Solar cycle minimum at the earliest in second half of 2008?

Current SOHO: The Sun is blank again

The outlook for solar activity continues to be pushed further back as cycle 23 spots continue, such as the group of 3 seen last week, but no cycle 24 spots are being seen. NASA’s convened panel of scientists obviously missed their mark of consensus in predicting cycle 24 would start in March 2008. There is growing concern over the delay in the start of cycle 24. Now a new prediction portends more delay. If we go to May or later before the solar min is reached, cycle 23 will be the longest cycle since the late 1800s. Now it is looking like cycle 24 may not get started until late 2008 or early 2009.

Here is a new forecast from  Jan Janssens SOLAEMON the SOLar Activity & Earth MONitor  web page:

In this statistical research, transits to cycles 12, 13 and 14 were considered, as well as transits to cycles 21, 22 and 23. The current transition towards SC24 was compared with foregoing evolutions.

The start of SC24 is not to be expected prior to July 2008, and in all likelihood might even take place only in the first half of 2009. This conclusion matches perfectly the results one can make from evolution of the number of spotless days. Nonetheless, SC23 would be one of the longest in over 100 years, possibly even in over 160 years.

See the entire article and methods used to determine these statements here:

h/t Bob B

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bob B
April 7, 2008 8:48 am

FYI—Leif Svalgaard has also updated his research page:,%20SW,%20and%20Solar%20Data.pdf

Pierre Gosselin (aka AGWscoffer)
April 7, 2008 9:11 am

“…longest in over 100 years, possibly even in over 160 years.”
What should this bode? Does anyone wish to speculate?

Michael Ronayne
April 7, 2008 9:42 am

While Jan Janssens is not an astrophysicists, given the track record of the wise men in Boulder Colorado I am not sure anyone can predict what is going to happen next. If Jan Janssens is correct then there are only three questions which need to be answered.
1. Will the Gore Minimum be comparable to the Dalton or Maunder Minimum?
2. How long will the mainstream media keep the lid on?
3. How will the AGW spin machine respond?
I will keep the Solar Cycle 23-24 animation updated. I do suspect that we will be seeing revised predictions very shortly.

Jeff B.
April 7, 2008 9:58 am

As a layman, it’s hard to understand how the AGW proponents can not see the obvious connection between the Sun and our climate. I can’t remember who said it, but there is an axiom whereby one does not look for more complex explanations where simple ones will suffice. How can there be any doubt that the Sun dwarfs all other inputs to Earth’s temperature? On any given day the Sun’s flatulence or lack thereof will probably erase years of man’s boldest efforts. This is the obvious truth that the AGW folks hope will go away. Thankfully the Sun is showing us the truth.

April 7, 2008 10:18 am

In the past, there were attempts to use solar activity as a leading indicator of wheat futures. Now, one might consider the same for rice and corn futures. Of course, correlation is not causation. But it is of interest nonetheless. I witnessed a rice run at a local store, over the weekend, right here in NoCal, a preeminent rice growing area. I cannot imagine being somewhere where domestic supplies cannot meet demand (even here we import as a matter of preference, since we only grow short and medium grain in Cali).

Alan S. Blue
April 7, 2008 10:25 am

Why are the plots of ‘Active Region Count’ versus time set up as always-positive? For the purposes of determining crossover, you’re trying to monitor when the average orientation switches. If you just decide “Ok, the orientation for cycle 23 will be considered ‘positive’, the other orientation is negative”, it would be more plausible to just eyeball the transition.
IOW: Currently there’s an always-positive sawtooth-like pattern (yes, uneven & curvy). If you let the orientation of an individual sunspot multiply it’s y-coordinate by (±1), then the scatter pattern and trends in the current time period alone tells you something about when we might ‘cross zero’ and move into the next cycle. You end up with an -alternating- sawtooth-like pattern.
Individual points (June 2006, Jan 2008, etc.) don’t do the job – they were outweighed by sunspots on the other side of the ‘zero’. And if you just plot the running average, you have a measure of how far from crossover you are.

April 7, 2008 11:06 am

Is it reasonable to expect, all other things being equal, that the global temperature will continue to drop for at least the next year and maybe this is the preface to a longer colder period?

April 7, 2008 11:22 am

So, the further along this gets drawn out, does this point to the gore minimum actually happening and that 2010 – 2040 may actually be a serious cold spell upward of an average of 2 degrees cooler than now . . . or is this even an indicator of anything at all?

