Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Solar Cycle 24 dissapointment?  (Read 3742 times)
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6475




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 21, 2011, 06:17:16 AM »

So they don't think there's a connection between the Maunder Minimum and the intense world wide cold wx of that period? They still haven't explained why temperatures on average were higher in the early 1500s, either.

And the highest recorded CO2 levels in 400,000 years has nothing to do with temperatures?
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 4845




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 21, 2011, 07:55:04 AM »

There was an interesting letter in one of our better newspapers this week from a plant molecular biologist. He said that the range of carbon dioxide concentration for photosynthesis is between 100 and 1000 ppm, and the average is currently around 300, below about the optimum in the 500ppm range.

So one does wonder......
Logged
KF5KXT
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: June 21, 2011, 09:15:20 AM »

I geuss the way I always looked at this, is untill I'm dead it doesn't really bother me. One question of debait is, which is worse solar maximum, or solar calm period? An ice age does sound a little scary, but I'l have to see it to believe it. I geuss I'm a little sceptical. After all doesn't it seem like the scientist have been more on the wrong side lately? They don't always know their stuff. It will happen when it happens.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6475




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 21, 2011, 10:08:15 AM »

There was an interesting letter in one of our better newspapers this week from a plant molecular biologist. He said that the range of carbon dioxide concentration for photosynthesis is between 100 and 1000 ppm, and the average is currently around 300, below about the optimum in the 500ppm range.

So one does wonder......

500ppm is maybe good for plants in a green house but not environment. I read of a study where they checked air trapped in ice dating back a little over 400,000 year right now and growing and no where in this recorded history has CO2 been this high or climbed this fast. The "fishbowl" is starting to fill up.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2011, 11:35:45 AM by W8JX » Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
G3RZP
Member

Posts: 4845




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 22, 2011, 01:03:50 AM »

In the final analysis, it's overpopulation that is the real problem.
Logged
STAYVERTICAL
Member

Posts: 875




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: June 26, 2011, 03:42:51 PM »

Scientists are only now (dragged screaming and kicking) admitting what the average ham has known for five years.
This solar cycle 24 is a dud, and may be the beginning of a new cycle of low solar activity.

Five years ago those same scientists were predicting (the computer told them) cycle 24 would be huge.
But, the Sun refused to co-operate with the global warming infected pundits touting global warming and started to dim (0.1percent dimming), and in fact cooled the Earth.

Humanity, as represented by the collective governments, tends to not see great disasters coming, and this is just the latest example.
A global cooling event is, in my opinion, coming on us swiftly, and the winters will be cruel and long, with short summers.
Remember, we are close to the maximum in this solar cycle, so the Sun will become less active in the future, leading to possibly even greater cooling of the Earth.

Sunspot numbers are almost worthless being akin to the Drake equation for calculating the chances of life in the universe, the solar flux figure being much more useful in my opinion, and looking at this, we see the real situation. Figures stubbornly around 70-90 with short excursions upward, refusing to budge much higher.
Over five years of low solar activity I have made 3500 contacts, mostly DX, mostly grayline, so we can survive a solar minimum, but we need to change our expectations, tune our stations as if we are receiving data from deep space probes and enjoy the challenge.

Then, prepare for a general cooling of the Earth, with all its implications, and enjoy our hobby.

73s.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2011, 03:49:51 PM by STAYVERTICAL » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!