SOLAR WATCH * Huge X8.2 Flare Sept. 10, 2017! (Updated Daily)

Space Weather Message Code: ALTTP2
Serial Number: 840
Issue Time: 2013 Mar 30 1423 UTC
ALERT: Type II Radio Emission
Begin Time: 2013 Mar 30 1322 UTC
Estimated Velocity: 814 km/s
Description: Type II emissions occur in association with eruptions on the sun and typically indicate a coronal mass ejection is associated with a flare event.

Space Weather Message Code: ALTEF3
Serial Number: 2000
Issue Time: 2013 Mar 30 1351 UTC
ALERT: Electron 2MeV Integral Flux exceeded 1000pfu
Threshold Reached: 2013 Mar 30 1335 UTC
Station: GOES13
Potential Impacts: Satellite systems may experience significant charging resulting in increased risk to satellite systems.
[link to www.swpc.noaa.gov]

[link to www.lmsal.com]

Maybe a filament eruption N central region ???

[link to halpha.nso.edu]


I don't think the B's would have cut it ???

[link to www.swpc.noaa.gov]

Can't access SDO

Shhhh!?

Shits on Fire,yo.

SolFolks

We been battered a little over the last Days hey,Geo-magnetic-wise : )

Its been emotional.

Here 66 [link to sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov] its' a beast off the North-North-East!

LoL!

We'll see

Hopefully not prime neutering time,hey!?

That would be diabolical behaviour...and I might just take the excuse that 'Cosmic rays' made me kill myself.

Here comes the 'boring' bit -

SWPC Discussion(all of it)

'Solar Activity

.24 hr Summary...
Solar activity was at very low levels. Region 1710 (S21E38) produced
the largest event of the period, a B8 flare, at 30/1024 UTC. Region
1710 showed a slight growth trend in its trailer spot area while the
other regions on the disk were either stable or decaying. Newly
numbered Region 1711 (S17E83) was classified as a simple Axx-type
alpha region, but it may contain trailer spots that are still behind the
east limb. Two disappearing solar filaments (DSF) were noted on H-Alpha
imagery this period. The first was a 7 degree filament eruption
centered near S20E56, near Region 1710, observed from 29/2337 - 30/0002
UTC. The second was a 5 degree filament eruption centered near S08W35,
near Region 1706, observed from 30/0653 - 0758 UTC. Further LASCO and
STEREO imagery analysis is needed to determine if a coronal mass
ejection (CME) is associated with these events.

.Forecast...
Solar activity is expected to be at very low levels with an increasing
chance for C-class flares for the next three days (30 Mar - 01 Apr) due
to the return of old Regions 1689 (S18, L=150) and 1698 (S19, L=119).

Energetic Particle

.24 hr Summary...
The greater than 2 MeV electron flux at geosynchronous orbit ranged from
normal background to moderate levels, reaching a peak value of 767
particle flux units (pfu). The greater than 10 MeV proton flux at
geosynchronous orbit was at normal background levels.

.Forecast...
The greater than 2 MeV electron flux at geosynchronous orbit is expected
to increase to moderate to high levels for the next three days (30 Mar -
01 Apr), in response to the enhanced solar wind environment caused by a
coronal hole/high speed stream (CH/HSS). The greater than 10 MeV proton
flux at geosynchronous orbit is expected to remain at normal background
levels for the next three days (30 Mar - 01 Apr).

Solar Wind

.24 hr Summary...
Solar wind parameters, measured at the ACE spacecraft, were indicative
of continued influence from a CH/HSS. Solar wind speed steadily
increased from initial values near 450 km/s to end-of-period values near
575 km/s. The interplanetary magnetic field Bt values ranged from 11 nT
to 1 nT while the Bz component ranged from +6 nT to - 10 nT. The phi
angle remained in a predominately negative (toward) sector.

.Forecast...
Solar wind speed is expected to begin tapering off on day one (30 Mar)
and steadily decrease to nominal values for days two and three (31 Mar -
01 Apr).

Geospace

.24 hr Summary...
The geomagnetic field was at predominately unsettled to active
conditions with intermittent periods of minor geomagnetic storming
conditions (29/1500 - 1800 UTC and 30/0000 - 0600 UTC).

.Forecast...
The geomagnetic field is expected to remain under the influence of a
CH/HSS through day one (30 Mar), experiencing quiet to active conditions
with a slight chance for G1 (Minor) geomagnetic sub-storming in the
night-sector. Conditions are expected to decrease to quiet to unsettled
levels for days two and three (31 Mar - 01 Apr) as the CH/HSS effects wane' [link to www.swpc.noaa.gov]

There,I can read it better now myself...I missed the three periods of Kp5 as I fell of the World just after posting the South-West achooooo.


