[Closed] At the current rate of deterioration in the global weather systems patterns!

For stucol, who clearly missed it the first time...

😉

To be fair, I don't think kaesae is trying to make wild claims - it sounds to me as if he is telling us what he's read or heard to start a discussion.

He admitted he was not well informed earlier.

Our nearest star is 24,938,000,000,000 miles away.

[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit ]um no it isn't[/url]

^^^ next nearest after the sun- this was discussed earlier in the thread

I don't think kaesae is trying to make wild claims

next nearest after the sun- this was discussed earlier in the thread

Okay, forgive me for not reading reams of what is quite frankly nonsense 😀

reasonable point and well made

I guess this thread proves that not all "theories" are equally valid.

This thread isn't about theories is supposed to be about awareness and looking into current matters. I have proposed a possible alternative cause for what is happening to this world and solar system.

A while ago I started a thread about my stellar realignment theory! in that thread I concluded by saying that time would tell and since the time is almost here we could simply wait.

Now the time of these global events is even closer and we will of course have to wait even less time to experience them, however I will say this, keep an eye on Japan and see what happens.

We could all say this, that and the next thing, however as history has proven over and over again, time will tell!

This thread isn't about theories is supposed to be about awareness and looking into current matters.

Realy? Every post you have made has been theories or odd questions. (which you never answer)

And surely if we want to do [i]something[/i] about climate change then a solid theory about what is causing it is pretty essential.

If it is man made, then we act to lower our emissions etc.

If it is some unavoidable natural cycle, and we can have no influence on it at all, then we can act on defending ourselves from the worst of it.

A while ago I started a thread about my stellar realignment theory! in that thread I concluded by saying that time would tell and since the time is almost here we could simply wait.

Yep. Very nearly here. Post back in another 500 million years and we'll see if you were right.

You might want to set a reminder...

I have proposed a possible alternative cause for what is happening to this world and solar system.

With all due respect, I think that's a bit of an exaggeration.

You've not "proposed an alternative cause," you've just made up something random based on (by your own admission) a weak understanding of, well, just about everything to be honest. Your "alternative cause" is about as valid as "well, there's a lot more wicked people dying these days so Hell's getting hotter to accommodate them, which is causing global warming."

A number of people have patiently explained facets of geology and astrophysics to you, and suggested that maybe, just maybe, your "alternative cause" is at best speculative science fiction. Now, you don't have to take all that at face value of course, but you said you had a desire to learn and increase your knowledge, so listening to people who [i]actually know things[/i] might be a good place to start perhaps?

Or if you want to start on something simpler in your quest for knowledge, you could do worse than reading [url= http://theoatmeal.com/comics/apostrophe ]this[/url].

I will say this, keep an eye on Japan and see what happens

Ten percent of the world's active volcanoes are found in Japan, which lies in a zone of extreme crustal instability. They are formed by subduction of the Pacific Plate and the Philippine Sea Plate. As many as 1,500 earthquakes are recorded yearly, and magnitudes of four to six on the Richter scale are not uncommon. Minor tremors occur almost daily in one part of the country or another, causing slight shaking of buildings.

if the fate of mankind will be communicated through wikipedia & youtube we deserve damnation.. 😆

as for arguing over who's better informed on a MTB forum 🙄

kaesae: do you know if any work has been done to look for any correlations between this work and what it shows and the movement of the stars or other astral bodies?

Well, our relative movement amongst all the other astral bodies and earth's biological diversity has been examined:
[url= http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/24/svensmark_supernova_life_on_earth/ ]A lay-layman's guide to:[/url]
[url= http://calderup.wordpress.com/2012/04/24/a-stellar-revision-of-the-story-of-life/ ]A layman's guide to:[/url]
[url=ftp://ftp2.space.dtu.dk/pub/Svensmark/MNRAS_Svensmark2012.pdf]A paper.[/url]

This thread isn't about theories

Why are there so many of your "theories" in it then ?

[its] supposed to be about awareness

Learn some actual science and get some then ?

I have proposed a possible alternative cause for what is happening to this world and solar system.

