[TECH]:: The sun has gone out - still

The sun continues to behave in ways not seen in modern scientific history.
Nobody interested in such things says nowt.

Now the guardians have started moving the goalposts.

Latest sunspot figures still have the sunspot activity at historically low
levels (about non existent) and the new cycle refusing to start - now
arguably 1 year + late and no sign.

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/

/CONSPIRACY THEORY - THE CATCHER IN THE RYE/NOAA DOESN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW
THAT THE SUN HAS GONE OUT* AND HAVE STARTED FUDGING THEIR GRAPHS.
/ No Change.

An interesting thing is that NOAA suddenly started fudging part of their
graphs! - it seems they don't want people to know that the current results
are far far outside projections.
Up until December's data (published early January) the prediction high/low
bounds were plotted. A reference was given to another page where the basis
of the predictions was discussed. The reference is unchanged and the page of
explanations is unchanged BUT the bounds curves suddenly jumped sideways
about 5 months on the January graph. The graphs are usually updated a few
days into the following month.BUT the January data didn't appear until about
3 weeks into February - something I've not seen before. And, when the graphs
did appear they had the shifted bounds.

SO I emailed the NOAA space prediction people and was told that from now on
they would just be shifting the curve arbitrarily sideways to suit how
things looked. I asked about the discussion on the related page but they
didn't comment.

So I sent them a more detailed comment and pointed out that the old curves
were of some use, but the new curves had no basis in fact, even though the
page said that they did. After several days with no comment on this I sent a
comment to another higher/different NOAA email address gained from their
contact page, pointing out the 'problems". No response yet. I wait with
eager anticipation their ongoing forays into new science.

__________

EVEN WORSE CONSPIRACY THEORY.
This is more towards SciFi / Nature is ganging up on us.
Doesn't mean it may not be true ;-).

* yeah. I know. Of course it hasn't gone out. probably. :-). But it sure is
acting weird like. Some other indicators are showing increasing signs of
anomalous behaviour. Others seem fairy constant.

Maybe it's time to start digging a bunker underneath my swimming pool? I
wonder what the price of lead is like these days?

I ...

Really though - best outlandish guess seems to be a trend towards continuing
low activity with a consequent fall in solar field >  rise in celestial
incoming gamma rays > increased atmospheric aerosols >  aerosols > more
clouds > higher albedo > more cooling > global cooling. Good fun theory
anyway. Should see a trend within a year or few at this rate. Stay tuned.

Sequester your carbon while ye may. If things happen as they may, although
it does seem outlandishly unlikely, 10 or so years from now you'll be able
to get credits for burning carbon.

Hopefully, the fact that the next iceage was statistically and historically
due at about the time of Christ's nativity, and is now about 2000 years
overdue, has got nothing to do with things. Some suggest that the Roman's
saved us all, with their localised spurt of industry and CO2 giving the
about to flip system enough of a kick to keep it stable for about another
2000 years or so - so far, anyway :-). While some people would love to see
thousands of feet of ice on NY, I feel that a need for me to move to, say,
Northern Australia, would be very sad. Bali may not be quite so bad.


               Russell
               6 Feb 2009
                   Remember who told you first.
                   Forget it all if I prove to be wrong :-)




_________________________

1st email to NOAA SWPC:


NOAA
Space Weather Prediction Centre.


Your web page http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/
shows the ongoing "ISES Solar Cycle Sunspot Number Progression", and
includes prediction bounds.
It is intimated on this page that the prediction bounds are based on the May
2 2008 prediction update. [This is not actually absolutely stated but this
is the very clear conclusion liable to be drawn by anyone who would be
interested in looking at this page.]

Your page http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/SolarCycle/SC24/index.html explains the
basis of the May 2 2008 predictions.

Up until the December 31st graph update the prediction curves have remained
consistent for some months, apart from predictions prior to the current date
being removed. [I personally think that leaving the prior prediction curves
in place would be useful, but that's not what I'm writing about.]

On the January 31st graph update (altered on February 24th) the prediction
curves appear to have been have been time shifted 'right' by about 5 months*
but the claimed prediction dates have not altered and the prediction page
has not changed.

You may wish to either move the prediction curves back to their prior
location or, if the basis of prediction has in fact changed, update the
prediction note on the graph and the data on the prediction page.


  regards


              Russell McMahon
              New Zealand.

* Based solely on visual inspection the curves appear to be slightly
different in shape than previously and may represent a whole new set of
predictions. The much longer than usual delay in publishing the prior
month's data suggests that major changes may have been made.



--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist