Another co-incidence? The Earth's magnetic shield.

On Sep 10, 2:46*am, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 8, 10:57*pm, Frisbieinstein wrote:

On Sep 9, 9:14*am, Brad Guth wrote:

There's no such thing as "magnetic field lines"

OK, but there is no such thing as numbers either.

You know what I mean, so stop being silly. *Numbers only exist in our
thoughts, and even at that as interpreted by ETs could be as
meaningless as numbers are to ants.


I'm not being silly. Numbers are a useful concept, magnetic lines of
force are a useful concept. So their level of "reality," whatever
that may be, seems to me to be about the same.

Does gravity have detectable lines of force? (I seriously don't think
so)


Sure it does, at least as detectable and real as magnetic ones.

Do photons actually move? (I'm not convinced, but at least I'm open
for whatever interpretations)


Speed of light, assuming photons "exist," which I don't personally
don't believe. They are a useful model in many situations.



*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Sep 9, 10:03*pm, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:
"Peter Webb" wrote in message

u...





"Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe wrote
in ...
"At present, the overall geomagnetic field is becoming weaker; the
present strong deterioration corresponds to a 10-15% decline over the
last 150 years and has accelerated in the past several years; geomagnetic
intensity has declined almost continuously from a maximum 35% above the
modern value achieved approximately 2,000 years ago."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagn...e_of_the_geoma....

Very plausible indeed. There is a possible mechanism (radiation). The
semi-chaotic but periodic behaviour of our magnetic field (deriving from
our molten core) is not disimilar to climate. Also easily checked; they
have at least a graph you could use for comparison.

At least as plausible as magic co2.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There you go. In the face of all that science (have I said that
already today?) giga actually thinks that this explanation of the
current warming is as "plausible as CO2".

"We don't know what it is, but it can't be CO2" What a perfect mantra
for a stupid like you.

You are a nutter and you will believe *anything* that is told to you.
Like the old testament, for example.

this sounds like it might be good, but
what are the acronyms?... as for PSCs,
the main datum on the holes in the ozonosphere is a)
how many of them are there, and b)
what are they, if they are not "holes?"

the Montreal Protocol is the key precedent for the Kyoto Protocol,
not counting my Congressman's cap&trade '91 bill, but
it may never have happened without the hostile take-over
of DuPont ... after their patents on Freon had expired.

looking for gcr seeded low cloud formation in the region of the SAA
one should seperate out enso and the solar cycle. *The poles are
subject to a unique cloud formation caused by reactions in the upper
atmosphere creating polar stratospheric clouds, PSC's. *This means one
should try to establish a *connection between GCR flux, polar
stratospheric clouds and low cloud formation over the poles.

yeah, the magnetic field max was 2000ya, so
Jesus did it ... that's New Testament, fool!

Like the old testament, for example.

On Sep 10, 10:57*am, 1treePetrifiedForestLane
wrote:
yeah, the magnetic field max was 2000ya, so
Jesus did it ... that's New Testament, fool!



Like the old testament, for example.

Perhaps the faith-based version of our geomagnetic force field is good
enough, because obviously the mainstream status-quo of our physics and
science peers doesn't seem to have a clue.

We seem to know more about Mars than we do about Earth, plus there
there's currently more research loot and expertise going into
understanding our moon than Earth.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Sep 10, 1:15*am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
wrote in ...
On Sep 9, 2:02 pm, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe





wrote:
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
wrote in
...
On Sep 9, 1:59 am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe

wrote:
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation"

wrote in
...
On Sep 8, 5:22 am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe

wrote:
"Frisbieinstein" wrote in message

...
On Sep 7, 6:50 pm, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe

wrote:
"At present, the overall geomagnetic field is becoming weaker; the
present
strong deterioration corresponds to a 10-15% decline over the last
150
years
and has accelerated in the past several years; geomagnetic intensity
has
declined almost continuously from a maximum 35% above the modern
value
achieved approximately 2,000 years ago."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagn...e_of_the_geoma...

Could there be any connection, as well as correlation, between the
reduced
magnetic field and increased co2 or warming? Or could all be caused
by
some
other factor, perhaps galactic in origin?

--

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts" Richard Feynman

"What's it gotta do with cloud feedbacks?" Giga2

I've looked into it. The system is chaotic, so even in theory there
is no predicting it. No one knows any details about how it works.

The magnetic field of the Sun reverses every eleven years. In the
Earth the iron core resists this, so the reversal has no period. The
average is about 50,000 years, but it can be up to a million years.
By they way, a recent computer simulation showed that the polarity of
the core is opposite that outside of the core.

Finally, the magnetic field of the earth is about double of its
average over the lifetime of the Earth, so it is much stronger than
usual.

=Interesting, didn't know that about the sun either.- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

There has been some great info coming in lately about the movement of
solar magnetic fields, and yet no connection has been made with GCR
seeding clouds at the poles, or at the SAA.

=Abscence of evidence is not evidence of abscence.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

can i quote you on that,

=Yep.

because i never claimed the it did not exist,
i said the connection has not been found. Now thats why i said the
best area to study the GCR cloud seeding link is the place where the
magnetic field dips, the SAA.

=And the poles?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

looking for gcr seeded low cloud formation in the region of the SAA
one should seperate out enso and the solar cycle. *The poles are
subject to a unique cloud formation caused by reactions in the upper
atmosphere creating polar stratospheric clouds, PSC's. *This means one
should try to establish a *connection between GCR flux, polar
stratospheric clouds and low cloud formation over the poles.

=Complicated huh.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

take some time on your vacation maybe do some light reading into the
subject, then come back to this thread.

On Sep 7, 3:50*am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:
"At present, the overall geomagnetic field is becoming weaker; the present
strong deterioration corresponds to a 10-15% decline over the last 150 years
and has accelerated in the past several years; geomagnetic intensity has
declined almost continuously from a maximum 35% above the modern value
achieved approximately 2,000 years ago."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagn...e_of_the_geoma...

Could there be any connection, as well as correlation, between the reduced
magnetic field and increased co2 or warming? Or could all be caused by some
other factor, perhaps galactic in origin?

--

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts" Richard Feynman

"What's it gotta do with cloud feedbacks?" Giga2

I have speculated that there is a correlation between the magnetic
field and weather patterns. I have described that in my article
"Origin of the Earth's Magnetic Field"

http://franklinhu.com/earthmag.html

There is a correlation between climatic change and the magnetic field.
There is a fairly strong correlation with ice ages with flipping of
the Earth's poles. I believe this is due to wind patterns switching
from going primiarily west - east to east - west. There is evidence
that the winds primarily flowed east-west during the last ice age.
This changes the direction of charged particles in the atmosphere
which I believe are the drivers of the core magnetic field direction.
So it doesn't have anything to do with CO2, and may be galactic in
origin since the Earth goes in cyclic patterns around the Sun which
increase/decrease solar radiation which in turn radically alter
weather patterns on Earth.

-fhumag

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 23:04:09 -0700, Frisbieinstein wrote:

Is this a troll?
No. This is Brad "Venus and back in a '63 Volvo" Guth.
Demented and occasionally very funny.
He has been around a long time.



--
Take the pebbles out.

On Sep 13, 12:44*pm, Peter Muehlbauer
wrote:
franklinhu wrote:
On Sep 7, 3:50*am, "Giga2" "Giga2" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
wrote:
"At present, the overall geomagnetic field is becoming weaker; the present
strong deterioration corresponds to a 10-15% decline over the last 150 years
and has accelerated in the past several years; geomagnetic intensity has
declined almost continuously from a maximum 35% above the modern value
achieved approximately 2,000 years ago."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagn...e_of_the_geoma....

Could there be any connection, as well as correlation, between the reduced
magnetic field and increased co2 or warming? Or could all be caused by some
other factor, perhaps galactic in origin?

--

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts" Richard Feynman

"What's it gotta do with cloud feedbacks?" Giga2

I have speculated that there is a correlation between the magnetic
field and weather patterns. I have described that in my article
"Origin of the Earth's Magnetic Field"

http://franklinhu.com/earthmag.html

There is a correlation between climatic change and the magnetic field.
There is a fairly strong correlation with ice ages with flipping of
the Earth's poles. I believe this is due to wind patterns switching
from going primiarily west - east to east - west. There is evidence
that the winds primarily flowed east-west during the last ice age.
This changes the direction of charged particles in the atmosphere
which I believe are the drivers of the core magnetic field direction.
So it doesn't have anything to do with CO2, and may be galactic in
origin since the Earth goes in cyclic patterns around the Sun which
increase/decrease solar radiation which in turn radically alter
weather patterns on Earth.

-fhumag

Your idea sounds good, but Earth's magnetic field is almost static.
It's out of question, that changes in field strength in means of very
long-term ranges might have an influence.
But it's not possible to explain climate changes in short-term periods
( 100 years or so).
Thereby only Sun and thereof modulated CR are a plausible explanation.

It's also not only cyclic patterns of the Earth around the sun, as you
describe above, it's also the Sun and her orbital perturbation around the
Center of Mass, caused by gravitational attraction of the big planets, mostly
Jupiter and Saturn, in conjunction with the Sun.
This perturbation is evidenced responsible for the solar activity.

I think, these factors exceed the Earth's magnetic field effects by far.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

maybe the carbon cycle would be a plausible explanation, as that would
have an impact on d18O, d13C ratios.