Haig and his Sun caused earthquakes

[phunk]

Scientists think fluctuations in the magnetic field could help identify where continental plates are shifting and help predict earthquakes.

You have cause and effect reversed if you think that supports your case.

 

[Haig]

You have cause and effect reversed if you think that supports your case.

How so?

A weakening Earth's magnetic field, which protects the planet from huge blasts of deadly solar radiation is leaving the globe more vulnerable to the effects of our variable star. Even though the Sun is weakening too, it's electromagnetic outputs are more effective. It's classic Little Ice Age conditions that occur around every 400 years.

The Sun and Earthquakes

 

[phunk]

How so?

The changes to the magnetic field that the article is talking about are not the cause of the changes within the earth, they're an effect of the changes within the earth.

 

[Haig]

The changes to the magnetic field that the article is talking about are not the cause of the changes within the earth, they're an effect of the changes within the earth.

As I read it they don't know why it's changing

The scientists who conducted the study are still unsure why the magnetic field is weakening

A weakening Sun and a weakening Earth are linked, as I understand it. Sure it's not mainstream thinking but that may change.

 

[Reality Check]

What NASA said is this ...

27 August 2015 Haig: It is a lie that a NASA article that does not mention that space weather can shake the Earth is "NASA are suggesting the space weather from the Sun can shake the Earth" !

P.S. Haig: 14 delusions about the Sun and earthquakes since 4 May 2015
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Ben Davidson) is deluded?
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Dr. Kongpop U-yen) is deluded?
26 August 2015 Haig: What's the "relative strength" of a solar flare that would suddenly change the rotation of the Earth?
27 August 2015 Haig: You cannot support an idea with an unpublished 2010 pre-print on arXiv.org that does not cite the deluded authors of that idea.

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Why did you waste our time with the "theory" of an uneducated crank

The Next Scientific Frontier: Sun-Earth Interactions

Oh good a link to the scientific literature ... oh no yet another irrelevant blog ! Not much wrong until what you quote, Haig.

That this uncited Mitch Battros's 1998 theory about weather is "endorsed" by a few people in a book means nothing in science. We have a book by a Mitch Battros called "Solar Rain" which leads us to yet another crank:
Mitch Battros has a M.S. in Psychology. His "theory" is his statement of a "non-equation".

28 August 2015 Haig: Why did you waste our time with the "theory" of an uneducated in solar or climate science, not published crank?
That failure to do basic checking needs a

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Are you wasting our time by linking to every web page on the sun and earthquake

Can Solar Activity Cause Earthquakes, Volcanoes and Extreme Weather?

The same author with now an obviously biased blog post. He links to a couple of old paper cherry picked to support his answer of yes. He ignore every other paper that exists about the Sun and earthquakes!
He has the bad idea of thinking that the NASA "spacequakes" article is about triggering of earthquakes. He ends very badly by falling for the paranoia of a politician !

Postscript: United States Secretary of Defense William Cohen said to a conference on terrorism on April 28, 1997 that people can:
Alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.

I asked this before:
28 August 2015 Haig: Why did you waste our time with the "theory" of an uneducated in solar or climate science, not published crank?

But this repeat of bad science needs another question:
28 August 2015 Haig: Are you wasting our time by linking to every web page mentioning the Sun and earthquakes, etc.?

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Fantasy of the Sun affecting power grids is the Sun triggering earthquakes

New Study Finds Earth’s Equatorial Regions Prone to Disruptive Space Weather

At last actual science reporting, Haig!
Pity about 28 August 2015 Haig: The fantasy of a paper about space weather affecting power grids is about the Sun triggering earthquakes, etc.

 

[Reality Check]

Hi jimbob, Don't you think this is REAL science? ...

Hi jimbob, just in case you do not know - this is not REAL science!
Haig has linked to the arxiv PDF which is not good scholarship because it hides the fact that this is a pre-print that has not been published in the 5 years since it was uploaded.
27 August 2015 Haig: You cannot support an idea with an unpublished 2010 pre-print on arXiv.org that does not cite the deluded authors of that idea.

 

[Reality Check]

SpaceWeatherNews.co

Other than the dubious source which is the deluded Ben Davidson's organization we have the LATEST SOLAR NEWS:

(Aug 27 0955UTC) A level 2 Geomagnetic Storm has set in.
(Aug 27 0207UTC) A level 1 Geomagnetic Storm has set in.
(Aug 26 1922UTC) Earth’s magnetic field has been unstable all day due to the solar wind shifts.
(Aug 25 1807UTC) CME or not, the solar wind is shifting, most importantly, the Phi angle.
(Aug 24 1332UTC) The CMEs are significantly late in arriving. Magnetic disruptions will not be as bad as predicted.

No mention of earthquakes, weather or pink unicorns .

 

[Reality Check]

Haig: Please cite your evidence that the LIA conditions occur around every 400 years

... It's classic Little Ice Age conditions that occur around every 400 years.