Sorry, but no, you haven't.

A while ago I started a thread about my stellar realignment theory! in that thread I concluded by saying that time would tell and since the time is almost here we could simply wait.

So no scientific knowledge involved in that either then by the sound of it ?
Just .... Let's wait and see.

Now the time of these global events is even closer and we will of course have to wait even less time to experience them,

How long do we have to wait then ?

however I will say this, keep an eye on Japan and see what happens.

Go on then, What's going to happen in Japan ?
Enlighten everyone.

We could all say this, that and the next thing, however as history has proven over and over again, time will tell!

What does that even mean ?

We're all DOOMED!

I've concluded that kaesae is actually an elaborate deep geek troll.

So much effort though! There are far easier ways to troll geeks, as a great man once said:

[img] [/img]

Let's recap so we can evaluate, what did we learn? actually we did not manage to learn or accomplish anything of value.

We did of course discover who are the winners and who is the LLOOOOSSEERR, so some people will be well chuffed with themselves, however if we look at energy / man power in relation to anything accomplished in a physical sense or even investment vs potential return, what we have in real terms to show for our efforts, is the fact that we are all undeniably retarded!

Edukator, how would you like to help me research something? I have sensitive eyes so can't spend too much time in front of monitors.

However I do have an idea that could shed some more light on the authenticity of the world flood myth.

Any chance you could loan your expertise in geology to my researching the myths?

We did of course discover who are the winners and who is the LLOOOOSSEERR, so some people will be well chuffed with themselves

I'm really not sure why you choose to paint it like that. It is a discussion, not a competition.

You were the one that told me to "go and research the ideas I have presented and contribute to the thread" so I did:

You said the Earth's core was heating up, but I researched (the link you provided) and found it was cooling down.

You posted a video to support the idea that the Milky Way could heat up the Earth's Core - but actually it stated that passage through the Milky Way might be linked to periods of cooling.

You said the sun was putting out more energy, I researched and found it wasn't..

You said seismic activity was increasing, I researched and found it wasn't.

You said volcanic activity was increasing, I researched and found it wasn't either.

I'm sorry if you didn't like my answers, but that was what I found. I'm not trying to score points or "win" - just have a discussion that illuminates, educates and entertains.

Let's recap so we can evaluate, what did we learn? actually we did not manage to learn or accomplish anything of value.

Personally I've learnt a fair and enjoyed the thread. Sorry if you didn't. 🙁

Perhaps you are correct Grahams, however it is not hard to prove anything these days and wikipedia will simply say what ever is popular.

How about if we start off with something simple, say for example sunspots?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspot

Can we learn anything about our solar system or the weather patterns on this planet from sun spots or can we at least rule them out as being important to any research relative to weather patterns?

Perhaps you are correct Grahams,[b] however it is not hard to prove anything these days [/b]and wikipedia will simply say what ever is popular.

And yet you seem to find it impossible to prove any of the theories you have been coming up with ??

Wierd that isn't it ?

You are correct Nealglover and I pronounce you the winner!

Did you bother to read about Sun spots and can you tell me if a low or break in sun spot activity is generally followed by a high?

it is not hard to prove anything these days and wikipedia will simply say what ever is popular.

That's why I gave you links to folk like the British Geological Survey, US Geological Survey, Smithsonian Institute, Berkeley, and The Royal Society.

Wiki is actually a good place to start, but only if you follow the citations and check the sources.

How about if we start off with something simple, say for example sunspots?

How about we clear up your "several world flood" theory before we start on another one?
When were these floods? Are you talking about early Earth before there was life on it or something more recent?

(actually I'm off to bed but I'll be interested to hear what you say tomorrow)

Don't know whether this is relevant, but its's weather related so I'll post it here anyway and see if there's any answer.
It's fairly widely accepted that cloud seeding, or weather engineering, were part of the Beijing Olympics delivery plan, but does anyone know if it was used or considered for the London games.
I'd reckon that the technology would have been available, at least as a sub-contracted service. And every other threat seems to have been taken seriously. Until August, we were having a very wet summer, but then it seemed to brighten up significantly in the East London area whilst unexpected downpours broke out in surrounding locations.
I also don't know what the legal implications would be if it was later shown that manipulated weather had impacted crops or other economic factors? Would the insurance industry be exempt from pay outs if there was shown to be unnatural causes?

