"The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming"

[Lynn McGuire]

"The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming"

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/15/the-sun-is-blank-nasa-data-shows-it-to-be-dimming/

"The rise and fall of the sun’s luminosity is a natural part of the
solar cycle. A change of 0.1% may not sound like much, but the sun
deposits a lot of energy on the Earth, approximately 1,361 watts per
square meter. Summed over the globe, a 0.1% variation in this quantity
exceeds all of our planet’s other energy sources (such as natural
radioactivity in Earth’s core) combined. A 2013 report issued by the
National Research Council (NRC), “The Effects of Solar Variability on
Earth’s Climate,” spells out some of the ways the cyclic change in TSI
can affect the chemistry of Earth’s upper atmosphere and possibly alter
regional weather patterns, especially in the Pacific."

Uh oh, most scifi predicts this to happen way, way, way in the future.
Mostly Vinge and Simak.

Do we have a good measure of the Sun's diameter to see if it is expanding ?

Hat tip to:
http://drudgereport.com/

Lynn

[Carl Fink]

On 2017-12-17, Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming"
>
> https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/15/the-sun-is-blank-nasa-data-shows-it-to-be-dimming/

Do you intend to be taken seriously?|

I mean, that site is also known as "lies and distortion central" for
Deniers.
--
Carl Fink nitpi...@nitpicking.com

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations!;;
Stupid mistakes you can correct!

[J. Clarke]

On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 13:50:01 +0000 (UTC), Carl Fink <ca...@panix.com>
wrote:

>On 2017-12-17, Lynn McGuire <lynnmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "The sun is blank, NASA data shows it to be dimming"
>>
>> https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/12/15/the-sun-is-blank-nasa-data-shows-it-to-be-dimming/
>
>Do you intend to be taken seriously?|
>
>I mean, that site is also known as "lies and distortion central" for
>Deniers.

It's just reporting the expected low in the sunspot cycle.

[Quadibloc]

Oh, yes, and the expected low in the sunspot cycle is really happening. I'm sure
*that* isn't the lie and distortion being objected to. The claim that this means
that the Sun is going to send us into a new Ice Age if we don't burn enough
gasoline, and therefore the global warming stuff is rubbish, now, *that* would
be lies and distortions.

And presumably, even if such a claim is not being made, that is the impression
that they're trying to create with their readers.

John Savard

[Greg Goss]

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>Oh, yes, and the expected low in the sunspot cycle is really happening. I'm sure
>*that* isn't the lie and distortion being objected to.

I remember a cycle and a bit ago, there was a web page predicting that
the upcoming cycle was going to be disastrously minimal and that we
might be heading into another Maunder.

I never checked up on how the cycle happened in treality.

(quick google)
OK, the picture on Wikipedia from mid-2015 shows a cycle count about
half as big as the previous two. But not near-zero.

"We are currently (2015/08) over five years into Cycle 24. The current
predicted and observed size makes this the smallest sunspot cycle
since Cycle 14 which had a maximum of 64.2 in February of 1906."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Solar_Cycle_Prediction.gif
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.