Auroras in the usa

[American Patriot]

Space Weather News for March 11, 2011
http://spaceweather.com

AURORAS IN THE USA: A coronal mass ejection (CME) hit Earth's magnetic field on March 10th. The impact set off a G1-class geomagnetic storm and sent Northern Lights rippling over the US-Canadian border into states such as Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan. Sky watchers who hadn't seen auroras in years captured beautiful photos of green and purple streamers. This is another sign that Solar Cycle 24 is heating up. Check http://spaceweather.com for photos and updates.

GEOMAGNETIC STORM ALERTS: Would you like a call when geomagnetic storms erupt? Sign up for Space Weather PHONE (http://spaceweatherphone.com) or Space Weather TEXT (http://spaceweathertext.com) and never miss another aurora surprise.

[Luke]

I wonder if there could be a connection between the moon and sun positions effecting the earths crust? I believe it was Ed Dames who used to be on Coast to Coast calling for a solar "kill shot?"

[American Patriot]

No.

Moon is not really any closer than normal.

Seriously.... a "kill shot" by Ed Dames is not really an issue.

We might take a massive hit from a CME which could destroy electrical systems, but won't kill life.

Gama radiation from an exploding supernova could sterilize the planet....but, you know that's also probably not going to happen, since the chances are astronomical....

The sun won't blow up any time soon, and thus won't give us a gamaburst.

[Luke]

You mean I had a vasectomy for nothing!

[American Patriot]

You mean I had a vasectomy for nothing!

LMAO.

I think so.

[American Patriot]

Hey Rick, I know this might be a stupid question, but could there be a link between this recent Solar activity and the earthquakes and the like happening here on Earth lately?

Doubtful.

Magnetic storms are just that, magnetic. While I suppose, in a theoretically sort of way a huge CME and associated magnetic field could possibly effect the geophysical planet (such as the tectonic plates) I find that extremely unlikely.

In any event, a CME could flip (re-magnetize) our own magnetic field - but not physically MOVE something.

I've never done a study on earthquakes vs sun spot cycle - but I suppose it wouldn't be difficult to run through the records for a hundred or so years and extrapolate some data.

But - in a nutshell solar activity affects our stratosphere, ionosphere and ultimately our weather - but not our tectonic plates. Not anywhere in any physical science book that I've found, read, or saw.

[American Patriot]

I can't vouch for the following article, but it claims to show a connection between CME's and earthquakes, so please help me determine if this is bullshit or not, ok?

http://www.rense.com/general93/sol.htm

As for myself, i'm curious about a link, but perhaps not in a position to make even an educated speculation.

1) Jeff Rense is blocked by the DOD as a "Hate Site"
2) I don't read Rense, he's an idiot.
3) NOTHING that comes from his site is credible.


There... did that help you?

[American Patriot]

Correction. Not a "Hate Site" (That's Alex Jones). Rense is blocked as "Alternative News" site. In other words, a site providing information that is highly unlikely to be accurate, or even true.

[American Patriot]

Lol... True enough, Rense is pretty bad. But isn't that how most Science starts out, 'highly unlikely to be accurate, or even true'? Then somebody does all the hard work and proves it at least provisionally true? Or not.

I have a feeling that Science, as a field of human endeavor, suffers these days like all other fields today from too many theoreticians and not enough people who actually sweat and strain to find the Truth. At least that's my take on things.

No. That's not how science starts out.

Current methodologies take known facts and data and build upon those things already proven.

Anything that builds upon the unknown, or misunderstood simply is building on an unprovable foundation.

Actually, you're quite wrong, Michael about your "feeling" about Science.

I personally know a lot of real life scientists. All of them are "theoreticians" but all of them use a basis of known physics (or whichever particular field is their own expertise) to examine the things they are working on, and perform the math, or experimentation required to give them they answers to questions.

I find it very interesting that you bring up a known idiot as a source for science and post it in a thread reserved for auroras (and not CMEs causing quakes).

What was your purpose for this, and why are you spending your time trying to "pick at science"?

[American Patriot]

Of course, everybody starts (or should start) from solid foundations in an objective search for the truth in science as in all other areas of life. And by picking that article out of cyberspace I was simply amused that somebody had earlier made the link-real or not-between the two separate phenomena. I told you, Rick, that I thought that it might be a stupid question, you answered me that there was no known link, and I found the article AFTER our conversation. I'm simply curious, ignorant in this area, but curious. That's not a bad quality to possess concerning science is it-Curiosity?

I'm not 'spending my time trying to "pick at science"' at all. I'm showing an interest in what you're talking about and asking questions, geez...

Many people make incorrect links. You remember my various diatribes on "Conspiracy Theory"? This is precisely my point...

But, here:

Lol... True enough, Rense is pretty bad. But isn't that how most Science starts out, 'highly unlikely to be accurate, or even true'? Then somebody does all the hard work and proves it at least provisionally true? Or not.

Specifically, no, science does not "start out highly unlikely to be accurate". Actually, if you knew some Latin, I suspect you could guess why this is so.

"Science" comes from the Latin word scientia, which means "knowledge".

Knowledge is gained in only one way... experience and observation. Science is simply a system of obtaining knowledge. The process of doing so is done through the study or experimentation on natural phenomenon and once an outcome is observed, usually the "experiment" or observation is repeated with the same circumstances and parameters to ensure that the same answer comes out each time.

Once this is accomplished (and in modern times by several DIFFERENT, unconnected groups) and the results are the same for all, this becomes "knowledge", information that we can count on as being true.

I have a feeling that Science, as a field of human endeavor, suffers these days like all other fields today from too many theoreticians and not enough people who actually sweat and strain to find the Truth. At least that's my take on things.

The people who post to the Jeff Rense, for the most part are neither scientists or "theoreticians". They are people who put together generally unconnected pieces of information to form some basis for an opinion. That opinion is generally wrong.

Cornonal Mass Ejecta (CME) - from a STUDIED point of view (mine) are chunks of the sun, namely high energy plasma that are blasted off for some unknown reason. These CMEs do not break up because there are vast and powerful magnetic fields.

Those fields will actually break away as a "magnetic loop" and hold together the CME.

CMEs travel pretty fast and can hit the Earth in a few hours or day or two in some cases.

It isn't the plasma that is particularly dangerous, it's the magnetic field... but not to life forms. The magnetic fields can impinge on our OWN magnetic field and cause massive disruptions called "geomagnetic storms". The magnetic field of the earth "rings' like a bell and will elongate and shrink until it settles back down in a few days.

That field is what protects us from massive doses of solar radiation and most gamarays traveling randomly through space.

Without it, we'd not be here. Nor would pretty much anything else.

In the mean time the ringing field sets up oscillations in the ionosphere which can dramatically destroy long distant radio communications (specifically the sort that uses the ionosphere as a kind of mirror to refract the signals vast distances over the horizon).

This also results in the Aurora and Australis Borealis - or northern (and southern, respectively) lights.

Now about my remarks about "picking at science". It has been my experience for many, many years that religion and science for the most part simply don't mix.

I personally don't like the scientists going after religion, and I don't like the religionists going after science. Neither of the two really DO have a "meeting point".

So your remarks are not dissimilar to the clods I used to have hanging on Anomalies - who even if they don't come right out and say it, would imply that science is unfounded. They would say things like what you said as a way to discredit science.

That's where I am coming from.

The foregoing information I just provided was completely, totally written by me, off the cuff and without ONCE using Google or any other search engine, book or resource than my own mind.

That, Michael, is what "Science" IS.

[American Patriot]

True enough, literally. And that's my whole point as to where you're mistaken about a lack of a 'meeting point' between religion and science-'Truth', the quest for Truth, Objective reality. It seems as if many on both sides of this divide refuse to see the other as sharing in a common desire to know the truth about man and his place in the universe, that the other MUST be in bad faith....I honestly don't share that prejudice.

I'm mistaken? Well, perhaps, I believe there IS a meeting point. I believe the problem lies with those who refuse to see both sides. Apparently we agree on this point.

You come at it your way, I try to come at it mine, and certainly I will utilize you as an expert in what I think is your field of competence...

I will take your above remark as a compliment. I have several fields that I am pretty good at. Though, not an expert in all, but if it comes to science, I can generally get you a reasonable and accurate answer. My way at coming at things is to read, read and read some more. I taught for many years in a college, and honestly, reading is the best way to understand the world around you.

There is so much out there already KNOWN all you have to do it read. Eventually you will begin to grasp the wheat from the chaff.

As my grandpa used to say; 'If I don't know something and I want to find out, i'm not too proud to find someone who knows what they're talking about.'

I have twelve grandchildren, Michael. I know what he was saying and this is my belief as well.

So i'm still curious why you think my asking even what MIGHT be a stupid question is the same as thinking 'science is unfounded'?

I don't think you're asking a stupid question. I think you posted a link to a stupid site, there's a difference. lol

Over the past 15 or so years I've done a LOT with the internet. I've done a LOT of reading of many of the existing sites out there, and if there is a site related to science or pseudo-science then I've been there, joined a forum if there was one, and have participated in literally tens of thousands of discussions.

I was one of the players in the John Titor story that started at Art Bell's site (pseudo-science) migrated to Anomalies Network (pseudo-science). I have had discussions on several physics sites about that story as well.

That's ridiculous. I think it's more than a little strange that you seem to want to argue with me about this when i'm already more than willing to accept what you've stated about science (on which point you're 'preaching to the choir') and especially in regards to my initial question....If you say that there isn't a known link between the two phenomena, i'm going to take you're word for it.

Not arguing at all, Michael, but honestly, your own remarks strike me as an attempt to drag the subject of the thread off topic.

Still thinking I'm talking like another one of those 'clods from Anomalies'? Funny, that if I am, I don't think i've ever even been on that Website/Forum, so I can't even objectively agree or disagree with your statement upon the quality of people who must post there.

Without reading the material on that site yourself and then comparing it with real science you're definitely talking like them if you were to believe it. Merely asking a question isn't a problem.

it was your following remarks about "Science".

So the fact is you are a strong believer in real science and like me, tend to ignore pseudo-science, correct?

[American Patriot]

And still... you persist.

How is any of that relevant to the original topic again?

[American Patriot]

I'm seemingly not immune to the 'thread drift' I castigate in others, so I withdraw any futher questions unless they directly relate to the topic at hand.

I don't mind the discussion... just asking, perhaps a thread about "What is science" or something?

[American Patriot]

I knew you didn't and perhaps that's not a bad idea to separate the 'wheat from the chaff', so to speak....A kind of 'Bullhockey or not' thread on examples of psuedoscience and also 'scientific orthodoxy' that is or will soon be dethroned....Lol, wait, isn't that the role of the 'Skeptic's corner' sub-forum?

Yes... which is why I posted the original here in SPACE LOL