“The advisory issued by the National Weather Service remains in effect until 8 a.m. Monday.”
Chu’s White Paint Brush
If they hadn’t painted the roses red we wouldn’t be in this trouble. Just go ask Alice.
And again I say, CO2 is good.
I say this because I look in my own backyard and most of the trees have larger than normal leaves, a baby walnut almost looks like a bush, an oak tree twig has the biggest leaves I have even seen on such a twig, 3 baby maples are growing larger than normal leaves, the mulberries and hackberries are getting jumbo leaves again, the sweetgum has some leaves larger than normal, and there’s a few others yet O.o
Only our cottonwood and a few others have leaves the same size as every typical year, this could partly be the result of increased rainfall too, but also the abundant sunshine and, (you guessed it), higher CO2 levels.
This again raises the question of whether these Sun Specks would be observable in the Maunder Minimum.
As an aside, it is interesting how we (and not only WUWT followers) are obsessing over the slightest speck. It seems that we all, even the Warmenistas, have a subconcious suspicion about the Sun. Could it possibly affect climate…..????
Mike McMillan (15:33:55) : orientation
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/solar-images/magnetograms.html
Mike Ramsey (14:57:37) :
Ric Werme (12:20:15) :
Wanna bet no one works on weekends?
“” Adam from Kansas (12:48:13) :The only benefit to painting everything white would that the UHI effect would be a lot less””
I don’t know what the measurement would be, a lot, a little. Unless it was a white instead of black roof where a temp station is placed.
Or in the case of this photo at this link if the pavement was painted white it would make a noticeable difference :
http://wanews.org/news/UHI_files/tucson_from_above.jpg
The explanation for it being placed there was they are trying to reproduce desert conditions? Is that what they’ve said?
How long will it be until they are gone? Or are are they already gone now, at 5:17 California time, Sunday night?
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (12:53:44) :
I like the photos!
Robert Wood (16:45:22) :
Robert,
I’ve posted this video a couple of times. I see a couple other commenters have posted it too. But, in case you and any others haven’t seen it its a fascinating documentary.
http://www.thecloudmystery.com/Home.html
5 parts in YouTube :
It seems that we all, even the Warmenistas, have a subconcious suspicion about the Sun. Could it possibly affect climate…..????
Thousands of years and religions throughout the ages that featured the Sun as vital and life-giving. Yes, it’s been subconciously drummed into us.
It’s a nagging thought, that it is.
Faster than a speeding Hansen. More powerful than a burning Gore. Able to leap AGW in a single bound.
It’s Sol, and he smiles for Anthony.
With respect, this is the most preposterous claim for a sunspot that I have seen in a long time. A weak plage, yes.
Adam from Kansas (16:41:28) :
> And again I say, CO2 is good.
> I say this because I look in my own backyard and most of the trees have larger than normal leaves, a baby walnut almost looks like a bush, an oak ….
Things may be weird in New Hampshire too. For a couple years some May Apples have been spreading like crazy and some Vinca (Myrtle) is too. Some commercial Ostrich ferns that struggled since we planted them a few years ago suddenly look like proper ferns. A couple of days ago I noticed on a dog walk some Red Oak shoots from a stump had grown 2-3 feet this year. I didn’t know oaks could grow that much in a month!
I don’t have proper data for any of this, and while we had a dry spell it didn’t slow things down much. However, it does look like plants here agree with you.
Faster than a speeding Hansen. More powerful than a burning Gore.
LOL
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (12:53:44) : Good photos!, how did you manage to find them?…knowing your abilities perhaps you have an special software to do it…unless you are using a ouija board 🙂
Those who find that the sun has an effect on climate and weather, like Piers Corbyn, Henrik Svensmark, Nir Shaviv, and Jan Veizer (and Lubos Motl 😉 ) are running in to the same trouble with traditionalists that Richard Feynman ran in to with traditionalists on his views of the characteristics of the atomic level :
But “the truth shall set you free”!!
“”Robert Wood (18:15:46) :
Faster than a speeding Hansen. More powerful than a burning Gore.
LOL”
Don’t forget how powerful that “Gore Effect” is, also the “Chu Effect”.
And what about that effect James Hansen has on coal protest attendance?
These powers are real and not to be trifled with!
I have often said we should learn from the ancients and the Aztecs in particular.
So to deal with climate change and AGW we need a pyramid.
No problem, there are any number of trendy British architects to design and build a very grand glass and stainless steel pyramid duly aligned according to Feng Shui etc.
Next we need some virgins. Now I am aware that these are an endangered species and consequently very rare and costly but no expense can be spared.
Then we place our virgins together with the high priests of AGW at the top of the pyramid and at each level down the lesser proponents of AGW such as the politicians, the NGOs, the meeja etc.
For all must attend.
At the propitious moment when the sun’s rays strike the correct point at Stonehenge the Virgins must be sacrificed so we can call on the Sun to give us a sign.
If however Sol remains inscrutable we must obviously do more to placate him by setting the pyramid and all those within it on fire.
Of course this might not succeed but at least we would no longer be bothered by all these gloom and doom mongers.
Kindest Regards
Robert Wood (18:15:46) :
Oh, and don’t forget about James Hansen’s powers of choosing the creepiest looking attire to wear those coal protests!