Solen haven't updated for the 30th yet.

Gorgeous !!

Looks like the latest alert on space weather was a filament liftoff @ 13:00 just off 1704.

Hello 66!

At 13:00?

I think I am still confused...do you mean they just alerted the Filament ejection from the North?

Or one just *popped* off?

Sorry,ich bin kaput!

Please let these [link to sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov] on the East produce Flares!?

pwetty pwease?

I Luv that smilie chick :)

Pants will be shat...minds will be

Eat my Schtick -

[link to climateaudit.org]

Quote -

'Marcott, Shakun, Clark and Mix did not use the published dates for ocean cores, instead substituting their own dates. The validity of Marcott-Shakun re-dating will be discussed below, but first, to show that the re-dating “matters” (TM-climate science), here is a graph showing reconstructions using alkenones (31 of 73 proxies) in Marcott style, comparing the results with published dates (red) to results with Marcott-Shakun dates (black). As you see, there is a persistent decline in the alkenone reconstruction in the 20th century using published dates, but a 20th century increase using Marcott-Shakun dates. (It is taking all my will power not to make an obvious comment at this point.)'

Comment -

' Bob Koss

Posted Mar 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM | Permalink | Reply

The goal was to get something scary published before the AR5 deadline. It simply didn't matter if it is correct. Since it is not refuted prior to the deadline, it will be used.

------------------------------

tallbloke

Posted Mar 16, 2013 at 4:37 PM | Permalink | Reply

Bob Koss Mar16 3.18pm

Oh I do hope so.'

------------------------------------------------------------
​

Just look at this [link to climateaudit.files.wordpress.com] that is what we'd have got HAD they utilized the correct dates of the Core samples used!

ffs.

Some more - [link to hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk]

I do pork/chicken and deliver.

:allseeingeye:

Wo ist mein SolarWatchers?

Dragon slaying a'gwan'rudebwoy.

Lo0ks like I may just have to C/P the whole thing...paranoid link tards

Incoming -

'Figure 1. Reconstructions from alkenone proxies in Marcott style. Red- using published dates; black- using Marcott-Shakun dates.

Marcott et al archived an alkenone reconstruction. There are discrepancies between the above emulation and the archived reconstruction, a topic that I’ll return to on another occasion. (I’ve tried diligently to reconcile, but am thus far unable. Perhaps due to some misunderstanding on my part of Marcott methodology, some inconsistency between data as used and data as archived or something else.) However, I do not believe that this matters for the purposes of using my emulation methodology to illustrate the effect of Marcott-Shakun re-dating.

ALkenone Core Re-dating

The table below summarizes Marcott-Shakun redating for all alkenone cores with either published end-date or Marcott end-date being less than 50 BP (AD1900). I’ve also shown the closing temperature of each series (“close”) after the two Marcot re-centering steps (as I understand them)'

(Chart) [link to climateaudit.files.wordpress.com]

'The final date of the Marcott reconstruction is AD1940 (BP10). Only three cores contributed to the final value of the reconstruction with published dates ( “pubend” less than 10): the MD01-2421 splice, OCE326-GGC30 and M35004-4. Two of these cores have very negative values. Marcot et al re-dated both of these cores so that neither contributed to the closing period: the MD01-2421 splice to a fraction of a year prior to 1940, barely missing eligibility; OCE326-GGC30 is re-dated 191 years earlier – into the 18th century.

Re-populating the closing date are 5 cores with published coretops earlier than AD10, in some cases much earlier. The coretop of MD95-2043, for example, was published as 10th century, but was re-dated by Marcott over 1000 years later to “0 BP”. MD95-2011 and MD-2015 were redated by 510 and 690 years respectively. All five re-dated cores contributing to the AD1940 reconstruction had positive values.

In a follow-up post, I’ll examine the validity of Marcott-Shakun redating. If the relevant specialists had been aware of or consulted on the Marcott-Shakun redating, I’m sure that they would have contested it.

Jean S had observed that the Marcott thesis had already described a re-dating of the cores using CALIB 6.0.1 as follows:

All radiocarbon based ages were recalibrated with CALIB 6.0.1 using INTCAL09 and its protocol (Reimer, 2009) for the site-specific locations and materials. Marine reservoir ages were taken from the originally published manuscripts.

The SI to Marcott et al made an essentially identical statement (pdf, 8):

The majority of our age-control points are based on radiocarbon dates. In order to compare the records appropriately, we recalibrated all radiocarbon dates with Calib 6.0.1 using INTCAL09 and its protocol (1) for the site-specific locations and materials. Any reservoir ages used in the ocean datasets followed the original authors’ suggested values, and were held constant unless otherwise stated in the original publication.

However, the re-dating described above is SUBSEQUENT to the Marcott thesis. (I’ve confirmed this by examining plots of individual proxies on pages 200-201 of the thesis. End dates illustrated in the thesis correspond more or less to published end dates and do not reflect the wholesale redating of the Science article.

I was unable to locate any reference to the wholesale re-dating in the text of Marcott et al 2013. The closest thing to a mention is the following statement in the SI:

Core tops are assumed to be 1950 AD unless otherwise indicated in original publication.

However, something more than this is going on. In some cases, Marcott et al have re-dated core tops indicated as 0 BP in the original publication. (Perhaps with justification, but this is not reported.) In other cases, core tops have been assigned to 0 BP even though different dates have been reported in the original publication. In another important case (of YAD061 significance as I will later discuss), Marcott et al ignored a major dating caveat of the original publication.

Examination of the re-dating of individual cores will give an interesting perspective on the cores themselves – an issue that, in my opinion, ought to have been addressed in technical terms by the authors. More on this in a forthcoming post.

The moral of today’s post for ocean cores. Are you an ocean core that is tired of your current date? Does your current date make you feel too old? Or does it make you feel too young? Try the Marcott-Shakun dating service. Ashley Madison for ocean cores. Confidentiality is guaranteed'
[link to climateaudit.org]

The real data re-interpreted [link to climateaudit.files.wordpress.com] !



Last Edited by Spittin'Cesium on 03/30/2013 03:41 PM

Awesome to revisit that whopper, tx.

Ffs.


[link to www.youtube.com]

According to this - [link to www.vukcevic.talktalk.net] and this - [link to www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov] + this [link to science.nasa.gov]

Etc.

We shouldn't be seeing too much Complexity(that lasts at least)in Sunspots for a licccle wee while.

Though we may just get a second round squeezed out of Sol for 24...we'll see.

Hello Isis.

Very interesting haarp video guys and thread.

[link to www.youtube.com]

Thread: HAARP BUSTED ! Amazing Satellite Imaging showing Wave Spiral coming from a Base !

Last Edited by Isis One on 03/30/2013 04:02 PM

Tink, excellent find there with Nin's thread, I bumped it a couple of times.

I just watched that Double 0 7 video...he correctly stated 'there is a island there'

Islands tend to have an effect on Clouds - Esp. if they are Mountainous.

Edit:though,if that is not a Photoshopped Ring set,wow.

Last Edited by Spittin'Cesium on 03/30/2013 04:08 PM

Yeah, but how bout that huge ass base on that Island, its almost sci-fi looking.

SC

LoL.



Not too bad thank you Isis..a little stressed at all the lying from asshats like Dr.Keith Strong per CO2,but apart from that blown gasket,ok.

You?!

Admittedly,after seeing the Still of the 'Ring Vortex' I had to stop watching to ask...'Where in the fuck of that satellite imagery was there any Rings?'...cus' I cannot see them in the Movie?

Confused...Is it photoshopped?

looks like it...less' I can see the rings in the movie(I may be being blind)I will assume fakery.

Edito:My bad - bad eyes!

apologies to 007.

Last Edited by Spittin'Cesium on 03/30/2013 04:41 PM

LOL, you're too funny. I'm good, was out at a nature preserve all day in the sun, under non-contaminated skies watching birds and getting recalibrated by nature. I kept feeling like that idea of spaceship earth and how I was flying through the cosmos!!!! Very exhilarating and I'm still on a natural high. Thinking about getting some spring skiing in tomorrow in the Catskills. For me, we are right on track, all is as it should be, I'm not attached to too many outcomes that I'm aware of anyway.

CO2? Cesium, you may like this article then- 20 Year Pause In Rising Temps!-

"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

"If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change," he says.

Whitehouse argues that whatever has happened to make temperatures remain constant requires an explanation because the pause in temperature rise has occurred despite a sharp increase in global carbon emissions.

The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now.

[link to www.theaustralian.com.au]


Last Edited by Hugh M Eye on 03/30/2013 04:43 PM