WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

Then why are you dedicating all of your time arguing with me send trying to detract from my message,? Extra comma for no reason.


While it is true that the government is not the only ones studying the Sun (me for instance), we all rely on the government for the data to analytically determine what is happening in the space weather environment. I can measure certain things ,Extra space and all of the indications that iI is capital can measure indicate that the data is being understated ,Extra space intentionally falsely explained and falsified.



.Period starting a sentence I can't afford to launch a solar observation satellite, but I can see frogs mating in January that normally mate in March, and trees that don't know it's winter, and I can see people being sunburned on overcast days, I can see stories of Ananias with legions on tierIt is their skin where it is horrifically exposed to Sunlight and I can actually look at the Sun and see it isn't the same as it was when iI is always capital was ten. I can see endless s reports of radical environment changes, and many more indicators that do not co relatethink you mean correlate with the data being presented.


.Period at beginning of sentence You made plausible excuses, admitting data is being withheld for whatever reason.


ALL sources of space weather data available on the internet are filtered through government efficienciesdo you mean agencies or government funded academic endeavors.


I never mentioned the NICT simulator or ACE data.
Quite the assumption on your part, I'm wondering where you came up with it from what iI is always capital wrote. Oh, that's right, you pulled it out of your ass.

And how does that relate with anything I have posted?


ad homineimIt is Ad hominem criticism without any actual basis.


YuIt is You mean I don't have the intelligence of Phil plaitIt is Plait. Proper names are always capital, who cannot explain hydrogen fusion.


because I have a totally different understanding odIt is of physics ansIt is and science in general than you do, and a radically different perspective than you do does not mean iI is always capital am wrong and you are right,Sentences end in periods, not commas From my perspective it is easy to perceive you are my intellectual inferior by a very wide margin.


POT KETTLE BLACK

That is one of the least intelligent summations on solar physics and space weather I have ever seen, and I have seen some real idiots working from Alice springsIt is Springs. Proper names are always capital.

I have not beck peddled at all and you are deluding yourself as a result of your poor reading comprehension skills...and you still haven't fund It is found an example of a beneficial genetic mutation caused by radiation, what you found is an example of one experiment, many of which are ongoing, to find plants that have an unusual resistance to damage by radiation. The reason for this destroys your whole argument, essentially, There is an obvious reason why radiation resistant plants are being developed at extreme expense. Can you guess what that reason is?
Could it be that radiation at the planet's surface is increasing?

LMAO!

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. There are numerous sources of ionizing radiation even if we leave out the Sun. There are radioactive elements in the Earths crust, there is radon, there are CONTINUOUS leakages of particle radiation from the Sun reaching the earths surface. (Take a ginger counter and point the fucking probe slots towards the Sun and see what you get!

I may have been technically incorrect about a minor detail (some sources claim cosmic rays are produced by the Sun while others don't) , but I am not lying to anyone about anything.

The magnetosphere is unstable and weakening and has been discovered to have numerous voids in it, the magnetic poles is shifting radically and at tines there are multiple magnetic poles .

Living things are being effected all over the world with symptoms that indicate solar radiation exposure including people, and entire biospheres are being effected and in some cases completely transformed.

There has been no winter and last summer was the hottest on record,the polar ice caps are melting , geological activity is the highest ever in recorded history, and methane gas is literally spewing from the ocean over large geographic areas.

Every planet in the solar system is getting hotter and brighter, the Sun is unbearable to even look in it's direction, and all of the native peoples are noting and publishing the changes in their tribal journals.

In order to go outside during a sunlit day, one needs to use increasingly protective sunscreens and warnings about this are being published even in mass Media outlets... To get on here and claim I am an alarmist and threaten me with incarceration betrays your real purpose. You can jail me, you can even kill me, but it will do you no good, it will only release my spirit and make me 1000 times the adversary to you that I am now.

If i were claiming the changes were related to human activity, I'd be left alone, but I'm not, I'm claiming the solar system is entering a dense cloud of plasma that is concentrated in the galactic plane and the solar maximum will peak while the Earth is closets to the Sun and crossing the galactic plane, while at the same time the Earth, the galactic center and the sun will all line up perfectly in three dimensions on a very specific time frame, giving the exact date that a catastrophic event will happen with a confidence of 100% .

Government funded Heckler, you still haven't' answered the real question, why are they trying to develop radiation resistant plants in the first place? if you can't answer this, what is the point of continuing to argue. the answer is obvious.

This is why:

'Effects of Increased UV-B on Food Production
Of all the health effects of the anticipated global environmental changes, food shortages are likely to be the most devastating. UV-B radiations are toxic to most plants and will adversely affect agricultural productivity. As mentioned, phytoplankton, which are abundant in the cold polar oceans, are impaired by ultraviolet radiation. Since the phytoplankton form the beginning of the food chain on which all marine species depend, the possibility of ecologic catastrophe looms. Tropospheric ozone, an indirect result of depletion of stratospheric ozone, is also toxic to most plants. Levels of ozone over the eastern United States during summers are already high enough to cause damage to crops and vegetation. These effects of UV-B on agriculture will only add to the many other factors that will compromise food supplies for the world's burgeoning population, especially in the developing countries which already are faced with marginal supplies'.
[link to www.ciesin.org]

Its' due to the loss of Stratospheric Ozone and an increase in Tropospheric Ozone.

Hope that helps.

What is wrong with your posts is you have absolutely no references to any of these claims and are using unsubstantiated reports your find on the internet. And many of them are wrong. There is absolutely no evidence that every planet is getting hotter.

A paper from Anthony Mallama, Dennis Wang, Russell A. Howard, (Venus phase function and forward scattering from H2SO4, Icarus 182 (2006) 10–22) looked at decades of photometry of Venus and concluded that there is no photometric evidence that the brightness of Venus has changed. However, Venus is seen to have small scale brightening in the form of clouds [link to www.venus.wisc.edu] but not marked increase in overall brightness.

From [link to www.skepticalscience.com]

The global warming argument was strongly influenced by a paper written by a team led by NASA scientist Lori Fenton, who observed that changes in albedo – the property of light surfaces to reflect sunlight e.g. ice and snow – were shown when comparing 1977pictures of the Martian surface taken by the Viking spacecraft, to a 1999 image compiled by the Mars Global Surveyor. The pictures revealed that in 1977 the surface was brighter than in 1999, and from this Fenton used a general circulation model to suggest that between 1977 and 1999 the planet had experienced a warming trend of 0.65 degrees C. Fenton attributed the warming to surface dust causing a change in the planet's albedo.

Unfortunately, Fenton’s conclusions were undermined by the failure to distinguish between climate (trends) and weather (single events). Taking two end points – pictures from 1977 and 1999 – did not reveal any kind of trend, merely the weather on two specific Martian days. Without the intervening data – which was not available – it is impossible to say whether there was a trend in albedo reduction, or what part the prodigious dust storms played in the intervening period between the first and second photographs. Indeed, when you look at all the available data – sparse though it is – there is no discernible long term trend in albedo.

At this time, there is little empirical evidence that Mars is warming. Mars' climate is primarily driven by dust and albedo, not solar variations, and we know the sun is not heating up all the planets in our solar system because we can accurately measure the sun’s output here on Earth.

Solar irradiance data does not show an increase in solar output. A study looked at the data and found a decrease over in irradiance (Total Solar Irradiance Variations, C Frohlich, J Lean, New eyes to See Inside the Sun and Stars, International Astronomical Union. Symposium no. 185, p 89 - 102, 1998)

Stop making unsubstantiated claims. Show references so they can be properly discussed.

You must be new here.

Relatively. Been here for about a year + a couple of weeks.

You have completely missed the whole point of this thread and what my general argument is. You are referencing government funded studies and academia, they're not going to tell you the truth my friend. Ask for the information to support whatever claim I have made the is in doubtthis makes no sense. and I will provide you with andit is an independent source of information confirming it. When Al Gore tried to sell the carbon tax and blame global warming on human activity, the whole arena of research was told point blank, the check stops here if you mention the increase in radiation from the Sun reaching the earth and other planets. And yes, it is that simple and these people can not only have youit is your funding cut off, they can have you suicided or even worstit is worse..one period, not two

Since you make such a big deal about other people's typos, I have pointed out all of yours.

Your claims are meaningless. You provide no proof merely unfounded accusations.

Stop making unsubstantiated claims. Show references so they can be properly discussed.

Yes , thanks for you contribution.
But the study to develop radiation resistant plants include other spectrum of radiation as well
One of the things NASA is really sensitive about is the fact that the space shuttles solid rocket booster did tremendous damage to the ozone layer.
What was left of it was severely depleted during the last solar maximum. I can describe the mechanism of that depletion if it would be helpful. I hope that asshole from the NSA doesn't show up again, I can't seem to spell when he's here, even though I use and automated spell checker.

(I will try to keep my typos down in the future, LMAO...Moderator are you here?

Any burning of Fuel in the Upper Atmospheres' depletes Ozone..but the main cause was the High Altitude Hydrogen/Atom Bomb Tests between 1947 and 1998.

No claim I have made is unsubstantiated and is backed up by multiple sources of correlating data and information, including the application of basic observation skills that you could do yourself.
Whether you realize it or not, I AM a reference. You might not appreciate my ego, but it is true nevertheless, since I have established a general pattern of being correct in nearly every case on this subject .

I am not going to argue against that statement and it is undoubtedly true to some degree that the atom bomb tests did effect the atmosphere, but the ozone depletion correlated directly with the years the space shuttle was in use and if you look at the data objectively, there is also a correlation between the last solar maximum and ozone depletion and the mechanism of this is clearly understood and can be found on the internet. I have had much of my bookmarked and stored data either stolen or destroyed, but I can look it up for you if you like. Ozone is essentially three oxygen atoms bonded together (the normal state is two), and when impacted by solar radiation particles the bonds are broken.

Tell me exactly what you want proof of, Be specific, not general. The proof of what I am claiming is all around you, this planet (and the solar system in general) is transforming radically, possibly dying. People are literally losing their minds, while being completely absorbed with useless technology that is negatively effecting their higher thought processes and ability to think independently..

And thanks for correcting my typos. The only reason i pointed out theirs in the first place was to shut them up about it. i see it hasn't worked.

I am not going to argue against that statement and it is undoubtedly true to some degree that the atom bomb tests did effect the atmosphere, but the ozone depletion correlated directly with the years the space shuttle was in use and if you look at the data objectively, there is also a correlation between the last solar maximum and ozone depletion and the mechanism of this is clearly understood and can be found on the internet. I have had much of my bookmarked and stored data either stolen or destroyed, but I can look it up for you if you like. Ozone is essentially three oxygen atoms bonded together (the normal state is two), and when impacted by solar radiation particles the bonds are broken.

That is an internet myth that the shuttle was a large contributor to ozone depletion

[link to www.aerospaceweb.org]

[link to stason.org]

Is it? Is the truth about 9/11 easily verifiable from the official government and educational institutions? What about the truth about the pyramids in China ( i don't remember them as part of my education). What about the truth about Tesla? I didn't learn about him but I did learn about Thomas Edison - was this another easily verifiable Truth?

The energies in charge of this planet are no friend of Truth. Every Master (eg Jesus, Krishna, Buddha) that has come here and spoken the Truth has been killed. Plasmare, though I believe your intent is honourable, you assume too much and trust that which is not deserving of trust. All is not what it seems.

Starry

Due to the massive 'Tearing' of the Ozone due to Atomic Testing and High Altitude Fuel Burning any Geo-effective Solar Event is bound to have more serious consequences on further Ozone depletion due to the already damaged layers.

Off-Topic:Did you come across the recent discovery of 'Cold Plasma' above Earth!?
'Cold' meaning 500,000 C..not really Cold hey!?
[link to news.nationalgeographic.com]

Hope that helps further your Research : )

The energies in charge of this planet are no friend of Truth. Every Master (eg Jesus, Krishna, Buddha) that has come here and spoken the Truth has been killed. Plasmare, though I believe your intent is honourable, you assume too much and trust that which is not deserving of trust. All is not what it seems.

Starry

That is the kinetic temperature, derived from the motion of the particles. Since the system is not in thermodynamic equilibrium it is not the same as what we would call room temperature. The cold plasma is extremely thin, the number of particles striking yout skin (hypothetically) would be very low so not much enery is imparted. Your skin would not feel hot if you could put your hand in the cold earth plasma. In fact, it would freeze in an instant.

Plasmare, though I believe your intent is honourable, you assume too much and trust that which is not deserving of trust. All is not what it seems.

Starry

Plasma is simply the least dense form of matter, very rarefied when compared to a liquid or solid, but there is a dividing point between a gas and a plasma. Your hand would freeze if exposed to very high energy plasma environment in a vacuum, because the energy imparted by the rarefied matter would be so little compared to the radiant heat loss.

Cold plasma is simple particles of matter that are rarefied enough to be classified as plasma that are not in rapid motion. The energy of a given plasma is directly related to the kinetic energy formula, Ke = 1/2 mass X velocity squared .

I suppose youd' say the same for High Altitude Atom/Hydrogen Bomb testing!?

: )

Plasma is simply the least dense form of matter, very rarefied when compared to a liquid or solid, but there is a dividing point between a gas and a plasma. Your hand would freeze if exposed to very high energy plasma environment in a vacuum, because the energy imparted by the rarefied matter would be so little compared to the radiant heat loss.

Cold plasma is simple particles of matter that are rarefied enough to be classified as plasma that are not in rapid motion. The energy of a given plasma is directly related to the kinetic energy formula, Ke = 1/2 mass X velocity squared .

The rocket tests didn't nothing to the ozone layer, they were well above the ozone layer, in the 100 to 500 km range. The ozone layer is 20 to 30 km. There were balloon tests in the ozone layer but did litle lasting damage. The releases were not catalytic. The bigger threat to the ozone layer is from air or ground bursts where a firestorm is created. The firestorm pushes up nitrogen into the stratosphere where NO2 can deplete the ozone layer. Once the firestorms end the injection of nitrogen into the stratosphere stops and the ozone layer will recover but the recovery time is over 10 years.

[link to www.wired.com]

That is correct.