Ric Werme (18:08:11) :
Adam from Kansas (16:41:28) :
> And again I say, CO2 is good.
> I say this because I look in my own backyard and most of the trees have larger than normal leaves, a baby walnut almost looks like a bush, an oak ….
Things may be weird in New Hampshire too. For a couple years some May Apples have been spreading like crazy and some Vinca (Myrtle) is too. Some commercial Ostrich ferns that struggled since we planted them a few years ago suddenly look like proper ferns. A couple of days ago I noticed on a dog walk some Red Oak shoots from a stump had grown 2-3 feet this year. I didn’t know oaks could grow that much in a month!
I don’t have proper data for any of this, and while we had a dry spell it didn’t slow things down much. However, it does look like plants here agree with you.
While an increase in [CO2] is associated with increasing carbohydrate production and consequently, yield, the enzymatic processes contributing to leaf size are more responsive to nutrient concentration and/or temperature. Nitrogen by itself has a Mitcherlitz response (in the % ranges we are discussing) about 2X that of [CO2].
Ric Werme (18:08:11) :
Adam from Kansas (16:41:28) :
I suspect that increased CO2 is likely the cause of many changes now being blamed on warming. Certain species may now thrive where they previously could not grow … having nothing to do with temperature.
Just Want Truth… (17:30:37) :
Not only does Svenmark et al have some good theory on climate, but they have also managed to collect data on the structure of parts of the Milky Way that are obscured. If there is precession on the orbit of the Solar System through the Galaxy, then it’s possible to build a more 3D image of our Galaxy.
I would also note that others have identified high-latitude dust clouds in our Galaxy. If the Solar System’s orbit is inclined, it may hit some of these dust clouds and thier abrupt boundaries. It may also collect that dust and take much time to sweep it out. Lots of possibilities here.
Leon Brozyna (14:21:42) :
Now all that remains is to see which of the predictions bears up: 50 – 70 – or 90.
90 isn’t a real prediction, just a bureaucratic compromise [and a bad one to boot].
Well something has to be causing the larger than normal leaves, I don’t remember leaves larger than normal during the last real warm and record setting wet year which was 1998, I also don’t remember my observations seeing a good cooralation between rainfall, temps. and leaf size, they only started getting larger than normal last year.
You say nutrient density, can CO2 affect that, there’s also the matter of increased photosynthesis according to co2science.com?
http://www.purgit.com/co2ok.html
Just found this link, it does talk about CO2 affecting leaf size nitrogen fixation in soil, and just about everything else related to plants in a positive way, I haven’t read it all, but it gives an overview of the incredible benefits of the current rise of atmospheric CO2 levels.
This is the first time in many months that I can say this: Now THAT is a sunspot. A bona fide, true, visible to our predecessors, go ahead and give it a number sunspot. Maybe this is indeed the start of something for 24.
ujagoff (20:29:24) :
> This is the first time in many months that I can say this: Now THAT is a sunspot.
Yeah, but it doesn’t warrant all caps. 😉 Try these:
http://www.lunarsurf.com/~eyenot/pics/essays/2012/sunspot032901.gif
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/images/maf/photogallery/031029aurora_midi512_blank.gif
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/headline_universe/solar_system/stories_2003/images/sunspots_oct_2003_big_jpg_image.html
ujagoff (20:29:24) :
This is the first time in many months that I can say this: Now THAT is a sunspot. A bona fide, true, visible to our predecessors, go ahead and give it a number sunspot. Maybe this is indeed the start of something for 24.
Are you trying to say: “Yesssss!!!!! Global warming lives!!!!!!!!!”
One seems a bit bigger now, can’t see the other one. I’d say we would have a sunspot visible with yesteryears equipment.
rbateman (19:36:18) : If the Solar System’s orbit is inclined, it may hit some of these dust clouds and thier abrupt boundaries. It may also collect that dust and take much time to sweep it out. Lots of possibilities here.
Well according to this:
http://www.viewzone.com/milkyway.html
Not only is our orbit way more inclined than you might every have thought, but we are the space invaders from another galaxy!
“The fact that the Milky Way is seen in the sky at an angle has always puzzled astronomers. If we originated from the Milky Way, we ought to be oriented to the galaxy’s ecliptic, with the planets aligned around our Sun in much the same angle as our Sun aligns with the Milky Way. Instead, as first suggested by researcher Matthew Perkins Erwin, the odd angle suggests that our Sun is influenced by some other system. Together with data from the Two-Micron All Sky Survey we now know what it is. We actually belong to the Sagittarius Dwarf galaxy.”
So, do you feel like a space alien ???
And did we even notice the galactic “collision”?
