Sunspot 987, 988, and now newly emerging 989 are shown above.
With all being near the equator, they are still a cycle 23 spots. A cycle 24 spot would be at a much higher latitude.
The most recent magnetogram shows them to have the magnetic polarity of cycle 23 spots, in addition to being near the equator.

Cycle 24 remains late. There was one sunspot of high latitude and reversed magnetic polarity on January 4th, 2008, but none have been seen since:
Click for a larger image
UPDATE 2: The solar holographic image shows a potentially large spot on the far side of the sun, we’ll have to wait until it comes around to see what it is. The method is not always perfect.

Darker area is the far side of the sun.
Seismic waves propagating through the sun are used to image potential spots on the far side. Here is a description of how it is done.
UPDATE 3:
It looks as if the spot seen yesterday on the far side of the sun via the holographic technique has disappeared. As I said “The method is not always perfect.”

The two spots above are earthward, 987, and 988.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


Look at the isotherms on the US national map today. Compare with even early March, 2006. Highly abnormal, straight across the country with the exception of the immediate Atlantic coast. NWS progs the rain – snow line to reach the Long Island Sound by either late weekend or early next week. If we get a string of Tonopah / inside slider type systems on the West Coast, during April, consider the impacts that might have on agriculture. Snow level is down in the 2K – 3K foot range in NoCal, and could drop even lower. Last night was chilly. There is still a lot of very cold air near the Arctic Coast, which could slam down here, with only a 2 – 3 day warning.
REPLY: I was thinking the same thing last night. I had a low of 33F last night (Sac valley floor). A bit unusual for this time of year.
HMMM. What a dilemma. Should we be hoping that the world cools off to shut up the warmers? Or should we be praying that it doesn’t?
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/global.daily.ice.area.withtrend.jpg
Consider albedo impacts of this. Now of course, in the area with currently growing ice, the sun angle is very low. However, in the area with shrinking ice (NH) the sun angle is getting higher. On the average, albedo impact must be considered. This, on top of a cold Pacific, and all other factors. If the Atlantic switches to cold mode, that would be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
To those hoping a bit/lot of cooling will force the AGWers to face reality.
The following is a direct quote from a recent documentary that hinted we may be in for some cooling. They said right at the end:
Voice over to a video of a polar bear on some melting ice:
This was immediately followed by a scientist (cant remember his name) stating the following:
It seems like the Pogies (anthropogenics) are hell bent in fighting back against Nature. Most of yesterday’s evening newscasts carried stories around the collapse of that little bit of the Antarctic ice shelf… A normal thing to occur at the end of a summer period.
But that was apparently a prelude to the $100 million advertising campaign about to be launched by Mr. Pogie himself… Goofy Gore. I think we can expect many more such “tie ins” to occur immediately before and after the AGW advertising fest.
Should we be hoping that the world cools off to shut up the warmers? Or should we be praying that it doesn’t?
Yes.
Pardon my ignorance, but what is the difference between a backward sunspot and a regular sunspot with regard to its effect on earth’s climate?
Evan
If yes is the answer to the first question, then I fully agree.
More warming would only embolden an already dangerous lot.
Gore ought to hurry up, as it appears the climate might be making a U-turn.
As I said, we are only about 0.5°C from exposing this huge hoax. It’s all coming home to roost.
There’s a link in this article to a data file ( spot_num.txt ) that contains sun spots numbers back to 1750.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml
Glad to see the sun active a little. Maybe it’ll help us warm up a little here in N.MN. Getting tired of the chilly weather.
Also get a chance to see some auroras. They’re cool.
AGWscoffer, don’t you know that no disproof is sufficient? Ever? Don’t question the Church, ye Heretic!
Seriously, though, they’ve been preparing, make stories suggesting that the sun may “save” us, but in the end AGW will come back to bite us later, so we can’t rest just yet, etc.
Anyone see this?
http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?articleID=130951
Pamela, I had the same thought.