The current historically weak solar cycle is a continuation of the twenty-year downward trend in sunspot cycle strength that began in “Solar Cycle 22.” If this trend continues for the next couple of cycles, then the Earth could suffer another “grand minimum” event, similar to the “Maunder” and “Dalton” that caused the last “Little Ice Age.”

This is a fantasy from an blogger in a Big Government section of a blog.
You know it is a fantasy, Haig. I have cited the science for you many times - a new Maunder Minimum will cause a small decrease in the rate of global warming, not a new Little Ice Age.

You state a fantasy which seems to be an attempt to make the current solar sunspot minimum into a grand minimum and thus a LIA.
28 August 2015 Haig: Please cite your evidence that the LIA was caused only by the Maunder Minimum.
28 August 2015 Haig: Please cite your evidence that the LIA conditions occur around every 400 years (so we are due for one now).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age#Possible_causes

Scientists have tentatively identified these possible causes of the Little Ice Age: orbital cycles; decreased solar activity; increased volcanic activity; altered ocean current flows;[66] the inherent variability of global climate; and reforestation following decreases in the human population.

 

[Reality Check]

A weakening Sun and a weakening Earth are linked, as I understand it.

That understanding is wrong, Haig.
The Earth is not "weakening".
The Sun's solar output is weakening which is a reason why the Sun is not that cause of global warming as you know.
You mention magnetic fields which makes the understanding fatally flawed:

• The Sun's magnetic field is generated from a solar dynamo in plasma.
• The Earth's magnetic files is generated from a terrestrial dynamo in its iron core.
• This is a coincidence - a rapidly cycling magnetic field will have always have periods when it matches a slowly cycling magnetic field , i.e. both weakening or both strengthening.
  In a while the Sun's magnetic field will be strengthening again while as you have pointed out several times the Earths magnetic field is expected to be still weakening.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

Jrrarglblarg, Why ask the messenger? I just copy/paste stuff I've read that I think is interesting and has merit. It's up to you, the reader, to check it out and make your own mind up. Others would like to do your thinking for you.

amusing irony is amusing. It seems to me you're letting others do the thinking for you. The biblethumping videos you keep posting in lieu of intelligent answers constantly tell you what to think.

You don't have to be an expert, just compare both sides and decide who's talking sense.

I have, and your "theory" isn't making the cut. The complete and total absence of anything remotely numerical in the ElectroMcWhatever "theory" removes it from the realm of science to the realm of StarTrek repair manuals, which is to say File Under Fiction.

Most of us are taxpayers and most science is paid out of tax, so they have a duty to make it understandable to the paying public.

Undiluted horsepoop. The Duty of scientists is to do science. Any lack of comprehension on your part is independent of the information.

After all, come election time, you pick a political party and what do you base that choice on?

Red herring, and a non sequitur, and also nonsense.

But since you asked nicely ... my answers are No & Yes based on what I've read so far but it's early days yet

What do you think ?

What do I think of what, your half-donkey answer? I think you pulled it from a donkey's hindquarters because the YouTube bible you keep thumping gives you nothing specifically addressing my specific question. So you flipped a coin.

"How" would ElectroMcWhatever reduce friction?

 

[Haig]

WoW! RC just an incredible run of 8 posts - I've no answer to that!

amusing irony is amusing. It seems to me you're letting others do the thinking for you. The biblethumping videos you keep posting in lieu of intelligent answers constantly tell you what to think.

Thank you for your opinion

I have, and your "theory" isn't making the cut. The complete and total absence of anything remotely numerical in the ElectroMcWhatever "theory" removes it from the realm of science to the realm of StarTrek repair manuals, which is to say File Under Fiction.

Everyone is entitled to a view

Undiluted horsepoop. The Duty of scientists is to do science. Any lack of comprehension on your part is independent of the information.

Don't agree Jrrarglblarg, when you're spending public funds you should be accountable

Red herring, and a non sequitur, and also nonsense.

No it's not! Politicians run the country and deciding who is the right for it is important and voters have that choice. If voters can make that decision they can pick sides in a debate on a science issue.

What do I think of what, your half-donkey answer? I think you pulled it from a donkey's hindquarters because the YouTube bible you keep thumping gives you nothing specifically addressing my specific question. So you flipped a coin.

I was asking what did YOU think! How YOU would answer the TWO questions posed. Get it NOW ? Never mind

"How" would ElectroMcWhatever reduce friction?

That answer you will find in the links I've posted ... go find out for yourself ... I'm done with you


Irregular heartbeat of the Sun driven by double dynamo

Predictions from the model suggest that solar activity will fall by 60 per cent during the 2030s to conditions last seen during the 'mini ice age' that began in 1645

The Sun is Going to Sleep

The subject of a coming grand minimum, despite some of the experts' concurrence and the data suggesting only one near-term outcome for the sun, has drawn controversy from many in the heliophysics community; I have fallen on the side of a coming grand minimum and am not shy about my praise for this mathematical model. I don't like most models; they tend not to match observational data - this one does.

 

[Reality Check]

WoW! RC just an incredible run of 8 posts - I've no answer to that!

Haig: You have no answer to anything in the thread just spamming of links to crank videos, crank blogs, irrelevant science and invalid science.
As often is the case you had nothing valid in your original post which is why a whole 8 posts is needed to address the ignorance. But it can be condensed down to one post if you like:
Haig: 14 delusions about the Sun and earthquakes since 4 May 2015
26 August 2015 Haig: What's the "relative strength" of a solar flare that would suddenly change the rotation of the Earth?
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Ben Davidson) is deluded?
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Dr. Kongpop U-yen) is deluded?
27 August 2015 Haig: You cannot support an idea with an unpublished 2010 pre-print on arXiv.org that does not cite the authors of that idea.

27 August 2015 Haig: It is a lie that a NASA article that does not mention that space weather can shake the Earth is "NASA are suggesting the space weather from the Sun can shake the Earth" !
28 August 2015 Haig: Why did you waste our time with the "theory" of an uneducated in solar or climate science, not published crank?
28 August 2015 Haig: The fantasy of a paper about space weather affecting power grids is about the Sun triggering earthquakes, etc.
This is a candidate for a new delusion if there is no answer, e.g. the paper is irrelevant.

28 August 2015 Haig: Please cite your evidence that the LIA was caused only by the Maunder Minimum.

28 August 2015 Haig: Please cite your evidence that the LIA conditions occur around every 400 years (so we are due for one now).
This is a candidate for a new delusion if there is no answer, e.g. there is no such cycle.

28 August 2015 Haig: Are you wasting our time by linking to every web page mentioning the Sun and earthquakes, etc.?
Of course the answer to that is yes as this thread shows that you have no idea of the relevance of many of the things you ink to !

 

[Reality Check]

That answer you will find in the links I've posted ... go find out for yourself ... I'm done with you

Almost lying to Jrrarglblarg and then running away from the question is not good Haig.

His question was: Are solar triggered earthquakes triggered by an increase in tectonic stress pushing the fault over its threshold or a decrease in fault friction allowing release of existing built stresses?
And you cite links that are not to do with the mechanism by which solar triggered earthquakes are triggered here on Earth!
They are about the Sun. The Sun is not the Earth.

Come on, Haig - you have read all of this science about how the sun triggers earthquakes for credible sources of science. You must have read scientific literature about the mechanism by which it works. It should be easy for someone who has been convinced by valid science to cite valid science.
Or maybe not !
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Ben Davidson) is deluded?
27 August 2015 Haig: Can you understand that an EU conference speaker (Dr. Kongpop U-yen) is deluded?

 

[Haig]

RC the gift that keeps on giving #5

Big Sun-Diving Comet, MAJOR Storm Alert

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Jrrarglblarg, Why ask the messenger? I just copy/paste stuff I've read that I think is interesting and has merit. It's up to you, the reader, to check it out and make your own mind up. Others would like to do your thinking for you.

You don't have to be an expert, just compare both sides and decide who's talking sense. Most of us are taxpayers and most science is paid out of tax, so they have a duty to make it understandable to the paying public. After all, come election time, you pick a political party and what do you base that choice on?

But since you asked nicely ... my answers are No & Yes based on what I've read so far but it's early days yet

What do you think ?


SpaceWeatherNews.co

That truly is one of the more ignorant pieces of rant I've seen in a while.
No, scientists should not be spending time making their respective fields understandable to the public. As most fields in science take many many years of actual training to understand and any dumbing down leads to crank hypotheses like yours.
Scientists have a duty to do their best to use tax payers money to enlarge the sum of human knowledge and make this available trough publications so that anyone willing to spend the time learning a specific field can look trough them and come to their own conclusion.

 

[ferd burfle]

Jrrarglblarg, Why ask the messenger? I just copy/paste stuff I've read that I think is interesting and has merit. It's up to you, the reader, to check it out and make your own mind up. Others would like to do your thinking for you.

Whatsamatter, Haig? Can't defend the carp you post? Or just too lazy? Or is it that doing so would take time that could be used to post more links to pseudoscience? I predict lots of votes for "all of the above".

 

[Haig]

That truly is one of the more ignorant pieces of rant I've seen in a while.
No, scientists should not be spending time making their respective fields understandable to the public. As most fields in science take many many years of actual training to understand and any dumbing down leads to crank hypotheses like yours.
Scientists have a duty to do their best to use tax payers money to enlarge the sum of human knowledge and make this available trough publications so that anyone willing to spend the time learning a specific field can look trough them and come to their own conclusion.

We agree to disagree then

Whatsamatter, Haig? Can't defend the carp you post? Or just too lazy? Or is it that doing so would take time that could be used to post more links to pseudoscience? I predict lots of votes for "all of the above".

Carp? Is that you on a fishing trip then?