Check out the TB2K CHATROOM, open 24/7               Configuring Your Preferences for OPTIMAL Viewing
  To access our Email server, CLICK HERE

  If you are unfamiliar with the Guidelines for Posting on TB2K please read them.      ** LINKS PAGE **



*** Help Support TB2K ***
via mail, at TB2K Fund, P.O. Box 24, Coupland, TX, 78615
or


Earth Chgs It's not the Sun (directly) bringing a little ice age.
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901

    It's not the Sun (directly) bringing a little ice age.

    https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2017...is-increasing/

    Atmospheric Radiation is Increasing
    DECEMBER 11, 2017 / DR.TONY PHILLIPS
    Dec. 9, 2017: Since the spring of 2015, Spaceweather.com and the students of Earth to Sky Calculus have been flying balloons to the stratosphere over California to measure cosmic rays. Soon after our monitoring program began, we quickly realized that radiation levels are increasing. Why? The main reason is the solar cycle. In recent years, sunspot counts have plummeted as the sun’s magnetic field weakens. This has allowed more cosmic rays from deep space to penetrate the solar system. As 2017 winds down, our latest measurements show the radiation increase continuing apace–with an interesting exception, circled in yellow:



    In Sept. 2017, the quiet sun surprised space weather forecasters with a sudden outburst of explosive activity. On Sept. 3rd, a huge sunspot appeared. In the week that followed, it unleashed the strongest solar flare in more than a decade (X9-class), hurled a powerful CME toward Earth, and sparked a severe geomagnetic storm (G4-class) with Northern Lights appearing as far south as Arkansas. During the storm we quickened the pace of balloon launches and found radiation dropping to levels we hadn’t seen since 2015. The flurry of solar flares and CMEs actually pushed some cosmic rays away from Earth.

    Interestingly, after the sun’s outburst, radiation levels in the stratosphere took more than 2 months to fully rebound. Now they are back on track, increasing steadily as the quiet sun resumes its progress toward Solar Minimum. The solar cycle is not expected to hit rock bottom until 2019 or 2020, so cosmic rays should continue to increase, significantly, in the months and years ahead. Stay tuned for updates as our balloons continue to fly.

    Technical note: The radiation sensors onboard our helium balloons detect X-rays and gamma-rays in the energy range 10 keV to 20 MeV. These energies, which span the range of medical X-ray machines and airport security scanners, trace secondary cosmic rays, the spray of debris created when primary cosmic rays from deep space hit the top of Earth’s atmosphere.
    https://www.swri.org/press-release/n...does-not-exist



    The sun is in fact going quiet. Sunspots are in fact going into solar minimum levels. Our magnetosphere has weakened and our atmosphere has been shrinking. The interstellar wind has shifted by 11°.

    The significance of the Earth Sky Calculus data is twofold.
    1. The sun's output protects the earth from interstellar ionized particles.
    2. Lacking sufficient strength to push those ionized particles away from Earth we end up with significant increases of those particles in the upper atmosphere.

    Those particles in turn increase the incidence of cosmic spallation creating a multitude of isotopes in the upper atmosphere, many of which combine with other atoms creating slightly heavier atoms in some cases, and in others atoms that increase the earth's albedo.


    The sun for its part is already struggling, so when combined with that higher albedo, we get less energy impacting the earth. We also end up with a shift in the spectrum that impinges the earth due to refraction and reflection. The end result of this is climate change towards the colder end of the spectrum on the whole.

    But that's just part of it. With that decrease in energy the oceans thermohaline currents change as the Pacific and Indian oceans that power them have less energy to absorb.

    Another mechanism that protected us is the interplanetary magnetic field. That too is weakened. The IMF and the solar wind powered the heliosphere bowshock. NASA knew it wasn't there as early as 2010. The change in direction of and composition of the interstellar wind was their first clue. The IBEX project confirmed it.

    It was that same time frame (2010-2012) that the narrative changed from global warming to climate change. Ask yourself if that was a coincidence?

    Data from previous solar minimums is often quoted. But haven't you ever wondered where that data came from? It came from sequestered beryllium 10 in trees and ice cores. Some places will tell you that. What they generally don't tell you is how it is the cosmic particles/radiation got here in the first place nor the significance of it.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  2. #2
    Thanks for posting this. Interesting.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    The loose buckle of the bible belt
    Posts
    11,211
    When might we see an effect at ground level?