But I’m sure it’s impact on earth is “settled science”…
i did my bit of the research and found out that this whole concept of Dead Pixel theory is still undeveloped and in nascent stages… probably an year or two doing down the line, this would be something big…
Oddly enough, while the prior (slightly offbeat) link has a discussion of our new galactic membership as maybe causal of global warming, the BBC article (that has some of the same press release in it) omits the GW angle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3142582.stm
Yet this India expat paper has virtually the same GW text:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/jun/26earth.htm
Though tracking down the original press release says that the claim that we are space aliens is false, but that we are at / near the intersection of where the two galaxies are colliding (AND it has really nifty pictures!)
http://astsun.astro.virginia.edu/~mfs4n/sgr/
OK, so maybe we’re not aliens from another galaxy, we’re just getting random starts and star dust from another galaxy all over us… couldn’t possibly have any effect…
Adolfo Giurfa (18:23:48) :
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (12:53:44) : Good photos!, how did you manage to find them?…knowing your abilities perhaps you have an special software to do it…unless you are using a ouija board 🙂
You can see these spots visually in an amateur telescope like mine (Celestron C8). I have some self acquired training in astronomical imaging, so this is not hard compared to other objects. Now that we have SOHO, you can just look at that first and check for yourself aftrwards. And yes, I have my own software for capturing the images 🙂
This is a day off here, and the weather is still perfect (although the seeing=turbulence is bad), so I will image the spots again. According to SOHO the group is now much bigger.
On Sunday May 31, 2009 Mt. Wilson did report two Sunspot groups:
ftp://howard.astro.ucla.edu/pub/obs/drawings/dr090531.jpg
Mike
Via iceagenow.com
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/185580-Still-More-on-Diminished-Solar-Activity-and-Global-Cooling
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/185448-The-Great-Global-Warming-Deception
Without any comment:
http://theresilientearth.com/?q=content/airborne-bacteria-discredit-climate-modeling-dogma
Richard M (19:22:45) : said: “I suspect that increased CO2 is likely the cause of many changes now being blamed on warming. Certain species may now thrive where they previously could not grow … having nothing to do with temperature”.
I don’t think so Richard … unless the plants suddenly adapted themselves through gene therapy!
And did we even notice the galactic “collision”?
Galaxies don’t collide in the solid sense.
The spectacular images like the Siamese Twins are from two spiral galaxies passing each other in close proximity and disrupted gravitational and outer mass.
The less-than-spectacular images as in M51spiral /NGC 5195 SB along the same trajectories where the individuals are not violently disrupted.
If we are part of the Dwarf Elliptical previously captured by the Milky Way, then we would also have an orbit about it, and the Sagittarius Cloud would have the orbit about the Milky Way… at a distance. As in M110 & M32 about M31. Ditto for the LMC & SMC about the Milky Way. Captured, not colliding. Otherwise the arms would be torn up on the Milky Way in short order.
It is more likely that the proto-arms were pulled away from the satellite galaxies by the larger host, not the other way around.
I have imaged the spots again today. The poor seeing (=local air turbulence) makes it difficult to get proper sharp images, but using stacking techniques the result can be greatly improved over individual images. The resulting still images are combinations of hundreds of individual frames taken from a webcam video sequence.
For reference, here is a backup of the current SOHO image, showing the placement and size of the spot group
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/soho_20090601_0716.jpg
Then an image taken with a Philips webcam and C8 telescope (2000mm focal length). Of course using proper solar filters. Never, never look at the sun without filters made for the purpose, or you will go blind instantly!.
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/sun_20090601_1039.jpg
The above image already provides better resolution than the SOHO image, you can see more smaller sunspecks in it.
Using a barlow lens, one can increase the focal length of any telescope. I tried using a 2xbarlow, which means the resulting focal length became 4000 mm., but finding obkects and focusing is then much more difficult.
The reult from processing the video taken through the 2xbarlow
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/sun_20090601_1130_2xbarlow.jpg
Now. what is the spot count in this group? I think it illustrates that sunspot counting is very much dependent on resolution and observation techniques, and the way individuals interpret what they see.
Apologies if this becomes a duplicate post. if so, just delete this post. But I can’t see that my previous attempt is awaiting moderation.
Here are new images of these spots from today
@ 2000mm focal length
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/sun_20090601_1039.jpg
@ 4000mm focal length
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/sun_20090601_1130_2xbarlow.jpg
compared to SOHO image
http://arnholm.org/astro/sun/sc24/soho_20090601_0716.jpg
Clearly, the spot count is very much dependent on resolution and image interpretation.
Jimmy Haigh (22:29:02) :
Are you trying to say: “Yesssss!!!!! Global warming lives!!!!!!!!!”
Not in the least. Though I’m sure someone somewhere is thinking that.
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (03:06:21) : Thanks for the information about your equipment and how you detect “lost pixels”. I used to be an amateur astronomer but I had to quit as Lima´s sky is 9 out of 12 months covered with a single cloud at an altitude of about 200 mts.high, and it does not rain at all. When it drizzles here is really humidity oversaturation.
Ron de Haan (04:47:30) :
In 1991 there was an cholera epidemia, here in Lima, Peru. Some were blaming the local water company, so this company made a research putting petri dishes to collect bacteria on lamp posts , and they found that the “vibrion cholera” was in the atmosphere (which usuallly has more than 80% humidity).
The new sunspot is beautiful,,, this one would have definatley been seen pre- 1940. Solar Cycle 24 has FINALLY begun! 🙂
pkatt (11:36:59) :
I think the area high on the eastern limb is the original producer of the current sunspot activity we are seeing now. It was the one that pushed up the radio flux to 75.8 at it’s peak on 2009/05/16. It has a way to go before it’s face on so we will have to wait and see if it has weakened. I believe it’s the longest lasting area of activity Solar 24 has produced to date.
Amendment.
I think the area high on the eastern limb. That should read “western” limb.
I hope the maximum for this cycle is very low — because it would be interesting to me to see what does or does not happen as a result.
Possibly OT, here,
but nevertheless something puzzling me, re: PDO
here is a picture with Sunspots & smoothed Sunspots (SIDC),
adjusted solar flux (Thanks again, Leif), GCR from Oulu (* 0.04):
–
On SC18,19,20,21 PDO was strong at SCmax and weak at SCmin.
On SC22, SC23 PDO was weak at SCmax and strong at SCmin.
On transition from SC23 to SC24, again PDO gets weak at SCmin, like it did
at SCmin of SC18 to SC21.
I have no explanation, at least nothing I could consider as – seriously.
Any guesses?
http://i44.tinypic.com/2ro5lrl.jpg
… I did try it previously with the ipmlemented link to tinyurl, did crash Firefox, so
I do try it seperately:
Here’s the text:
Possibly OT, here,
but nevertheless something puzzling me.
here is a picture with Sunspots, smoothed Sunspots (SIDC),
adjusted solar flux (Thanks again, Leif), GCR from Oulu (* 0.04):
–
On SC18,19,20,21 PDO was strong at SCmax and weak at SCmin.
On SC22, SC23 PDO was weak at SCmax and strong at SCmin.
On transition from SC23 to SC24, again PDO gets weak at SCmin, like it did
at SCmin of SC18 to SC21.
I have no explanation, at least nothing I could consider as – seriously.
Any guesses?
It will be interesting to see what happens to the climate indeed with solar activity low, especially now that the latest SST map from NOAA shows evidence that the PDO may be somewhat dependent on ENSO because the cool horse-shoe has kicked the bucket as La-Nina finished disappearing.
KlausB (12:13:19) :
I have no explanation, at least nothing I could consider as – seriously. Any guesses?
Yes, they have nothing to do with each other. That is the simplest explanation.
Looking at the latest image a few moments ago, these look like the best so far.
Then we place our virgins together with the high priests of AGW at the top of the pyramid and at each level down the lesser proponents of AGW such as the politicians, the NGOs, the meeja etc.
For all must attend.
At the propitious moment when the sun’s rays strike the correct point at Stonehenge the Virgins must be sacrificed
I was with you up until this point, but I have a better idea.
KlausB (11:50:01) :
On SC18,19,20,21 PDO was strong at SCmax and weak at SCmin.
On SC22, SC23 PDO was weak at SCmax and strong at SCmin.
On transition from SC23 to SC24, again PDO gets weak at SCmin, like it did
at SCmin of SC18 to SC21.
I have no explanation, at least nothing I could consider as – seriously.
Any guesses?
http://i44.tinypic.com/2ro5lrl.jpg
Human vision is very good at picking out correlations. If you made a plot without the sunspot curves and then tried to pick out SC transistions, I think you would notice all the places where the PDO makes a significant change that your eye isn’t drawn to when the SSN curves are up.
A non-astronomical analogy might be “razzle-dazzle” camouflage, see http://www.crookedbrains.net/2007/09/razzle-dazzle-dazzle-camouflage-british.html and http://www.core77.com/blog/object_culture/razzle_dazzle_camouflage_3677.asp – the goal was to make it difficult for submariners to determine the course of the ship.
Nice graph, though.
Mighty nice trio of dark spots today. Numbers aren’t in yet, but it’s looking good. Now it will be interesting to see where this lies on L&P projection. Are we on track or is it reversing?
Carsten Arnholm, Norway (06:46:53) :
Yes, the size of spots resolved are heavily dependent on the resolving power of the scope and the focal length plus seeing.
Since you are stacking images, you are decreasing the noise of individual pixels and the readout electronics as well as compensating for the seeing conditions, thus increasing the resolution of the final image.
Using a filter, you decrease the brightness (glare) that would visually hamper the observation. Splitting your 2x Barlow image into RGB components, I notice that the Red band is much sharper than Blue or Green.
It would be interesting to see what a single integration would reveal.
Using a simple 70mm refractor, I cannot see the smaller spots today.
I am quite sure that if you took SOHO and did the same imaging steps, you could get even tinier spots.
Strangely enough the PDO/SSN corralation is only seen with the last two cycles during its warm phase and no obvious corralation during the cool phase before it, it almost looks like before the bulk of the cool phase the possible corralation is flipped!? O.O
Could it be that the dynamics of the PDO when you factor in everything including solar variables is more complicated then one would’ve thought?
at Drudge :
NASA: Sun cycle ‘lowest since 1928’…
http://www.drudgereport.com/
From Spaceweather: The sunspot’s two dark cores are each about the size of Earth, and they are crackling with A-class solar flares. During years of Solar Max (e.g., 2000-2002) we would consider such activity minor, but now, during the deep solar minimum of 2008-2009, it merits attention. The magnetic polarity and high latitude of the sunspot identify it as a member of new Solar Cycle 24, expected to peak in 2013. This makes sunspot 1019 a sign of things to come. Readers with solar telescopes should take a look.
This time the spots are bigger than pixel size, let’s see how it develops.
Adam from Kansas (21:02:45) :
> Could it be that the dynamics of the PDO when you factor in everything including solar variables is more complicated then one would’ve thought?