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/409794/weather-engineering-in-china/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_seeding

Can we learn anything about our solar system or the weather patterns on this planet from sun spots or can we at least rule them out as being important to any research relative to weather patterns?

You have been told this before

it is hard to debate with someone who says outlandish stuff, presents no evidence, explains the theory in very vague terms and then dismisses any fact as it simply being not hard to prove anything these days
Here I go again
[img] [/img]

http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

[img] [/img]
Figure 1: Reconstructed cosmic radiation (solid line before 1952) and directly observed cosmic radiation (solid line after 1952) compared to global temperature (dotted line). All curves have been smoothed by an 11 year running mean (Krivova 2003).
http://www.skepticalscience.com/cosmic-rays-and-global-warming.htm
[img] [/img]
the top figure compares temperature to solar cycles. The bottom figure plots the difference between temperature and solar cycle length, showing a strong divergence in the mid 1970s (Lassen 1999).

Did you bother to read about Sun spots and can you tell me if a low or break in sun spot activity is generally followed by a high?

[url= http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Is+a+low+or+break+in+sun+spot+activity+is+generally+followed+by+a+high%3F ]answer to your question is here[/url]

Loum I have no idea, you want to help with me investigate our solar system and beyond?

OK junkyard good points you are also the winner!

Can we get back to researching now?

Are all of these from the same website? and are we currently experiencing a period of reduced or nominal sunspot activity?

You know, there's a pattern here.

kaesae: wild unsubstantiated theory.

STW collective: actually, here's a load of well researched proof as to why that's implausible.

kaesae: *ignores that completely*, here's another wholly unrelated wild unsubstantiated theory.

STW collective: here's yet more proof, we took a while looking this up so we're sure it's right.

kaesae: Yes, but what about (something else entirely)

Repeat ad nauseum.

I put it to you, sir, that you are either a troll or a loon. And my money's on the former. You have no interest in learning anything, you just like wasting people's time. And for that reason, I'm oot.

Do you want to know about sunspot activity or the suns output as they are not the same thing

Yes same website
http://www.skepticalscience.com/

This can be viewed as ether impartial science or pro global warming if you wish.
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/SunspotCycle.shtml

for sun spots but they have minimal affect on TSI Total Solar Irradiance

Please just use google

At the left side of the sunspot page on wikipedia there is a reconstruction of sunspot activity

"Analysis of tree rings has revealed a detailed picture of past solar cycles: Dendrochronologically dated radiocarbon concentrations have allowed for a reconstruction of sunspot activity dating back 11,400 years, far beyond the four centuries of available, reliable records from direct solar observation"

at about 9,000 to 10,000 bc there is an exceptionally high amount of sunspot activity, is that what the graph means?

Its solar activity and not sun spot activity they have measured and they are not the same thing.
We nned to look at the sun for the later but we can use proxy measures [ ie dendrochronology] for the former

EDIT:Whilst there is a relationship between sunspots it is not the case that they affect output in the sense I think you mean and they are interrelated but separate things
Say floods and rain we could have no floods and yet have more rain than last year when we had three floods- same with sun spots - sun spots does not necessarily by itself indicate solar output any more than flood measures tell us how much rain we have had this year.

Junkyard, what if we say that the effects that we are seeing on earth in our atmosphere could be caused by stellar forces.

If this is or is not the case, should be able to be answered by evaluation and then inclusion for further analysis or exclusion due to elimination.

To me the characteristic of sun spots are similar to that of a tornado, hurricane, or any other wind based vortex. However they are magnetic in structure.

Firstly I would like to better understand sun spots, is a sun spot or is it not a vortex of magnetic energy that passes through the sun? or does it only exist within the sun?

[quote=kaesae]At the left side of the sunspot page on wikipedia there is a reconstruction of sunspot activity

[quote=kaesae]however it is not hard to prove anything these days and wikipedia will simply say what ever is popular.