Texas Aggie
April 7, 2008 11:48 am

Jeff B. – were you thinking of William of Ockham, a Franciscan friar who gave us “Occam’s razor.”?

April 7, 2008 12:08 pm

I thought the Dalton and Maunder minimums were also puncutated with several major volcanic eruptions. Without that, will we only get a cooling period similar to the 1960-70’s?
John M Reynolds

April 7, 2008 12:11 pm

Indeed Aggie, but according to the principle, a simpler but less accurate theory should not be preferred over a more complex but more accurate one.
I would also be interested to hear speculations about what the Solar Minimum means with respect to our climate.

Texas Aggie
April 7, 2008 1:39 pm

Robinson: In all cases, accuracy. This should never be about whose ox is “Gored.”
I’m just grateful to see a civil debate.

D. Dodd
April 7, 2008 2:38 pm

This is slightly off-subject, but since a less active Sun ultimately affects the Earth’s hydrologic cycle, making it snow, hopefully, in Tennessee, can someone point me to an actual PHYSICS TEXT in which “greenhouse effect” is defined? This term is used as though it is a natural law, yet in my personal schooling (ca. mid-1960s), the Earth’s climate and weather patterns were adequately described in terms of the hydrologic or water cycle, and not once was the term greenhouse effect used. Since even a glass greenhouse does not act like a “greenhouse” (it only traps air warmed by conduction from objects within the greenhouse, not secondary radiation), it seems unlikely that the chaotic, dynamic atmosphere could act in such manner. Any gas (e.g. CO2) warmed near the surface will simply expand (natural gas laws) and disperse to higher levels, thereby releasing its energy. The end result is warming near the ground, evaporating more water into the water cycle, creating cooler clouds, etc. In fact, all of the climate models or GCMs seem to violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics by having the cooler troposphere warm the earth’s surface! The entire AGW hypothesis requires one to “suspend disbelief” and stand physical Laws on their heads! I know that definition must be out there, but please don’t pont me at Wikipedia — my Conservative computer doesn’t travel well there! My personal belief is that the greenhouse effect is an urban myth, but I could be wrong!

April 7, 2008 2:56 pm

Wikipedia is warped on climate because its editor for climate matters, until very recently, was William Conneley(sp?) and ardent warmer and climate modeler. The wreckage of his ideology still strews the beaches.

April 7, 2008 3:01 pm

Steve Sadlov can you elaborate on this rice run you witnessed? I also live in NoCal, near ATT Park, and I know there are no food supply shortages here, although a particular commodity may sometimes be out of stock, but rice?
I was able to find this:
Gotta love Guardian reporting: “But with rice relied on by some eight billion people”
I guess they got the scoop on that one a couple of decades into the future.
REPLY: It was probably Rice-a-Roni, I hear there was almost total crop failure for that this year. 😉

April 7, 2008 3:10 pm

Well, Anthony, I searched the NoCal press for “rice” but all I got was this.
REPLY: OK I deserved that. 😀

April 7, 2008 4:35 pm

D. Dodd,
You might try “Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics,” Seinfeld & Pandis. Concise on greenhouse effect, and expansive in other sections on the related physics.

George M
April 7, 2008 4:56 pm

D. Dodd:
Go to the Junkscience Blog written by Steve Milloy. He has a link to a pretty well written description of the “greenhouse effect”, both as expected by the AGW group, and as viewed by thermo-physicists.

April 7, 2008 5:46 pm

Jeez – it was at a Marina Market, a “chinese” market. You probably are not going to witness rice runs in Safeway, Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, Raley’s or Cala. There are certainly cultural factors involved. For, shall we say, those who do not eat rice as their main carbs, there is probably not (yet) the sense of foreboding that would drive one to hoard. Interestingly, there are also reports of hoarding presently from Hong Kong.

April 7, 2008 6:14 pm

I figured it was a Chinese market and the run was probably price driven.
It just still seemed improbable. Sorry for doubting you.

April 7, 2008 6:53 pm

“I thought the Dalton and Maunder minimums were also punctuated with several major volcanic eruptions. Without that, will we only get a cooling period similar to the 1960-70’s?”
The Year without a Summer was triggered by the explosion of Mt Tambora which was 5X the size of Krakatau and 25X-100X the size of St. Helens. From Brian Fagan’s “The Little Ice Age”:
“At least three major volcanic eruptions occurred between 1812 and 1817: Soufriere on Saint Vincent in the Carribbean erupted in 1812, Mayon in the Phillipines in 1814, and Tambora a year later. This extraordinary volcanic activity produced dense volcanic dust veils. The Krakatau event provides scientists with a baseline for measuring the extent of volcanic dust trails. If 1883 is given an index of 1,000, 1811 to 1818 is roughly 4,400. Another set of powerful eruptions between 1835 and 1841 produced an index of 4,200 and further colder weather.”
“The years 1805 to 1820 were for many Europeans the coldest of the Little Ice Age. White Christmases were commonplace after 1812. The novelist Charles Dickens, born in that year, grew up during the coldest decade England has seen since the 1690s….”
Fagan assigns 1790-1820 to the Dalton Minimum, Wikipedia says 1790-1830.
The sort of solar cycles people are talking about (sunspot numbers in the 40-50 range) are much more like the Dalton Minimum than the 1960-1977 timeframe with numbers around 130. Then there are the people talking about perhaps we’ll be revisiting the Maunder Minimum, but we really don’t want to go there.

April 7, 2008 7:14 pm

According to the predictions from the Solar Inertial Motion hypothesis, we can expect to be entering a minimum like the Dalton Minimum.

steven mosher
April 7, 2008 7:43 pm

I’m ok with rice shortages. as long as I have moon cakes I’m happy.

Pamela Gray
April 7, 2008 7:46 pm

I read the Janssens article looking at models. This is the first time I have seen such an in-depth examination of models. Loved it. But it was very complex. I am still wondering if simple measures such as flare numbers and magnitude predict/precede short term fluctuations in temps. The Earth’s magnetic field measurement may be compromised by other factors. CO2 and ocean temps may also be compromised by interactive mechanisms. Could it be as simple as sun “eruptions”?

Joe Black
April 7, 2008 8:32 pm
The wreckage of his ideology still strews the beaches.

Always the philosopher.

April 7, 2008 9:20 pm

The Solar Cycle Progression charts at have been updated. No surprises that I see. There is an uptick in the sunspot count, but that must be from the three groups that came by recently.

April 7, 2008 9:29 pm

Questions and Speculation: Why would a Daulton Minimum be the expected outcome? It seems to me that volcanic eruptions affected the depth of the 3 solar minima of the Little Ice Age–it was all a perfect storm, so to speak.
other question: Could this minimum be like the Oort Minimum? Was there an appreciable effect on climate then?
last question: is there really a rice shortage? I eat rice for dinner almost every night…(no, i’m not Asian. I just like rice.)

Pierre Gosselin (aka AGWscoffer)
April 8, 2008 12:35 am

@Michael Ronayne (09:42:05) :
I just love to speculate…your questions are all on our minds. And I for one do hope it approaches that point.
1. Will the Gore Minimum be comparable to the Dalton or Maunder Minimum?
Trends and past cycles indicate it’s a real possibility, but no one knows.
2. How long will the mainstream media keep the lid on?
I imagine there are a number in the media who are not that entrenched,
and are concerned about not wanting to look really stupid. So if the cooling continues, look for significant defections by the end of the year. Yes, some media are still sane enough to read the writing on the wall.
3. How will the AGW spin machine respond?
They’re desparate, i.e., $300 million campaign, which is tagged for the next 3 years. But just imagine if temps dive 0.5°C in the next year or so. Will Gore and the zealot media really want to invest in a campaign claiming the absolute contrary to reality? This will only make them look even more insane, like someone, only wearing a Speedo, running outside in a snowstorm claiming it’s warm enough for a swim in the lake, urging everyone else to follow. It certainly would be entertaining.
If it gets that far, my guess is that they’ll concede it’s getting cooler for the time being, but only temporarilly, and that the next warm phase will be a real burner because of all the manmade CO2. And this argument will be valid if the cooling does not reach the levels of the 1960s, i.e. meaning a longterm upward trend.

April 8, 2008 1:28 am

The Little Ice Age lasted in the region of 400 years, so while volcanic eruptions made some years or groups of years colder they can not have be the cause of the LIA.
There is certainly a shortage of rice on the international market, although international trade in rice is small compared to overall consumption. The big unknown is China. They claim to have a 50 million ton stockpile, which is several times the annual international trade.
I don’t think we know much about the climate at the time of the Oort Minimum.