I’m sure as we learn more we’ll find that the PDO is more complicated, at least compared to what we now now. We could also find that the complexity of the relationship between sun and PDO shows that it is largely coincidental.
Leif Svalgaard (12:38:41) :
KlausB (12:13:19) :
I have no explanation, at least nothing I could consider as – seriously. Any guesses?
Yes, they have nothing to do with each other. That is the simplest explanation.
Leif,
I agree it is the simplest when one considers trying to prove something without a shadow of a doubt. Other than that, your dead wrong.
And I would like to like to know if you’ve ever forecasted something besides solar related items, like the ENSO etc….
Jim Hughes (06:03:19) :
And I would like to like to know if you’ve ever forecasted something besides solar related items, like the ENSO etc….
Some people would consider ENSO solar-related, but we all try to forecast things in our lives, all the time. More seriously, I have forecast [rather successfully] the number of defects [bugs] in large computer systems [which can be done ].
A new cycle 23 spot has popped up on the equator below the 24 spot! Check it out , before it vanishes…
Leif Svalgaard (06:46:34) :
Jim Hughes (06:03:19) :
And I would like to like to know if you’ve ever forecasted something besides solar related items, like the ENSO etc….
Some people would consider ENSO solar-related, but we all try to forecast things in our lives, all the time. More seriously, I have forecast [rather successfully] the number of defects [bugs] in large computer systems [which can be done ].
Leif,
So I am going to assume that you have not made these type of forecasts because of your answer. And I was more concerned about weather-climate since you made a comment about the solar-PDO.
So I will ask you another question. At what point do forecast results matter even if the exact mechanism is not understood? Or do you just dismiss all correct forecasts, if given a good overall base to go by, as just pure luck? Like with ENSO forecasts or even space weather activity level spikes.
Jim Hughes (13:03:51) :
So I will ask you another question. At what point do forecast results matter even if the exact mechanism is not understood? Or do you just dismiss all correct forecasts, if given a good overall base to go by, as just pure luck? Like with ENSO forecasts or even space weather activity level spikes.
There are several kinds of forecasts on different time scales. If I had a method for reliably forecasting something I wouldn’t care too much about why it works as far as using the forecast [although researching why it works would be highly interesting]. The point is just that little word ‘reliable’ and that is where the problem comes in. About dismissing correct forecasts, they are not interesting, it is the incorrect ones that are important. Predicting sunshine during the summer where I live [Calif.] is not hard and if I say you will have sunshine every day my forecast would be correct 98% of the time.
I can readily accept a forecast based on tea leaves if it just works. I don’t know much about ENSO forecasts, but do know about space weather activity, and for the latter we have good mechanisms on various time scales: give me a satellite upstream of the Earth and the data from that can be used to forecast space weather at Earth a few hours later with great accuracy [every little wiggle accounted for] because we know how it works. On a time scale of weeks we can observed the rotating Sun and give good overall forecasts, and on a time scale of years, the solar cycle gives us a good handle on forecasts [of space climate, perhaps].
If I could forecast earthquakes with 99 % accuracy it would make sense to completely evacuate San Francisco every time I predict a quake there, but would that make sense if I’m correct 1% of the time?
NASA was considering bringing the Hubble spacecraft back on the basis of a high forecast of solar activity. We convinced them [and we shall see about how wise that was] that SC24 would be small, so they decided to let Hubble ‘fly over’ SC24. So I do know something about forecasts in real life and with large interests at stake.
It is not clear what your problem is. But before you declare somebody ‘dead wrong’ you might want to justify that declaration other than being simply a disagreement.
There is actually also present a tiny sunspot of cycle 23, just about at the same longitude as these (finally proper) cycle 24 spots but almost spot on the equator. And it’s visible on the disk, so more than a plage. It seems cycle 24 is gaining strength, but 23 isn’t dead yet.
This little pair of spots look like fang marks, almost exactly like the fang marks from a rather large spider bite on the back of my left hand. If I put hand up to the screen next to the SOHO continuum image, they look almost identical. I’ll let you know if my skin mirrors or prophecizes any more Cycle 24 spots.
Leif Svalgaard (13:52:04) :
It is not clear what your problem is. But before you declare somebody ‘dead wrong’ you might want to justify that declaration other than being simply a disagreement.
Leif,
I will let my forecasting record during the past 15 years speak for itself and if I disagree with a conservative viewpoint I will say it. And my June forecast for a heighten solar activity level, the likes not seen since March 2008, seems to be ocurring right on cue.
And I told you about this weeks ago, and I had made it much earlier and many people within the science community are aware of this forecast.
And my developing El Nino forecast, that I had previously talked about around here, also looks to be coming along nicely. And CSU just came out today and downgraded their own Atlantic tropical season forecast from April because of their new thoughts about the El Nino. Or at least it developmental chances.
So are you denying what is going on right now with both of these previously forecasted subject matters?
Jim Hughes (19:14:05) :
I will let my forecasting record during the past 15 years speak for itself
I don’t know your record. Have you are anybody else analyzed the skill score? Do you have a table of graph of that?
And my June forecast for a heighten solar activity level, the likes not seen since March 2008, seems to be ocurring right on cue.
Unless you tell me what it is based on I cannot evaluate it and therefore cannot take it seriously. Everybody [except perhaps David Archibald] predict(ed) that solar activity would pick up by now, even me.
Lief,
There is some significant activity now. How many spots would this count as?
Leif,
I am sorry but saying that the activity level will eventually pick up, and giving a speciifc time frame, like June 2009, are completely two different things. And I specifcally said that it would be the highest level since March 2008. So I gave a measuring stick to go by.
As far as my record and results. I could give you plenty of links to prior forecasts which professionals in the field read-interacted , or even links to newspaper articles which talked about my forecasts, or radio shows , but I see no reason to do this (Thread clutter), and you can believe what you want.
Now I have asked you previously for specific clarifications in regards to forecasts. What I want to know is how far out must you receive a forecast and what do you want spelled out?
Hypothetical Example….Would a forecast for our first X-Class flare to be seen in January 2009 be good enough for you from this far out or would you want it nailed down to a week ?
And BTW I also asked you this before but you did not answer it. I already told you what my Cycle 23 forecast was and who received this but you never did tell me what your call was. Would you mind sharing this because I would like to know what your forecast was for Cycle 23. Thanks in advance.
John W. (05:03:02) :
There is some significant activity now. How many spots would this count as?
1 group with ~10 spots, sunspot number = 20
Jim Hughes (05:32:56) :
As far as my record and results. […], but I see no reason to do this
A link to a table with your skill score [numbers] would go a long way. The local psychic down the road claims a good track record too and has a sign in her window that says ‘since 1979’.
Hypothetical Example….Would a forecast for our first X-Class flare to be seen in January 2009 be good enough for you from this far out or would you want it nailed down to a week ?
Assuming you mean 2010, it still is just guesswork unless you also tell me how you arrived at that. And historically the first really big flare activity occurs about a year after minimum, so your guess is quite reasonable. I will also now predict that 100 years from now, summer will be warmer than winter [method: tilt of Earth’s axis and the annual variation of solar insolation].
Would you mind sharing this because I would like to know what your forecast was for Cycle 23.
Ken Schatten using my [our] method at the solar cycle prediction panel for SC23 urged the panel to consider Rmax=125, my own value would have been 126 [Table 1 of http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Smallest%20100%20years.pdf ], Schatten et al (1996) suggested 138+/-30.
In all cases, the method is documented [Rmax = 0.63 * DM in microTesla; the coefficient being Rmax/DM for cycle 22 and 21 (the latter corrected for scattered light); DM being the difference between the North and South polar fields, the ‘dipole moment’] and can be evaluated. Unless yours is too, it cannot be taken seriously.
Leif Svalgaard (06:39:01) :
Ken Schatten using my [our] method at the solar cycle prediction panel for SC23 urged the panel to consider Rmax=125, my own value would have been 126 [Table 1 of http://www.leif.org/research/Cycle%2024%20Smallest%20100%20years.pdf ], Schatten et al (1996) suggested 138+/-30.
Re-reading their 1996 paper [section 4] I see [had forgotten] that they actually predicted Rmax = 123 using the polar fields. The 138 was arrived at incorporating the F10.7 which I think just increases the noise a bit.
Leif,
I’ll get back to more of this later but I find your spinning quite incredible. If one puts out enough methods ……your Schatten forecast comments about considering F10.7 etc…… you can come back and say anything.
And I know that Schatten did not predict a 123 max, and your original comments about his forecast were more inline with what he actually forecasted, and how it was perceived by the public, or even his peers.
And I also, for the third time, would like to hear what you forecasted back then. Not an after the fact based upon your later research. So are you telling me that you have been in the field for some thirty years, which I believe you stated to me earlier, but you did not make a Cycle 23 forecast ?
And please no links. My time is short. A straight numerical answer will do.
Jim Hughes (08:24:46) :
And I know that Schatten did not predict a 123 max,
line 16 from the bottom of this paper:
http://www.leif.org/EOS/96GL00451.pdf
And I also, for the third time, would like to hear what you forecasted back then.
I did not forecast anything then as I was also some years in private industry.
And please no links. My time is short.
And yet you have time to waste on this here…
Jim Hughes (08:24:46) :
And please no links. My time is short.
If you can take time out from your busy schedule, Ken Schatten and myself explain the method here [at least the operational part of it; the theoretical explanation why this should work is much longer and will tax your patience a lot harder]:
http://www.leif.org/research/AGU%20Fall%202008%20SH51A-1593.pdf
One can disagree with the prediction of the method, but it is at least laid out for everyone to see. Your prediction can only be taken seriously [at least by me] if it is similarly explained. So, for the fourth time: where is the explanation?
Leif,
You continue to play games by posting research links well past 1996 and this is throwing up red flags to me. Since none of this is relevant to what you “actually” forecasted for Cycle 23. (If you even made one)
Now I am not doubting your expertise in certain matters and your research papers prove that you can dissect certain things and show possible statistical correlations. And you obviously have a great deal of knowledge about many different types things in the solar related field.
But this is much different than actually forecasting a subject matter. Much like a college professor who teaches the science behind meterorology may not be a very good forecaster. Or at least in regards to anything beyond 3-5 days and any veteran long range weather forecaster within the field knows this.
