|
Post by dusty09 on Mar 12, 2010 8:27:08 GMT
If you watch the video again you'll notice that Corbyn does not claim to have predicted the M-class flares but only the effect of the flares, once they had happened, on Earth's weather. That was my point, from memory his forecast was issued about a month before and was right on the money. When it arrived the snow was definitely more severe than the professionals forecast. He may not have known the magnitude of the activity on the sun, therefore my question remains what is he looking at? I've noticed the K index ramping up at the moment, again from memory this peaked when the sun was active in January, can you forecast the K index, can this be correlated with the suns activity? I'm not interested in the politics but am intrigued by Piers' results and how he gets them
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 13, 2010 4:19:13 GMT
He may not have known the magnitude of the activity on the sun, therefore my question remains what is he looking at? ... I'm not interested in the politics but am intrigued by Piers' results and how he gets them He looks at the past solar activity/climate combination and compares it to the present. That is over simplified of course and some of what he does is proprietary.
|
|
|
Post by kiwistonewall on Mar 15, 2010 4:24:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dusty09 on Mar 17, 2010 22:57:34 GMT
Cheers, not sure when I'm going to get a chance to digest that, but it'll keep me occupied for a while. For our North American friends I've stumbled over the following www.aerology.com/national.aspxWould be interested to know how accurate this turns out, if scpg02 is at a loose end that is.
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 18, 2010 2:17:58 GMT
Cheers, not sure when I'm going to get a chance to digest that, but it'll keep me occupied for a while. For our North American friends I've stumbled over the following www.aerology.com/national.aspxWould be interested to know how accurate this turns out, if scpg02 is at a loose end that is. [/i][/ul] I can't seem to get the map to work.
|
|
|
Post by dusty09 on Mar 20, 2010 22:48:02 GMT
A snippet of what you are missing. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by scpg02 on Mar 21, 2010 2:34:59 GMT
Nice to see what I was missing the other day. Maybe I'll try again.
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Apr 10, 2010 23:07:36 GMT
If you watch the video again you'll notice that Corbyn does not claim to have predicted the M-class flares but only the effect of the flares, once they had happened, on Earth's weather. That was my point, from memory his forecast was issued about a month before and was right on the money. When it arrived the snow was definitely more severe than the professionals forecast. He may not have known the magnitude of the activity on the sun, therefore my question remains what is he looking at? I've noticed the K index ramping up at the moment, again from memory this peaked when the sun was active in January, can you forecast the K index, can this be correlated with the suns activity? I'm not interested in the politics but am intrigued by Piers' results and how he gets them If Piers sees the same things I am astronomically, then he already knows that a global cooling cycle for the world is on tap starting officially in about six (6) years.
|
|
|
Post by dusty09 on Apr 15, 2010 22:28:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sentient on Apr 17, 2010 12:44:16 GMT
And to return the favor to our European friends: Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Apr 18, 2010 19:06:50 GMT
Solar correlation who would have guessed while examining CO2 with litany of modeled results. "Flowrate of World’s 4th Largest River Linked to Solar Cycle " "They find that the unusual minimum of solar activity observed in recent years has a correlation with very low water levels seen in the Paraná’s flowrate. Additionally they report historical evidence of low water levels during the Little Ice Age. They also consider flowrates for three other rivers (Colorado, San Juan and Atuel), as well as snow levels in the Andes. They conclude, after eliminating secular trends and smoothing out the solar cycle, there is a strong positive correlation between the residuals of both the Sunspot Number and the flowrates of these rivers as well." www.thegwpf.org/the-observatory/769-flowrate-of-worlds-4th-largest-river-linked-to-solar-cycle.html
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 18, 2010 20:24:13 GMT
Thank you. That is the study I had read when referring to the Missippi River from KSU. I KNEW that it affected both the South American and North American continents. OF course, the line stops there and in no way shape or form could it affect Asia/Africa etal. OR could it? Did NASA have a study showing the Nile?......Maybe?.....
|
|
|
Post by trbixler on Apr 24, 2010 17:10:04 GMT
" Saturday, April 24, 2010 Sun back in a mini-slumber in the transition between solar cycles 23 and 24 The sun is back in a mini-slumber with 9 straight sunspotless days and now 786 for the transition from cycle 23 to 24 (the last 4 cycle transitions had between 220 and 310 such days). " "It is established from observation that solar cycles longer than the 11 year average are followed by later cycles of lesser intensity, and, commensurately, a cooler climate[ii]. Solar Cycle 23 was 3 years longer than Cycle 22. Based on the theory originally proposed by Friis-Christensen and Lassen, this implies that cooling of up to 2.20 C may occur during Cycle 24 (compared with temperatures during Cycle 23) for the mid-latitude grain-growing areas of the northern hemisphere[iii]. " icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog
|
|
|
Post by socold on Apr 24, 2010 19:46:54 GMT
So "Joe" is just going to ignore that "the theory originally proposed by Friis-Christensen and Lassen" failed to work out and just cite it anyway?
|
|
|
Post by glc on Apr 24, 2010 23:42:50 GMT
" Saturday, April 24, 2010 Sun back in a mini-slumber in the transition between solar cycles 23 and 24 The sun is back in a mini-slumber with 9 straight sunspotless days and now 786 for the transition from cycle 23 to 24 (the last 4 cycle transitions had between 220 and 310 such days). "
"It is established from observation that solar cycles longer than the 11 year average are followed by later cycles of lesser intensity, and, commensurately, a cooler climate[ii]. Solar Cycle 23 was 3 years longer than Cycle 22. Based on the theory originally proposed by Friis-Christensen and Lassen, this implies that cooling of up to 2.20 C may occur during Cycle 24 (compared with temperatures during Cycle 23) for the mid-latitude grain-growing areas of the northern hemisphere[iii]. "
Solar Cycle 20 was more than a year longer than Cycle 19 which implies that temperatures should have declined by ~0.7 deg. during Cycle 21 (1976-86). They didn't.
Why do people persist with this nonsense when it's so easy to show that the claimed relationship simply doesn't exist.
|
|