    Any forecast of the cosmic radiation that we'll be receiving at the top of the atmosphere at the next solar maximum in about six years?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901
    When might we see an effect at ground level?

    Any forecast of the cosmic radiation that we'll be receiving at the top of the atmosphere at the next solar maximum in about six years?
    Extrapolate the earth sky graph reversing the time line assuming the sun recovers.
    rant/
    Consider this;
    The earth's atmosphere cycles in expansion and contraction phases. Basic thermodynamics is responsible for that. Heat it up it expands, remove the heat it contracts. As it contracts more cosmic spallation occurs as the energy from the sun is insufficient to keep out the interstellar wind/particles creating more cosmic spallation events.
    This in turn increases the earth's albedo when that causes denser gases/isotopes to form. That in turn causes a shift in the spectral bandwidth (frequency) of light/electromagnetic energy hitting the surface.
    That in turn changes the velocity of light in the medium (atmosphere) due to denser regions. That sets up for a higher refraction of light in accordance with snells law.
    Index of refraction (n) = velocity of light in a vacuum (c)/ velocity of light in a medium (v).
    Sells law then becomes;
    n1/n2=sin°2/sin°1.

    You can do the math yourself but the end result is increased reflection and refraction in the atmosphere. That changes both the quantity and quality of energy plant life receives.
    That is known demonstrable science. You see it every time you witness a rainbow or a reflection of light off of water.

    Yet the normal suspects go on for a month of Sundays about cold and sunspots.
    You can build a million dollar green house, but if you do not take into account the quantity and quality of light it will be nothing more than a nice warm place to starve. A couple of tons of seeds will do you no good if the plant won't grow. Science sans the fiction.

    Any old growth tree will demonstrate this if you core it. Wider rings, more growth that season, narrower rings less growth. Again demonstrable empirical science.

    Let us all pray the sun turns around and fires back up in the next cycle as between global warming and new ice age types, the means for survival if it doesn't is being buried in rhetoric and ego.
    /rant
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    37,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Extrapolate the earth sky graph reversing the time line assuming the sun recovers.
    Sun won't be recovering for another 20-30 years.
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by packyderms_wife View Post
    Sun won't be recovering for another 20-30 years.
    Possibly, but it's impossible for any to state it one way or another with assurance. Trends for solar cycles have definitely been down, but past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    37,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Possibly, but it's impossible for any to state it one way or another with assurance. Trends for solar cycles have definitely been down, but past performance is no guarantee of future performance.
    Actually my statement is based upon an article I posted here sometime back that was published in 1967 about solar activity and it's effect on the earth's tilt, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions. The gov't has known as early as the 1950's that an ice age was coming which was why there was such huge rush to get out into space. It has to do with our solar systems position in the galaxy, remember we're not just revolving around a star, we're also revolving around the huge maw of a monster black hole. Of which we'll get a glimpse in 2018.

    Our solar system is currently residing in a galactic dead zone (I forget the exact termed used in the article and they predicted that this would happen), it's sorta like being a sale ship out in the ocean caught up in one of those areas where the wind doesn't blow for months on end. Until something happens in the galaxy we're kinda stuck here, and as long as we're stuck here our Sun will experience less and less activity.

    Which means it's gonna get mighty cold here on planet Earth! They've also know since the late 50's that ice ages happen much quicker than what they were telling the general public at the time, in fact that cat was finally released from it's bag in the mid 90's.
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by packyderms_wife View Post
    Actually my statement is based upon an article I posted here sometime back that was published in 1967 about solar activity and it's effect on the earth's tilt, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions. The gov't has known as early as the 1950's that an ice age was coming which was why there was such huge rush to get out into space. It has to do with our solar systems position in the galaxy, remember we're not just revolving around a star, we're also revolving around the huge maw of a monster black hole. Of which we'll get a glimpse in 2018.

    Our solar system is currently residing in a galactic dead zone (I forget the exact termed used in the article and they predicted that this would happen), it's sorta like being a sale ship out in the ocean caught up in one of those areas where the wind doesn't blow for months on end. Until something happens in the galaxy we're kinda stuck here, and as long as we're stuck here our Sun will experience less and less activity.