So let’s quit the bull and lay the cards on the table. Your reputation has really taken off the past year thanks to the Internet, which is fine, but it’s not like you have a long standing history of actually forecasting space weather- solar events. Or at least you havn’t shown me anything to prove this yet, like you want me to do.
And I’m even willing to accept your word about these forecasts , unlike yourself. So your silence speaks volumes because we both know that you have to be careful about what you say, in regards to what you have or have not forecasted before.
And as for scientific proof to my own methodologies. I have already mentioned that I have no direct proof to the mechanisms behind these possible relationships. So there are no smoke and mirrors with me.
And I am not going to share these forecasting methods when others can possibly make money off of these things. And most long range forecasters, whether they be at NOAA & CPC, the private sector, or wherever, already know this about me. Not unless they have been living under a rock in the weather forecasting community.
So I just forecast events and then sit back and watch the results just like any other forecaster within the different fields. And people within the meteorological – climate field pay attention to some of my outlooks, and they are taken seriously, but you are free to believe what you want.
Jim Hughes (07:31:43) :
So I just forecast events and then sit back and watch the results just like any other forecaster within the different fields. And people within the meteorological – climate field pay attention to some of my outlooks, and they are taken seriously, but you are free to believe what you want.
If you’ll not disclose your methods, then they are not to taken seriously [by me, at least]. Same goes for Corbyn’s. That you make money off them is good for you, a lot of people make money on gullibility, even Al Gore. And you, too, are free to believe as you want, but you must expect some objections if you peddle it as science, as it ain’t, unless it be discussed and recognized [not necessarily accepted] by scientists.
Leif,
At least I finally got something staight from you even if it was just your opinion about me, or even Piers. Which is more than I can say about your other responses to me.
And for the record I do not make any money at this and it has just been a hobby of mine that I picked up on about fifteen years ago while wanting to know what type of weather was ahead for work. Since no governmental organizations were giving out any extended forecasts for well out in advance.
Which then lead to my own solar research that I have continued on with. And I figured this was important, even as a self taught layman, because of the lack of skilled forecasters out there within your field. Which Cycle 23 showed as well as even some of the ones for Cycle 24.
But there’s no denying one thing. The individuals who have used the planets for forecasting the solar cycles, whether it be Cycle 23 or 24, have clearly outperformed the upper echelon of your community. And you were not the first to forecast a lower level for Cycle 24 even if most around this place, or elsewhere, mistakenly believe so.
But it’s always nice to see mainstream science support a myth. Much like they do with GW. Or at least the way they make it a bigger issue then what it is. As in our influence, and not the suns role, which forces certain atmospheric and oceanic teleconnections.
BTW….And of course you’ll want proof …… we’ll see an El Nino form this year like I have have previously forecasted , but we are also more than likely going to see another one follow in 2010-11. (70% chance ) Which will be stronger. But you’ll just chalk it up to a lucky guess even though it is highly unusual to see back to back El Ninos.
But maybe your unaware of this since your not a climate expert. Or maybe I am mistaken and you are one of these also.
Jim Hughes (15:58:18) :
At least I finally got something staight from you
Good for you.
And for the record I do not make any money at this
Then I see no reason not to disclose the method, lest it is too embarrassing…
But it’s always nice to see mainstream science support a myth. Much like they do with GW.
You finally showed your true colors…
And of course you’ll want proof
No, I’m not interested in proofs, just in methods. Everybody claim they have proof…
But maybe your unaware of this since your not a climate expert.
It is then good to learn from one like yourself.
Jim Hughes (15:58:18) :
But there’s no denying one thing. The individuals who have used the planets for forecasting the solar cycles, whether it be Cycle 23 or 24, have clearly outperformed the upper echelon of your community.
And its goner get even better Jim…so much new data.
Leif Svalgaard (17:36:18) :
Then I see no reason not to disclose the method, lest it is too embarrassing…
Why would anyone get embarassed for possibly trying to extend our knowledge about certain relationships? Although some people get intimidated real easy so they might get rattled when an individual like yourself speaks out against them. But thankfully I’m not one of them.
And I’m also hoping to get in the long range forecasting field if the economy turns around. And I’ve had some minor interactions with some within the business. But their not hiring right now.
And I also do not have a degree so I’ve either got to be the best con guy in the world or them the dumbest. Take your pick.
——–
But it’s always nice to see mainstream science support a myth. Much like they do with GW.
You finally showed your true colors…
So I’m a stern AGW person because I criticized how a large part of the community has pushed an unproven agenda as fact ? And FWIW I’m all for cleaning up the earth or for keeping it from getting worse. Both air and water, so your wrong.
And the activity level of the sun, or at least these double Gleisberg minimums, are going to continue to get higher up until 2500 AD . So it couldn’t hurt our warming chances even if you believe that the solar – climate connection plays a bigger role than GHG’s.
———-
And of course you’ll want proof
No, I’m not interested in proofs, just in methods. Everybody claim they have proof…
So this will always be your answer regardless of what happens with my forecasts. Which is fine but your living in a dream world. Because your not able to seperate the need to know the methodology for acception, with the need of the forecast, regardless of the unproven method, if the indivdual has a better track record than most.
And your able to do this because your also not relying upon the ENSO state when it comes to making a living. And maybe you should consider just how many dollars are invested in the market, weather related wise. Like in the energy business. Because all they really want is a statistical edge.