Michael Ronayne
April 8, 2008 4:28 am

Note: This comment was flagged as spam, sorry for the delay.
World Rice Supplies And The Run On Rice
I have commented on the price of rice in other posts on this BLOG and the fact that the mainstream media is going to great lengths not to report the reasons why there has been over a 200% increase in the price of rice. Obviously the fact the Government of the United States is subsidizing the conversion corn into energy inefficient ethanol at tax payer expense and the price of oil is creating a near perfect storm, but the winter weather conditions in Asia got the ball rolling.
The Weather Anomaly Which Must Not Be Named
Here are news reports from the Chinese and Vietnamese Communist Party controlled news survives which are the only reliable sources of information on the impact of the winter of 2007-2008 on food supplies. Obviously they have not yet morphed their colors from red to green, how reactionary of them.
China Winter 2007-2008
China’s War on Snow Havoc This is a very long list of cold weather related events in China.
Northern Vietnam faces longest cold spell
China island province faces severe agricultural losses for cold weather
Vietnam Winter 2007-2008
Hai Duong farmers fight cold to save rice
PM calls for drastic measures to cope with cold weather
Ministry steps in to help farmers
Assistance for cold spell-hit people in Lao Cai
Rice export to be kept in moderation
Mekong farmers reap top rice crop
This is the real reason why world food prices, including rice, are going through the roof. If Jan Janssens is correct the winter of 2007-2008 may be looked upon as the good old days in the future.

Tom in Florida
April 8, 2008 4:58 am

“NASA’s convened panel of scientists obviously missed their mark of consensus in predicting cycle 24 would start in March 2008”
According to Algorean science, consensus is always correct and this is just a case the Sun not being aware of it. Perhaps the IPCC should fine the Sun a couple of million Euros for it’s blatant disrespect of the scientists comprising the panel.

April 8, 2008 7:20 am

There has been some debate as whether solar cycle 24 would have high or low numbers of sunspots. NASA issued 2 predictions (high and low).
From the Nasa press release on their high and low predictions for solar cycle 24 (dated April 2007),
What would cause the big predictors to think small.
If solar minimum drags out beyond March, 2008.
What would cause the small predictors to think big.
If either the magnetic field at the sun’s poles increases in strength or geomagnetic activity increases before March, 2008.

As it now April, it seems the low prediction wins. It remains to be seen how low.

Mike Bryant
April 8, 2008 8:32 am

“What would cause the big predictors to think small.
If solar minimum drags out beyond March, 2008.
What would cause the small predictors to think big.
If either the magnetic field at the sun’s poles increases in strength or geomagnetic activity increases before March, 2008.”
Hmmmm, it looks like a small cycle. Good thing the sun has absolutely no effect on climate.

April 8, 2008 10:22 am

The longer minimum goes on, the lower #24 will be. Right now, looks like we can bank on <75 maximum.

April 8, 2008 11:33 am

[…] something new on that solar angle: Solar cycle minimum at the earliest in second half of 2008? « Watts Up With That? And yet another tidbit that I’m predicting will find precious little play in the mainstream media. […]

Old Chemist
April 8, 2008 11:47 am

Since a consensus predicted that the cycle would start in March and the sun has not cooperated, there can be only one explanation — the sun has been bought by big oil.
By the way, I ‘ve been buying stock of natural gas related companies for the past few months. For what its worth, I think it is not too late to get in.

April 8, 2008 12:21 pm

“Algorean science” – I love it. 🙂
Sometimes the humour here is just so delicious and spot on.
Bit like chocolate drops on my wife’s mouth-watering brownies….

April 8, 2008 4:00 pm

[…] Solar cycle minimum at the earliest in second half of 2008? […]

Pamela Gray
April 8, 2008 5:38 pm

I agree. Buy heating oil/gas futures. Invest in coal processing plants. Buy a mature wood lot now because if you heat with wood, it will also get very expensive. There will be a run on wood/pellet stoves so get your’s ordered now. Buy any kind of grain crop future. Buy any kind of fruit crop future. The prices will likely soar.

Evan Jones
April 8, 2008 7:27 pm

The temperature decreases.
Watch the frozen sean, as my pulse go down.
The king has lost its crown.
Cold sun, will never shine.
Freezing clouds, ready to fall.
Killing us all.

