Comments on: Astronomers May Have Cracked the Case of the Quiet, Spotless Sun

By: The Baldchemist

The Baldchemist — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:30:38 +0000

Ah, “God moves in strange ways”. The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.

It must be God’s work if science can’t explain it eh?

By: John A. Jauregui

John A. Jauregui — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 04:34:24 +0000

Google “Rhoads Fairbridge solar inertial motion” to get a better understanding of just what is going on with regard to the sun and its impact on our climate.

By: Before Gore Kneel

Before Gore Kneel — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:14:33 +0000

Wear a hairshirt and walk where you need to go. Revenge is within my grasp.

By: JF

JF — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 21:42:52 +0000

The sun influences the clouds which directly drives the weather. Humans release CO2 from the natural sources within which it resides. The Oceans are to name but one natural sponge which contain a vast amount of stored CO2 which in noteably colder periods they release (and store in warmer periods — a sfety valve of sorts)….The volume of CO2 which humans release from natural sources is from information i’ve seen (but then again who can you believe) in no comparison to the amount released by the planets volcano’s. If CO2 is going to scorch the earth, how ever did we survive the periods of extreme volcanic actvity….oh, there was an ice age wasn’t there when things cooled down a bit?. Every living thing has a pattern, a cycle if you will. Who are we to assume that planets are any exception and that we can in anyway imaginable effect something which has been happening since the dawn of time of itself. Solar minimums and solar maximums are our interpretation of what we think know…..not necessarily what is actually happening.
Just the thoughts of a lay man, trying to make sense of it all…..;-()

By: Bluejay

Bluejay — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:14:35 +0000

Of course the sun is the primary factor that influences our weather. No one would ever dream of denying that obvious fact. However other factors play a huge role in how the sun’s energy is absorbed or reflected. It so happens we are responsible for pumping millions of tons of excess carbon that is retaining the solar energy. That is the only factor we can control.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:49:39 +0000

torres — if you want more info go to http://www.solarcycle24.com. The forums there will lead you to the several old forecasts for cycle 24.

To see what an EPA scientist wanted to say about their recent report, but was prohibited from saying because “the administrator and the administration have already decided on the endangerment path”, go to http://www.examiner.com/x-9111-SF-Environmental-Policy-Examiner~y2009m6d27-Why-the-EPA-should-have-listened-to-Alan-Carlin

A comment filing that includes e-mails detailing the supression of dissent can be found at
http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf

——————

Debate is good and strengthens ideas that are correct.

The “the science is settled” position that many anthropogenic global warming activists take is an indication of the weakness of the science behind their position.

By: Franklin

Franklin — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 01:17:53 +0000

Al Gore is an unabashed opportunist not a scientist, just another inconvenient truth.

By: Candy

Candy — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:57:43 +0000

The first thing I thought of while reading this article was a phrase my mother used occasionally…it’s the “lull before the storm”.

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:11:37 +0000

5. roy norton Says:
June 22nd, 2009 at 1:25 am

Al Gore should be feeling pretty dumb about now!

hmm.. really. should he? and why exactly?

By: John

John — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:31:14 +0000

Unfortunately, this is an area where politics and science mix, and one disrupts the other.

It is not politically correct to say that the sun might have a bigger impact on the earth’s climate than greenhouse gasses. An open-minded scientist evaluating the evidence risks being branded a “denier”, unless he says something bad about carbon to placate the ignorant masses.

If you want to learn more, look up the Wikipedia entry for “Maunder Minimum”. This is not the first time that sunspots have suddenly disappeared.

The truth is, there is a lot that don’t know.

By: roy norton

roy norton — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:25:19 +0000

Al Gore should be feeling pretty dumb about now!

By: Jared Wain Jarvi

Jared Wain Jarvi — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:21:34 +0000

Important stuff to know,science is best when it can help keep a look out at saving our bacon and in this case the bacon to be fride is US.

By: Roberto Ruth

Roberto Ruth — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:17:01 +0000

Agreed, please go on.

By: torres

torres — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:38:45 +0000

Hey JGary Fox, I am curious to know more about what you are talking about. Can you explain it better?

By: J Gary Fox

J Gary Fox — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 22:29:10 +0000

As one who has followed the travils of trying to first forecast Cycle 24 and then explain the dearth of sunspots,I am somewhat sceptical about this new theory.

It was only a few years ago when the experts predicted a very intense Cycle 24 based on their accuracy in prediction Cycle 23.

http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast19oct98_1.htm

“Oct. 19, 1998: Scientists at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center appear to have done a good job of predicting Cycle 23 of the sunspot cycle.

“They expect Cycle 23 to continue until sometime in 2006 when the next cycle, Cycle 24, should begin.”

Too bad the Sun wasn’t invested in the theory.

No expert predicted the late start of Cycle 24 … if indeed it can be “declared” started … nor the deep quiet phase of the sun in all mesurable energies.

We live in exciting Solar times … stay tuned for the conclusion of Cycle 24 … and, if possible, Cycle 25.