Matt N, my understanding is that sunspots in one cycle are (to the best of our knowledge) unrelated to sunspots in the next or preceding cycle. Therefore, measuring the start or end of a solar cycle by the sunspots in the next or previous cycle tells us nothing about the length of the particular cycle.
We should measure a sunspot cycle from the first to the last sunspot in that cycle. If we do, Pamela is right and we are looking at a very weak cycle.
Nothern lights forecast.
http://www.gedds.alaska.edu/AuroraForecast/Default.asp?Date=20080327
Upper left corner has little maps for your part of the world. Click the one for you.
You guys don’t get it. What you’re missing is that it doesn’t matter if it warms or cools. People like Gore are bent on control by the elite (meaning them). Gore will switch from AGW to Global Cooling in an instant and start proclaiming that his ilk must control the world’s food and fuel to protect mankind from the evil capitalists. Since no one wants to listen to them when things are going good they have to create a crisis that they proclaim only they can solve. Doesn’t matter what it is.
We need to still continue with that because when the sun finishes going through its 100 year period of low activity we are going to be right back where we started with a vengence
So… this scientist and others, believe that there will be not One Jot of improvement in energy technologies in the next 100 years?
I wonder if he any relation to the gentleman who said canons had reached their pinnacle in the war of 1812?
You guys don’t get it. What you’re missing is that it doesn’t matter if it warms or cools.
It does, though. To some people it doesn’t, but it does to the swing vote.
I remember when they “cleanued up” Times Square. A lot of people said, so what, the porno theaters would just move uptown two blocks. They did. And they were out of business in a couple of years. If being uptown two blocks made no difference they would have been there in the first place.
Same basic principle applies to the MSM. Most of them will never change. But the MSM itself is in the very process of being bypassed. To be largely replaced by the wattsupwiththats of the world! The MSM is being “moved two blocks uptown”.
In the time it took you to read this message, the New York Times has lost half a dozen readers . . .
The Daulton Minimum, the Maunder Minimum … the current minimum will need a name.
How about:
The AGW Alarmist Minimum?
The Gore Minimum?
The Carbon Tax Minimum?
Anyone?
I agree that this should be called the Gore Minimum.
This fraud must be remember for generations and never forgotten. The damage done to science is beyond calculation and the deaths will be in the millions.
The current minimum? You must mean the (very likely) upcoming one, in which case the name should be given to someone who has actually been studying sunspots, just as solar astronomer Edward W. Maunder did. How about the Watts Minimum?
REPLY: Absolutely not.
This predicted reduction in solar activity and the resultant cooling would be great as far as I am concerned. I would LOVE to see the AGW crowd laughed off the stage! However, I am not getting my hopes up just yet, I want to see the sun stay reletively calm for a little longer before I get too excited.
I have read about the Dalton minimun’s affects on society in one of Hubert Lamb’s outstanding books, and I have hoped to have the opportunity to live through a similar period. Maybe that sounds silly, but his writing captured my imagination!
One more thing: can it really get as cold as the Dalton period if solar activity were to become equally low as then, because we will be cooling from a higher starting point? (warmer oceans, less land ice, etc. than back then).
Great stuff here!
Anthony,
Your site is a lot of fun. I’m still chuckling over your Dragnet entry. Just keeps on getting more interesting. We’re still trying to deduce how those punks got away with taking a server out for a joyride.
Re: New Cycles: NASA Science Chief Dr. Alan Stern resigned today, and will to return to Boulder’s Southwest Research Institute. He was primarily a planetary scientist, and was noted for “keeping the cost of projects in check”, according to today’s NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/science/27nasa.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin
REPLY: I like to follow this maxim: “Science should be fun.” – Don Herbert, Mr. Wizard
Definitely the “Gore Minimum” that’s perfect. Gore will be remembered as only a laughing stock once it becomes clear to the rest of the world that the Sun and Earth failed to cooperate with his chicken-little blathering.
How about,
The Kyoto Minimum
The Greenpeace Minimum
or my personal favourite,
The WattsUpWithThat? Minimum
REPLY: No naming minimums after me.