April 9, 2008 1:13 am

Cool, I don’t quite understand though. But I do love astronomy. Tell me more!

April 9, 2008 7:41 am

Jeff B.
The axiom is “Occams Razor”.
As you point out very applicable in this instance.

Bernd Felsche
April 9, 2008 9:49 pm

Regarding the Guardian’s 8 billion figure, they’ve revised the figure down to 3 billion (let’s hope that the revised figure was derived more scientifically than the former), but still failed to come to grips with the real issues. Or deliberately skirted them.
The Guardian doesn’t mention the normal, long-term supply fluctuation; just the _predicted_ one of a 3.5% reduction. Nor how much of the rice produced goes to waste before reaching the table.
The 50% increase in price is akin to that of oil. Largely due to speculation and profiteering. As a result, tiny negative changes in supply produce enormous, positive price responses. -3.5% => +50%
OTOH; it takes a large positive increase in availability for a small reduction in price. If not also an increase in price to hedge “instability of supply”.
Methinks that the machine is broken.
A very small number of the three billion would be at risk if their portions of rice were reduced by 3.5%. It’s the speculation that results in their portions being 33% smaller. I guess one could call that making a killing on the commodities market.

April 24, 2008 1:32 pm
April 24, 2008 7:13 pm

I’m not entirely on the side of algorean science on the issue of global warming (and certainly not on that of the magical power of consensus!), but it bears pointing out that whatever may happen to climate because of the solar cycle has nothing to do with the hypothesis that anthropogenic emissions have a radiation forcing impact. (I dislike the misnomer “greenhouse effect” because, as someone has pointed out, the glass in a greenhouse doesn’t do anything like the same thing.) Senifeld and Pandis has a good discussion of the mechanism behind this forcing.
To D. Dodd I will only point out that gas warmed by absorption of longwave radiation does *not* lose energy upon the ensuing expansion, although its temperatures does decrease, since it gains potential energy along with height. On your hypothesis, even increasing solar energy wouldn’t be able to warm the atmosphere, since that would equally result in expansion! Clearly, increasing incoming radiation, whatever the source, tends to warm the system. “Greenhouse” gasses have that effect, because they absorb outgoing longwave radiation from the Earth, which would otherwise escape to space, and re-emit it in a random direction. Sometimes that random direction is directly outward, in which case there is no effect, but usually it is either downward or obliquely into the atmosphere, in which case the net temperature of the surface and the atmosphere is slightly increased. The magnitude and secondary effects of this process are not yet well known, nor is the potentially mitigating effect of changes in the solar cycle, but the basic physics of changing atmospheric temperature as a result of changing atmospheric composition are relatively simple. Now, leftist politicians have latched on to this bit of science to sell scaremongering scenarios of molten ice caps and the like, without any proof. But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater! As usual, there’s a kernel of truth behind the propaganda, and it may even be one that warrants action. Please let me know, or check out Seinfeld & Pandis, if you have any questions. (It’s good to question the conventional wisdom.)

April 24, 2008 7:17 pm

I should add that a parcel of air expanding with height does lose some energy since it does work on its surroundings. However, the work is done on surrounding parcels, so the atmosphere as a whole doesn’t lose energy, which is the relevant point. The overall volume of the atmosphere is constrained by gravity, so that energy re-radiated from some point in the atmosphere must contribute a net increase in temperature.

May 3, 2008 5:09 am

Some great comments on this thread along with some up and coming bon mots
such as Algorean Science and the Gore Minimum.
I have bookmarked these words and I sense some of them will end up in the worldwide lexicon of AGW realists.

M White
May 6, 2008 6:07 am

A question by Michael Ronayne
“I will keep the Solar Cycle 23-24 animation updated. I do suspect that we will be seeing revised predictions very shortly. ”
Next decade “may see no warming” A new computer model developed by German researchers, reported in the journal Nature, suggests the cooling will counter greenhouse warming.

Jeff Corbin
August 10, 2008 6:34 am

No entries since June… March passed, July passed and now it’s August and no blog entries since June. Hasn’t the Gore minimum continued and deepened? Too busy trading corn, oats and hog bladders? Reality is much more exciting than ideology, doctrine and paradigm. So, let me tell you about my 1/2 acre of fingerling potatoes in Philadelphia PA. They turned off 12 days early. In fact they turned off very quickly and by 7/25/08 I realized something beyond the usual factors was amiss, that is when I started to look for answers. I found the answer in the NOAA Solar graphs, which are astonishing…right!? So should we expect a repeat of the winter of 1977, the romance of Victorian winter or something a bit colder.