——–
But maybe your unaware of this since your not a climate expert.
It is then good to learn from one like yourself.
What areas? Maybe I can still help without sharing to many methods. Or maybe I can share what I’ve already talked about.
Here’s a couple of links to some of my “out of the box” wacky thinking. Which are basically early building blocks to work on in the long range forecasting game.
The first one I wrote about three years ago and the graphics are pathetic but it’s hard to teach an old dog new tricks and computer graphics were obviously a foreign language to me back than……probably still are.
It is about the possible cyclical relationship between the Polar Eurasian Teleconnection and the onset of major forbush decreases (Or higher geo-less GCR’s) during the ascending phase of the new solar cycle. I called it the PET Cycle. I also point out a couple of other relationships that seem to coincide. So I am looking forward to the next onset to see what happens.
PET Cycle
http://www.easternuswx.com/bb/index.php?showtopic=103909
TWC waves …
A short discussion I wrote up this past winter to forecast certain teleconnections well out by the use of the current wave pattern trends at the time. And I am going to assume that you know about certain AAM related variables.
http://www.easternuswx.com/bb/index.php?showtopic=184842
Jim Hughes (06:30:35) :
And I also do not have a degree so I’ve either got to be the best con guy in the world or them the dumbest. Take your pick.
Could be some of both. But, your chances of business will be MUCH higher if your method is public and has been vetted by scientists. My colleague Ken Schatten issues [and has done this for decades now] a quarterly solar forecast for NASA [and other paying customers] using my [our] method and benefits from a published method. These agencies would never pay for anything that was not documented. So, no reason at all not to disclose your method.
So I’m a stern AGW person because I criticized how a large part of the community has pushed an unproven agenda as fact ?
You cannot generalize to the ‘rest’ of science from the AGW nonsense.
And the activity level of the sun, or at least these double Gleisberg minimums, are going to continue to get higher up until 2500 AD .
kind of flies in the face of other planetary influence people pushing a Grand Minimum.
if the indivdual has a better track record than most.
Your track record is not quantified [skill-score?] so cannot be compared.
I also point out a couple of other relationships that seem to coincide.
and are thus coincidences…
Leif Svaalgard (07:45:09)
And I also do not have a degree so I’ve either got to be the best con guy in the world or them the dumbest. Take your pick.
Could be some of both. But, your chances of business will be MUCH higher if your method is public and has been vetted by scientists.
No doubt. But I also do not think that any business would keep me around for long if I brought nothing to the table. And I also doubt that any forecasting outfit would share what I brought. So it’s sort of a wash from your perspective.
——————-
And the activity level of the sun, or at least these double Gleisberg minimums, are going to continue to get higher up until 2500 AD .
kind of flies in the face of other planetary influence people pushing a Grand Minimum.
I have never looked at things like others. At least not the originals who went by way of the CM, like Landscheidt.
——————
if the indivdual has a better track record than most.
Your track record is not quantified [skill-score?] so cannot be compared.
And you know this how when you actually know nothing about me or what I have previously forecasted ?
—————–
I also point out a couple of other relationships that seem to coincide.
and are thus coincidences…
I used the term coincide because it was added on later after the intial discussion was written. So I didn’t dig deeper into the relationship. But they tie in quite easily if you understand the behavior of the wintertime stratosphere and how this relates to FW’s, or even ozone levels.
And I’m assuming once again that you know that the indice state, -/+, of the Polar Eurasian teleconnection, can be indicative of the state of the circumpolar vortex.
Jim Hughes (09:58:45) :
No doubt. But I also do not think that any business would keep me around for long if I brought nothing to the table.
If you brought a well-documented and validated method to the table, I think you would get more business.
I have never looked at things like others. At least not the originals who went by way of the CM, like Landscheidt.
Well, that could be a problem, because now you have to explain to your customers why not.
And you know this how when you actually know nothing about me or what I have previously forecasted ?
I know this only from the fact that you have not provided a table of skill-scores.
And I’m assuming once again that you know that the indice state, -/+, of the Polar Eurasian teleconnection, can be indicative of the state of the circumpolar vortex.
As I’m sure the ‘official’ ENSO forecasters are also aware.
Geoff Sharp ( 23:12:01)
And its goner get even better Jim…so much new data.
The truth always surfaces sooner or later so I am not to worried about the naysayers.
Leif Svaalgard (11:11:46)
And I’m assuming once again that you know that the indice state, -/+, of the Polar Eurasian teleconnection, can be indicative of the state of the circumpolar vortex.
“As I’m sure the ‘official’ ENSO forecasters are also aware.”
Yes they are but this has nothing to do with the context of my reply since I was not talking about the ENSO’s relationship with the PET Cycle, just the POL.
But maybe you can define “offical” for me anyway since no reliable ENSO state can be forecasted well out by the models, which they rely heavily upon.
And some of us have lead the league in batting average over the years with our own ENSO calls and you don’t have to wait eleven years to find out who is good or who is bad. So even the most brilliant minds have to take a seat on the bench after they strike out. And their peers pretty much look the other way now since they know that they are basically winging it. And we all know how to read a model forecast anyway.
And I challenge you to find one professional in the weather forecasting field, and many seem to post around around here, who could say that about my own long range ENSO calls….winging it.