    Which means it's gonna get mighty cold here on planet Earth! They've also know since the late 50's that ice ages happen much quicker than what they were telling the general public at the time, in fact that cat was finally released from it's bag in the mid 90's.
    There were several articles of the kind posted in that time frame.


    That graphic comes from one such article published in National Geographic. They doubled down on it in 1974.

    New York times, Time magazine, etc, there were a plethora of such articles.
    Problem is they all turned out to be incorrect failing the test of time. With the available science of the time, they made the best call they could. However the understanding of how it works has come a long way since then.

    There is also a mountain of evidence to empirically prove where they went wrong. That in turn became 'global warming' science. We now know that too was wrong.

    What has made the difference are the deep space probes, skylab, Themis, IBEX, better space weather satellites, orbiting spectral analysis aboard ISS, and other platforms etc.

    We did not know what we do now. One of the key things in that is the nature of the heliosphere and the galactic gas cloud our system has been passing through. We didn't know about the nature of the stellar wind, interplanetary magnetic field, and a host of other things.

    I'd be very surprised if even now, there isn't something critical being missed.
    In balance, the unknowns and vaguely knowns kick us back to monitoring trends. We didn't even know what a sun spot was until we got an xray spectrum telescope up.

    I'll stand by my original statement. Others may feel differently.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  9. #9
    Coming at this from an "applied science" angle, seems to me those of us hoping to grow successful crops might prepare for this possibility of "quality/quantity" of light change by finding as much info as possible on which plants like which part of the spectrum - and when, because IIRC from little I've looked at this, the needs change over time from sprouting to maturation and development of "fruits". And of course, we'd need a way to measure the light too. Then, taking a tip from the pot growers, invest in some grow bulbs of the correct wavelength.

    Yes, that's a big investment in equipment and extra time. But there are other issues beginning to impact "food security" - geopolitics, natural disasters (witness the drug shortage due to Puerto Rico's hit from the hurricanes), inflation/currency devaluation, etc. We all like to eat... so it pays to consider being able to grow what you like to eat - come what may. (To the best of one's ability, that is - we could still get hit by a giant asteroid, or the gamma rays could start turning people into emotional basketcase, irrational, brainwashed zombies............ oh wait, that was Obama & Hillary........)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    13,417
    For what it's worth, it's now technically possible to have a growing space not directly exposed to sunlight at all and use sunlight concentrators and fiber optic lines manufactured to transmit only the specific bands of light you want to pass to the plants. They already make solar dish concentrators combined with fiber optic lines to pipe sunlight (minus UV light if you want, although I don't actually know if that's an option with the commercial systems being sold) into office buildings and whatnot, so assuming someone was willing to manufacture fiber optic lines to different specs I imagine it wouldn't be all that difficult to substitute the preferred fiber optic lines. I'm not saying it would be cost competitive to a standard greenhouse (it almost certainly wouldn't be), just that it should be possible. Think of it like FRS radios tuned to a very specific frequency and excluding all other frequencies, except that you'd be substituting light for radio waves.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901


    The above graph is dated but it is what I use for a baseline. Since that data was taken, the peak has compressed, and the quantity/quality received has dropped as measured on the ground in my area. While I can only wish for a satellite, I can extrapolate the portions I cannot measure on the ground directly by comparison.
    Keep in mind it will change with latitude. Angle of incident light/energy inherently changes with latitude which is why in the best of times, crops/plants that grow well in southern latitudes will not do so in more northern latitudes.

    That btw is the most frustrating part of it all for me. Century upon century of empirically demonstrated crop data is available for anyone with two or more brain cells and even a lazy attitude towards research to review. It's not like it's a state secret held closely in MI6, NSA, or FSB deep data holes, it's wide open to the public. Yet the overwhelming number of the people I've brought this up to absolutely, positively, refuse to see or listen. That goes for liberals and conservatives alike. Their confirmation bias source can't be wrong, no way, no how.

    For our part, we've acted. We have the capability to grow 100% independent of the sun. I'm no farmer, but I am an engineer at heart, so engineer I did. Between those of us who are farmers, and those who are not, we have our solutions in hand.

    There are commercially available units popping up here and there. They aren't cheap, but they are there.

    The frugal version is to research what grows (or at least what did grow) in more northern latitudes from your own. Currently you have to switch by about 11°-15° and climbing. So if your in Oklahoma, you'd be wanting something that grew in South Dakota. You'd want a test plot to monitor what grew, how fast, and to what quantity/quality. Records are important here.