August 17, 2008 2:52 am

OK, ok, I’ll add something… I’m in California. Silicon valley area, near the coast. Most summers I get tomatoes OK, but it takes some time until July heat gets them going. This year? My “Siberia” tomatoes are doing fine (set fruit as low as 45 degrees or so!) but my pink Brandywine have given me nothing yet. Today I found one small green fruit on it. The Vine is about 5 feet tall and more in diameter, and one stinking green fruit the size of a kiwi. Lots of flowers, no set due to cool temps. Typical August temps are 90’s with the occasional 100 or so. Today was 85 … don’t remember the last 100… I’m getting a few fruit from my Arkansas Travelers, but in general my Tomatoes are just not happy. It’s too cold for them.
At the same time, I have runner beans (that like cool weather – the scarlet type that they grow in England) growing great. They usually sulk in mid summer…
I’ve been shorting oil / energy over the summer (no AC demand!) but expect to put on a big long position in natural gas (XTO, UNG, CHK) as soon as the price crosses the 25 day moving average to the upside. Probably about end of August early September? I’ll be watching grains too, but no position yet.
The first guy to notice commodity and economic cycles moving with sun spot cycles (at least, and write about it!) was William Stanley Jevons about 1878. He is an important economist who created the idea of “marginal utility” (a fundamental concept in economics) and built an early calculating engine.
He is also known for his work on the coal shortage in England which resulted in Jevon’s Paradox: Increasing efficiency does NOT reduce coal consumption! The increased efficiency for any ONE use results in more uses and more users and total consumption goes UP not down! So much for CAFE standards and efficiency improvements reducing oil demand…
BTW, improved efficiency is still a very good thing. You get more stuff done for more people for a given amount of resource. It just does not reduce total demand for coal (or one presumes, oil…). The real solution is more supply or less demand (from higher prices). The law of supply and demand.
I do wish folks would look at what is already known before running off the cliff of conclusion. Oh Well. Don’t complain about them, make money off of them. Mild summers will mean lower fuel demand and good buying opportunities while severe winters will mean stronger run ups in fuels. It is likely that food harvests will also be down. Short food processors and go long basic commodities (as their graphs give the timing…).

August 17, 2008 3:16 am

Oh, and a minor note on the “rice shortage”. Little mentioned was the fact that Bayer Crop Sciences had an escape of a GMO rice that contaminated a nearby foundation seed stock for two of the major varieties planted in the Texas to Arkansas belt. This wasn’t found until too late. Many countries forbade the import of US rice (fearing, rightly, that it could contaminate their stocks…). Most of the U.S. farmers had to choose to roll the dice on more bad rice seeds of unfamiliar varieties or just plant something else for a year or two… lots of them chose to go the proven corn, soy, whatever route.
OK, take one of the largest rice exporters out of the market and the rice importers have shortages. Take many farmers out of the US market and the US production drops. We have plenty of rice, though, due to the lack of exports… California rice was not impacted, being a short grain or mid grain types. Only the long grain from “back east” was a problem. The oriental markets were hit by panic buying from oriental restaurants…
Doesn’t have much to do with global warming (other than to point out that the US production hit was not weather related…).
As a weather side bar: Skiing resorts in South America are reporting great snow this winter (i.e. right now…)!
Oh, and the solar cycle was predicted some time ago; the predicted sunspot minima is already named for the predictor, so it can not be named the AlGore Minima… BUT we can start taking about the “AlGore Cold Period”!

December 23, 2008 5:07 am

actually next solar cycle is predicted to be small. and crops prices were largely dropping last 10 years, with a short up trends. the heating oil and gas were falling like a knife since some people here recommended to pile them up. so they are the agents of oil magnats.
if you read physics more carefully, you’d understand that excess heat will easily irradiate back into space, so Algorean science is a branch of social sciences. the volcanoes make a bit of difference. while actual heat radiation from sun is very constant. it is only the X-rays and visual spots that make a difference into that solar minimum. i think we need to point to a good textbook, as many people have no idea about how things are in reality as opposed to man-made cliches !

%d bloggers like this: