|
Post by nonentropic on Jun 6, 2018 5:15:46 GMT
I am in your camp but appreciate the clarification.
That is not to say that we have as a species gone over and above our likely trajectory of environmental impact. so as to say, had a significant level of mission creep as would normally be defined by evolution and nature.
Being in my 60's I view this positively.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 7, 2018 21:53:19 GMT
Interesting set of papers ... starting at Tallblokes Talkshop... tallbloke.wordpress.com/ "Posted: May 23, 2018 by tallbloke in Celestial Mechanics, censorship, climate, Cycles, Forecasting, Solar physics, solar system dynamics 73
Our hypothesis that solar variation is affected by planetary motion, developed over the last 10 years here at the talkshop received a boost today when one of its main detractors, Anthony Watts, published an article declaring that solar cycle 24 is entering minimum.
I’ve left a comment there, something I rarely do since the debacle back in 2014 when Anthony and his sidekick Willis attacked our work and banned discussion of our solar-planetary theory. "[ Naut note - 'solar-planetary theory' is a euphemism for "barycenter" which is for some reason as welcome as a Trump hat in UC Berkley] However that takes us to: WUWT..... " Are we headed for a deep solar minimum? Anthony Watts / May 23, 2018
Have you been keeping an eye on Sol lately? One of the top astronomy stories for 2018 may be what’s not happening, and how inactive our host star has become. The strange tale of Solar Cycle #24 is ending with an expected whimper: as of May 8th, the Earthward face of the Sun had been spotless for 73 out of 128 days thus far for 2018, or more than 57% of the time. This wasn’t entirely unexpected, as the solar minimum between solar cycle #23 and #24 saw 260 spotless days in 2009 – the most recorded in a single year since 1913."wattsupwiththat.com/2018/05/are-we-headed-for-a-deep-solar-minimum/and a comment there from Roger... "The timing of this descent into solar minimum was correctly predicted by the planetary orbital resonance model we produced and published in 2013. Many said at the time that we were wrong because low cycles are long cycles, and anyway the planets can’t affect the Sun because they are too small and far away. While it’s not proof, correct forecasts are valid supporting evidence for a hypothesis. I’ve added the 2013-2018 data to the 2013 plot/forecast below in faint red."and that takes us to the source paper..... "A mathematical model of the sunspot cycle for the past 1000 yr R. J. Salvador Vancouver, Canada Correspondence to: R. J. Salvador (rj_salvador@hotmail.com) Received: 8 October 2013 – Revised: 27 October 2013 – Accepted: 30 October 2013 – Published: 15 November 2013 Abstract. Using many features of Ian Wilson’s Tidal Torque theory, a mathematical model of the sunspot cycle has been created that reproduces changing sunspot cycle lengths and has an 85 % correlation with the sunspot numbers from 1749 to 2013. The model makes a reasonable representation of the sunspot cycle for the past 1000 yr, placing all the solar minimums in their right time periods. More importantly, I believe the model can be used to forecast future solar cycles quantitatively for 30 yr and directionally for 100 yr. The forecast is for a solar minimum and quiet Sun for the next 30 to 100 yr. The model is a slowly changing chaotic system with patterns that are never repeated in exactly the same way. Inferences as to the causes of the sunspot cycle patterns can be made by looking at the model’s terms and relating them to aspects of the Tidal Torque theory and, possibly, Jovian magnetic field interactions." www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/117/2013/prp-1-117-2013.pdfWhich has a very close relationship to Theo's work here.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 8, 2018 4:57:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 8, 2018 5:19:11 GMT
The U.S. just had its warmest May in history, blowing past 1934 Dust Bowl record
[ Snip ] I find that very hard to believe .....
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jun 8, 2018 20:28:31 GMT
A couple of questions for the usual suspects. Does anyone know where/if there is any info on VEI and lighting strikes by year. It would stand to reason that if there is a correlation between solar/grand solar minimums and volcanic activity it would show up in the VEI. It certainly "seems" like we have seen an increase of late in volcanic activity.
It would also stand to reason that if cosmic rays really do seed cloud formation down here on earth we would most likely see an increase in lighting strikes.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 20, 2018 1:10:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 20, 2018 10:57:23 GMT
Ratty, I hope you didn't sell your coat...
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 20, 2018 11:44:36 GMT
Ratty, I hope you didn't sell your coat... [ Snip ] NEC ** ..... Alice Springs Weather History Surprised there is that much water vapour around The Alice. ** Not Even Close
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 20, 2018 15:42:46 GMT
65% chance btw....not far off 50/50...
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 24, 2018 16:31:24 GMT
I wonder how much is cherry picking and how much is actual real change?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 7, 2018 7:55:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 7, 2018 8:56:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 7, 2018 9:47:15 GMT
It hasn't snowed in Sydney (same latitude) since 1836. What does this mean?
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jul 7, 2018 10:51:35 GMT
It hasn't snowed in Sydney (same latitude) since 1836. What does this mean? The clip was snow in South Africa. Sydney being a lot further North but lower altitude could be next.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jul 7, 2018 12:50:15 GMT
It hasn't snowed in Sydney (same latitude) since 1836. What does this mean? The clip was snow in South Africa. Sydney being a lot further North but lower altitude could be next. I'll concede that Sydney might be an inch further North than Cape Town but I agree on altitude.
|
|