    If you want to see a working example, review and research Icelandic production of bananas and other fruit.

    http://icelandmag.visir.is/article/i...panama-disease
    NATURE
    Iceland has Europe‘s largest banana plantation: could grow in importance due to Panama Disease
    BY STAFF |MAY 18 2016
    geothermal energy is used in Iceland

    Bananas were first produced in Iceland in 1941. Using cheap geothermal energy to heat the greenhouses and cheap electricity to provide illumination during the darkest months, it was possible to grow bananas in the middle of the North Atlantic. Import duties on imported foodstuffs and fruit meant the Icelandic bananas were competitive, and Icelanders consumed domestically produced bananas until the late 1950s. Since 1959, however, all bananas sold in stores have been imported.

    The claim that Iceland has the largest banana plantation in Europe has been disputed by fact checkers. But because it is an excellent story it has survived any attempts at correction. One of the arguments used by the pro-Iceland as Europe’s largest banana producer camp is that Spain, the largest European banana producer, actually grows bananas on the Canary Islands, which are part of Africa, rather than Europe.

    Read more: Geothermal power generates higher living standards, lower heating costs and less pollution

    The banana plantation in Reykir is operated by the Icelandic Agricultural University which has been growing bananas at its research station in Reykir since the 1950s. The bananas have remained completely isolated since then, safe from contact with plant diseases, including the Panama Disease which is currently decimating the world’s banana plantations. Many fear the disease, caused by a fungus, could wipe out the Cavendish banana, which is the most common type of banana consumed today.
    Those folks are way ahead of the curve on the subject, and what We've used as a guiding model.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    13,417
    It doesn't address the question of the quality or even the quantity of the light, but I seem to recall one of the founding fathers (Washington or Jefferson?) growing fruit trees far north of the usual range for those trees. If I'm remembering it correctly they did it by planting the trees in holes and keeping them warm in the winter using burning wood. The point being that there may be low-tech solutions available to a reduced growing season, although those solutions might also be very labor-intensive.

  13. #13
    Good idea tanstaafl. Along those lines, you've seen the in-ground or partly in ground greenhouses? They have a name, but I don't remember it right now. The work is probably worth it, if it means eating vs not.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Swimming in sea quarks
    Posts
    901
    Quote Originally Posted by Sacajawea View Post
    Good idea tanstaafl. Along those lines, you've seen the in-ground or partly in ground greenhouses? They have a name, but I don't remember it right now. The work is probably worth it, if it means eating vs not.
    Walipini is the name your looking for most likely.

    Yes there are lower tech solutions. I mentioned one of them. For standard greenhouse and a walipini,
    they will not produce as fast or as much, but they will produce. Quality can be addressed by filters, quantity is addressed by extended growth times.

    However it's addressed, it needs to be addressed regardless.
    Facts?? We don't need no stinkin facts...

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Central Iowa
    Posts
    37,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Rayku View Post
    Walipini is the name your looking for most likely.

    Yes there are lower tech solutions. I mentioned one of them. For standard greenhouse and a walipini,
    they will not produce as fast or as much, but they will produce. Quality can be addressed by filters, quantity is addressed by extended growth times.

    However it's addressed, it needs to be addressed regardless.
    There's a thread in the Gardening forum here about these types of growing systems.

    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...as-a-Prep-Item

    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/showt...of-Hugelkultur

    link to the room and there you will find the other threads
    http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/forum...?157-Gardening
    People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


NOTICE: Timebomb2000 is an Internet forum for discussion of world events and personal disaster preparation. Membership is by request only. The opinions posted do not necessarily represent those of TB2K Incorporated (the owner of this website), the staff or site host. Responsibility for the content of all posts rests solely with the Member making them. Neither TB2K Inc, the Staff nor the site host shall be liable for any content.

All original member content posted on this forum becomes the property of TB2K Inc. for archival and display purposes on the Timebomb2000 website venue. Said content may be removed or edited at staff discretion. The original authors retain all rights to their material outside of the Timebomb2000.com website venue. Publication of any original material from Timebomb2000.com on other websites or venues without permission from TB2K Inc. or the original author is expressly forbidden.



"Timebomb2000", "TB2K" and "Watching the World Tick Away" are Service Mark℠ TB2K, Inc. All Rights Reserved.