CME's, active regions and high energy flares

Michael Mozina said:
This grade school "challenged" individual just did something you will *NEVER* do, namely actually "predict" a CME *BEFORE* it becomes visible in LASCO or COR images. Since you can't even do that much, what does that say about your education? You've got some nerve whining about civility. You don't even known the meaning of that word.
Click to expand...


You are not predicting anything. You're simply noting some activity and guessing it might continue. Again, big deal. For you to use the word "predict" is either a serious distortion of the word, or it's another lie. Of course you would have to be qualified to understand science at some level to understand the concept of a scientific prediction. So far you haven't shown that you are qualified to understand science, so your error is not unexpected.

Oh, and I'm pretty sure it's been explained to you, probably often and probably as long ago as five or six years, using helioseismology we can make some predictions about potential solar storms while they're still on the back side of the Sun. Real science kinda kicks ass when compared to the childish approach of looking at pictures of solar activity that currently exists and guessing that, well, some solar activity exists. :D
 
Michael Mozina said:
The stupid part is your denial RC. That's just weird

FYI, I used SDO to designate the position of the filament, and STEREO to demonstrate the CME since SOHO wasn't taking pictures as often. It's irrelevant when the STEREO movies *END*. All I was using them for is to demonstrate the CME became visible a few hours later in the COR images. Who cares when those videos end?

The denial thing is just strange IMO.
Click to expand...
The stupidity is in you claiming that you predicted the activity when you missed it.
Read what you posted:
Michael Mozina said:
http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/assets/img/latest/latest_1024_0211.mpg
http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/assets/img/latest/latest_1024_0335.mpg

It looks like another "dark filament" flare is in progress. You'll notice a moving dark thread at about the 8:00 position that has just started to leave the surface. That much material should result in a full blown CME in few hours.
Click to expand...

There was a "full blown CME" already happening :jaw-dropp!

But maybe you can do better in your next guess.
  1. State the exact time and uncertainty in UT.
  2. State the exact position and uncertainty.
The denial thing from you is not strange IMO. You have a massive track record of being incompetent and unable to explain yourself.
 
Michael Mozina said:
I'm not throwing any temper tantrums, I'm calling your bluff. You know *exactly* what we're trying to "predict" and you claim it's no big deal. I'm calling your ridiculous bluff. Prove it!
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but if you think it is a big deal then it is up to you to prove it.
 
Michael Mozina said:
That's what this thread is all about. I intend to accurately "predict" a whole lot of CME's over the next few months/years until you're all squealing like a pig. ;)
Click to expand...

I suppose you've done a full analysis of the mean rate at which CME occur and know how good your predictions need to be for them to be statistically significant.
 
Michael Mozina said:
I'm not throwing any temper tantrums, I'm calling your bluff. You know *exactly* what we're trying to "predict" and you claim it's no big deal. I'm calling your ridiculous bluff. Prove it!
Click to expand...


Your argument has gone into the realms of the irrational. I don't have the slightest idea what you mean by that. I don't know exactly what you're trying to predict because you haven't been willing to explain yourself in a rational or understandable way. It seems you're looking at pictures, seeing some solar activity, and claiming that the activity will continue. If that's it, big firkin deal. If that's not what you're doing, then it is a lie for you to claim that you have explained yourself.

But once again I will remind you, and anyone else reading, that your qualifications to communicate in a sane and intelligent way on any science related issue have been challenged, and you haven't been able or willing to demonstrate that you possess any such qualifications. Your gibberish rant above is consistent with that.

Do what I just did yesterday. "Predict" a CME *BEFORE* it shows up in LASCO/COR images. You can't do it. I've done it three times now, and I've predicted *BOTH* types of CME's. You're not even in the game yet. I'm not even convinced you realize that there are two distinct types of CME's yet, let alone that you have any clue how to "predict" either type.
Click to expand...


And once more I ask, so what? You looked at a picture that showed some solar activity and you guessed there might be some more solar activity. You could do it a thousands times and it still wouldn't be anything special. If you do it with a red nose and wig on, children wouldn't even laugh at you. If you do it seriously with a straight face, the world of science will.

Now if you would, without the temper tantrums and incivility, without any lies, arguments from incredulity and ignorance, without your usual waffling and evading, explain what it is you believe you're predicting and how you're going about making that prediction. Describe your method in quantitative objective terms, clearly and simply, so that other people can apply your method to achieve the same results and come to the same conclusion that you have. Also explain what is special, unique, or interesting about it.
 
Tubbythin said:
I suppose you've done a full analysis of the mean rate at which CME occur and know how good your predictions need to be for them to be statistically significant.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'll do better than that. I intend to isolate the exact surface areas, basic direction and eventually I'll explain the "cause(s)" that are responsible for the CME, not just predict an event. It may take me awhile to figure out the directional components with any accuracy, but I'm working on figuring out directional components *BEFORE* it's visible in LASCO/COR images.
 
Here's the part I think you should answer first and foremost:

GeeMack said:
Now if you would, without the temper tantrums and incivility, without any lies, arguments from incredulity and ignorance, without your usual waffling and evading, explain what it is you believe you're predicting and how you're going about making that prediction. Describe your method in quantitative objective terms, clearly and simply, so that other people can apply your method to achieve the same results and come to the same conclusion that you have. Also explain what is special, unique, or interesting about it.
Click to expand...
 
Michael Mozina said:
Boloney!

http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2010/10/10/behind_20101010_cor2_512.mpg

http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/browse/2010/10/10/ahead_20101010_cor2_512.mpg

What are you talking about? Here are the STEREO COR images from yesterday up through 2400. When did you see that CME show up RC?
Click to expand...
Boloney. You cannot even read simple numbers, e.g. the times in the movies: There is no CME in those movies which are from 2010-10-10 01:24:24 to 2010-10-10 12:09:35.

Your guess in the original post was for a "fullblown" CME about 2010-10-11 10:20 UT.
Then you posted two STERO movies to support your guess that showed that you were wrong:
The first STEREO movie ends at 2010-10-11 13:24:24 (got this wrong in the original post).
The second STEREO movie ends at 2010-10-11 13:24:23 (got this wrong in the original post).

There is activity in those movies from the start (2010-10-11 01:24:24) to about 2010-10-11 08:24:24.
This is all before your guess.

FYI, Michael Mozina: the definition of a prediction includes that it is in the future :jaw-dropp. You posted (original post) movies that ended at about 2010-10-11 08:38 UT.

A question for any astronomer looking at this thread:
What is the visual difference between a CME and a flare?

To my untutored eye the above movies show a flare rather than a CME but I am probably wrong. On the other hand
  • I have not been able to find a reference to a CME happening on 2010-11-10 between 01 and 08.
  • MM calls it a CME. Given his track record of incompetence, I would not be surprised if he is wrong.
 
Mister Earl said:
Here's the part I think you should answer first and foremost:
Click to expand...

Let's recap:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6369360&postcount=8

There seem to be at least two types of CME's that took place on the 22nd, one that I would describe as an electromagnetic CME, and one I'll describe as a "dark CME" (cause I know you guys love dark stuff, and this does begin with dark plasma). Both types are visible on the 22nd in the SDO data. The electromagnetic CME took place about the 10:00 position between the two active regions coming over the horizon. That was the CME I expected. The other one however takes place in the northern polar region and seems to be related to "dense" or "dark" plasma that rises up from the photosphere and eventually "blows" for lack of a better term. That one I did not expect but there are "signs" associated with these types of CME's just as there are 'signs" that of an electromagnetic flare/CME.
Click to expand...

Emphasis mine. :) The last CME was the "dark" type, the one that begins with "dark plasma" rising up above the photosphere.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6426685&postcount=16

What's "new" and "unique" about this method of 'detection/prediction' is that it uses two new filters from SDO to isolate the dark thread and the direction of that dark thread.
 
Michael Mozina said:
http://sdo.gsfc.nasa.gov/assets/img/latest/latest_1024_0304.mpg

The SDO 304A image shows the best view of the exploding filament. You can now observe it's outward momentum very clearly in the SDO 304A images. I suspect well be able to see the CME in LASCO-C2 and LASCO C3 SOHO images within the next couple of hours.
Click to expand...

Michael Mozina said:
Ya, but predicting *WHEN* it will rain, down to a few hours is a "science"!
Click to expand...
When I see storm clouds rolling in, I predict that it will rain in an hour or two. I'm nearly always right.

I should start a thread about it.
 
Reality Check said:
Boloney. You cannot even read simple numbers, e.g. the times in the movies: There is no CME in those movies which are from 2010-10-10 01:24:24 to 2010-10-10 12:09:35.

Your guess in the original post was for a "fullblown" CME about 2010-10-11 10:20 UT.
Click to expand...

For the record, my post was posted on 10/10/2010 at about 19:49UT, and my prediction was that we would see confirmation of the CME in LASCO/COR within 2 to 5 hours. The CME becomes visible right after midnight UT in COR and LASCO. I'd say that's pretty damn close.
 
Michael Mozina said:
For the record, my post was posted on 10/10/2010 at about 19:49UT, and my prediction was that we would see confirmation of the CME in LASCO/COR within 2 to 5 hours. The CME becomes visible right after midnight UT in COR and LASCO. I'd say that's pretty damn close.
Click to expand...
Thanks for making it clearer rather than the vague stuff in your post.

But: So what?
It is still "I predict wet days in winter" logic.
 
D'rok said:
When I see storm clouds rolling in, I predict that it will rain in an hour or two. I'm nearly always right.

I should start a thread about it.
Click to expand...

If it was necessary to make sure you brought things out of the rain, don't you think it would be a good idea to look at the storm clouds? The method that I'm using gave a five hour advantage over waiting to observe the CME in LASCO/COR. Don't you think it's worth exploring?
 
Reality Check said:
Thanks for making it clearer rather than the vague stuff in your post.

But: So what?
It is still "I predict wet days in winter" logic.
Click to expand...

Oh come on! I told you it would rain in 2-5 hours, and it rained in 5 hours. Now that I have a better handle on how long it takes for the CME to show up in LASCO/COR, I can refine my numbers accordingly the next time. I told you WHERE the CME would come from too, I didn't just say "somewhere on the sun". You're oversimplifying what I did and you know it.
 
Michael Mozina said:
If it was necessary to make sure you brought things out of the rain, don't you think it would be a good idea to look at the storm clouds? The method that I'm using gave a five hour advantage over waiting to observe the CME in LASCO/COR. Don't you think it's worth exploring?
Click to expand...
I'm operating under the assumption that you are always wrong about everything. I have a large evidence base for this assumption, namely, the fact that you are always wrong about everything.

I assume that whatever it is you think you are doing with this thread, it is wrong. I'm willing to be corrected by somebody who is not always wrong about everything, in which case, you would then be almost always wrong about everything.
 
D'rok said:
I'm operating under the assumption that you are always wrong about everything. I have a large evidence base for this assumption, namely, the fact that you are always wrong about everything.

I assume that whatever it is you think you are doing with this thread, it is wrong. I'm willing to be corrected by somebody who is not always wrong about everything, in which case, you would then be almost always wrong about everything.
Click to expand...

How was my last prediction "wrong"?
 
Michael Mozina said:
How was my last prediction "wrong"?
Click to expand...
Beats me. Most of the time I can't even parse what you are trying to say.

I'd still put money on you being wrong though. Remember the photoshop filter fiasco? I don't believe that you can competently interpret NASA imagery.

Oh, and predicting activity in an active region and calling that prediction significant is wrong in my books.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom