2
$\begingroup$

Scientists say rare drop in sunspot activity could cause global cooling

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/business-tech/science/110615/science-news-solar-flares-sunspots-global-warming

Last week's event is almost certain to be just the start of a cycle that is expected to peak in 2013. It is during this rising activity that we can expect the Earth to be buffeted by some devastating solar storms.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/science/Solar-storm-rising-Earth-may-be-hit-by-cosmic-hurricane/articleshow/8858351.cms

Solar Flares Could Cripple Earth's Tech Infrastructure in 2013

http://www.pcworld.com/article/229876/solar_flares_could_cripple_earths_tech_infrastructure_in_2013.html

Isn't the first article contradictory with the other two? Which one is closer to the truth?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

The first is front line research announced at a conference, and is news, and closer to the current truth as far as the way cycle 24 is manifesting.

The probability of a large solar eruption is another story, one large eruption was manifested even though the cycle is not yet at its maximum; there is no direct contradiction

Now as far as cooling goes, there is no solid model nor long range data to be able to predict whether low intensity sun cycles lead to Maunder minimum type cooling. The energy depletion is of the order of 1.4 watts/meter^2, not enough to make a large direct temperature effect. In 30 years we may have the data to know whether it is a coincidence that the world cooled during the Maunder minimum or somehow the various hypotheses of the sun's indirect influence lead to a causal connection. ( magnetic fields, cosmic rays, UV and planckton, etc)

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.