It's laughable.

Really, are you actually serious.?

I have no idea what you mean by stellar forces but the second graph above is about comic* radiation and how it is declining but temperature increasing,

EDIT: *I mean cosmic but it seemed like a good typo to leave in for this thread 😀

Cosmic forces, energy fields, magnetic or electromagnetic waves or fileds, stellar forces, any force that is out there in the universe,

stellar stel·lar
? ?[stel-er] Show IPA
adjective
1.
of or pertaining to the stars; consisting of stars.

Forces
Is this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force

*checks in*

Where did we get to on the "several world floods"...

Oh.

Never mind.

*checks out and goes to bed*

Sides with Cougar - you must be a troll 🙄
Yes i know what Stellar means and I know what force means my only confusion is WTF you mean when you use them together.
See above graph ...leaves thread

Grahams we are waiting for a response from Edukator , since edukator has knowledge of geology his input would be very valuable and make any research much more easy, however if we don't hear from him because he is too busy or doesn't want to be involved, then we can continue without him, all be it at a slower pace.

I don't see how seismic activity can be reducing? we are seeing major earth quakes in very close proximity in terms of time scale to each other.

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/10_largest_world.php

Largest earth quakes in the world since 1900, 6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that? 2004, 2005, 2007, then 2010, 2011, 2012, so for 3 years in a row we have had major seismic activity in the form of the most powerful earth quakes since 1900. I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

Perhaps it's becuase you're ignorant of what a logical fallacy is and can't see just how many you are making? And no, I'm not about to tell you about them, other people have defined them better than I could and put them on the web all you have to do is look.

6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that?

Grahams we are waiting for a response from Edukator , since edukator has knowledge of geology his input would be very valuable and make any research much more easy

Okay. Though perhaps if you suggested why you believe there have been "several world floods", (e.g. a source, or evidence or logical reasoning) or clarified what you mean (how many is "several"? when did they occur?) then Edukator would be better able to answer you.

I just don't see how seismic activity can be decreasing?

It's not [i]decreasing[/i]. It's just not [i]increasing[/i].

since 1900, 6 out of 17 earth quakes have happened since 2000, what percentage is that?

About 35% - but the percentage of big earthquakes falling in an arbitrary time period means very little.

From the same figures you could likewise say:
40% of the top 5 occurred in the early 1960s
or 50% of the top 8 earthquakes occurred between 1952-65

If you have read the USGS/BGS links I posted you'll know there are a number of external factors that must be considered when looking at the straight numbers for earthquakes:

- the number of seismographs and monitoring stations has increased exponentially since 1900, and the technology is more refined and sensitive, so more and more quakes of smaller and smaller scales are now recorded (the USGS mention they can even tell when explosives are used in mines!)

- earthquakes in populated areas are more likely to be recorded, so as population grows and spreads we get more reports

- global communications means we are much more likely to hear about earthquakes these days

- the numbers of recorded quakes and tremors takes a steep drop during the periods of the first and seconds world war, because people had other things to attend to.

All that applies to volcanoes too by the way.

But analysis of the data means BGS can happily state:

"Recent devastating earthquakes in Haiti, Chile and China, as well as magnitude 7+ earthquakes in Indonesia and California, might give the impression that earthquake activity is increasing.

In fact, a quick look at earthquake statistics over the last 20 years shows that this is not the case.

On average there are about 15 earthquakes every year with a magnitude of 7 or greater.

As with any almost random phenomena, the number of earthquakes each year varies slightly from this average, but in general, there are no dramatic variations. "

-- http://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/earthquakes/earthquakeActivity.html

Great! Can you tell me who funds the BGS? and are there other sources that can be used preferably ones that have independent funding to varify what is being said?

All of your arguments are aimed at being right

What exactly [i]is[/i] the aim of your "research" kaesae, if you're not aiming to be right?

If you want wrong answers I can give you lots of those too.

I wouldn't bother, he's already got plenty.

If you want wrong answers I can give you lots of those too.

Don't worry about that, he's got it covered already I think.