Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Welcome to Slider's Dugout -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ig who wrote (15207)	2/8/2009 11:36:38 PM
From: jim_p	Respond to of 50404

events.startcast.com He talks about almost every week. It's a little more than half way through his presentation last Friday. Jim

To: ig who wrote (15207)	2/9/2009 12:31:25 AM
From: Amark$p	Respond to of 50404

Coxe is basing his claims on number of sunspots being low for an extended period of time. And that if we a have low number of sunspots for next 6 weeks COUPLED WITH the low activity for the past year, then this would be lowest average number of sunspots recorded in last 100 years... FWIW, Coxe is taking simplistic approach (#2 below). There are other reasons to believe cooler weather than normal can be expected: 1) Last Solar Cycle (SC23) was longer than normal, and in general, cooler weather follows a long solar cycle. 2) The end of SC23 has been tapering off, and SC 24 has had a low sun spot activity. Low sunspot activity in general leads to cooler weather when it occurs at the end of a SC. 3) There are also 100ish and 200ish years Solar Cycles and we are in a period currently where these cycles may kick in. The prior 100ish year cycle was warm, so more likely that this 100ish year cycle will be cold. Also note, nobody really knows or can forecast whether gloabl cooling will occur. We only have 23 solar cycles of data, not much to go on when making predictions on SC24. However, more evidence seems to be mounting that it is more likely that a global cooling cycle is taking place right now... Don Coxe's comments are thus supported by this evidence. Thus, IMO, global cooling is certainly not a sure thing, but does appear more likely than in the past 50 years. from another board: comment: Call me crazy but I am not willing to bet the house that we are entering a new Dalton minimum like some people have been saying on the Internet based on their "feelings". Of course... nor am I willing to bet that UCAR is right about it ramping up high either but if I had to choose between the two options I'd go with UCAR. reply: It's not just the depths of the minimum. If you'll look, every time a low cycle follows a high cycle the previous cycle is significantly longer and tapers off slowly. Granted, we only have 23 cycles worth of data...but there's a good chance SC23 will have been 13 or 14 years long. SC23 tapered off, indicating the whole solar dynamo isn't quite working the way we normally expect. The sun also has other cycles that take longer than 11(ish) years. There are 100ish and 200ish years cycles...which we're at the end of. Wavelet analysis of the sunspot numbers gives us something that at least LOOKS like the conditions headed into the dalton minimum. We should expect lower numbers based on the length. We should expect lower numbers based on the long taper. We should expect lower numbers based on being at the end of the 100/200 year cycles. Now I know you may be thinking "13 or 14 years isn't THAT much longer than 11 years". BUT the actual average for the length of a sunspot cycle is lower..and cycle 22 was only 9.7. SC23 will have been 30-45% longer than SC22. That's a heck of a difference.