SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Environmentalist Thread
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Maurice Winn who wrote (23164)10/26/2008 7:06:02 PM
From: neolib  Read Replies (1) of 36917
 
Perhaps the 1885 one was that low, a little hard to tell because it's peak looks pretty noisy. The 1895 one looks to me more like a smoothed peak of 90 or so.

But yeah, if those are what you have in mind, I can certainly see that as possible. Would not surprise me in the least. Of course neither would a cycle bigger than the last one surprise me. Your screwball methods of arriving at them are of course just that, screwball. The salient point being that AFAIK, there is no widely accepted theory that has any proven track record for predicting the next solar cycle performance. There are no even moderately accepted theories. There are plenty of crackpot ones. Yours are exceptionally crackpot for obvious reasons, but then you are an exceptional crackpot, so no surprises there.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News