If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Serious Business: Just a heads-up, Earth's magnetic field is collapsing   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 163
    More: Interesting, magnetic fields, magnetosphere, global warming, Earth, ozone layer, space weathers, animal migration, cancer mortality rates  
•       •       •

18425 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Jan 2014 at 4:17 AM (29 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



163 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-28 07:01:20 PM
humans are to blame!!! with the huge increase of electromagnetic radiation their toys put out. tax the toys to oblivion!!!

How else will the algores and such keep up the money grab since the global warming is over.

humans are to blame!!! their reduction of VOC's is causing the world to freeze!!!
tax the green products for causing an ice age!!!
 
2014-01-28 07:07:01 PM
Some of my more paranoid Facebook friends will have a field day with this.
 
2014-01-28 08:12:20 PM
d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net

/flawed but fun portrayal of America once the grid goes down
/helps to wear patriotic clothing while reading
 
2014-01-28 08:43:55 PM
tea baggers and deniers
 
2014-01-28 09:01:57 PM

ReverendJynxed: Just_a_Bear: what is wrong with you people??

THANKS, OBAMA!

Easy now, this is the first he's heard about this.


He read it in the Daily mail...just like everyone else.
 
2014-01-29 04:47:59 AM
Where are the usual warmist propagandists from climate change threads? You know, I****r, J** S***, d************k, c**** n**** etc.

Obviously this thread hasn't been flagged on  http://realitydrop.org/
 
2014-01-29 07:39:40 AM

THE GREAT NAME: Where are the usual warmist propagandists from climate change threads? You know, I****r, J** S***, d************k, c**** n**** etc.

Frozen solid.

 
2014-01-29 10:21:14 AM

namatad: I predict that sooner or later the GW deniers will notice this fact and start pointing out that the earth was warming during the same period that the field was weakening!

STUDY IT OUT


I found the article confusing on this point.  They point to an uncited study that claims a "natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere."  But wouldn't that be a result of a stronger magnetic field, not a weaker one?

Wish they provided a link.  All I could find Googling was a few denier sites that provide the same quote.
 
2014-01-29 01:20:45 PM

caddisfly: [d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net image 312x475]

/flawed but fun portrayal of America once the grid goes down
/helps to wear patriotic clothing while reading


You're not wearing it everyday? Name noted
 
2014-01-29 02:00:38 PM

THE GREAT NAME: Where are the usual warmist propagandists from climate change threads? You know, I****r, J** S***, d************k, c**** n**** etc.

Obviously this thread hasn't been flagged on  http://realitydrop.org/



I can't speak for the others, but remember that not everyone is always around. Plus, this doesn't seem to be an obvious climate change thread - the same people won't necessarily be in every geek tab thread.

Is there something you wanted to discuss?
 
2014-01-29 02:04:46 PM

THE GREAT NAME: t3knomanser: THE GREAT NAME: Clearly the effect of a few decades with virtually no magnetic field to protect our technology is a much bigger deal

First, this process is not a "few decades" long. It's thousands of years. Second, There is no evidence that the Earth will be without a magnetic field for this period of time- to the contrary, our best evidence indicates that the Earth's magnetosphere remains roughly the same.

This isn't a matter of talking anything "down". There's no evidence that indicates any sort of alarm is necessary or helpful here. Further, unlike climate change,  there is literally nothing we can do. The biggest vulnerability to solar radiation is the power grid, and it is  impossible to harden it sufficiently to operate without the Earth's magnetosphere for protection. Further, since there's no evidence that it will be called upon to do so, it's foolish to seriously consider it  anyway.

What we do know is that the weakened field allows solar radiation to reach the upper atmosphere. We know this because of radioisotopes gathered from 40,000 year old ice cores (the same ice cores that allow us to measure the relative quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere). We know that there's no correlation between mass extinction cycles and geomagnetic reversals, implying that there's no organic danger due to radiation. We know that geomagnetic activity is chaotic and seemingly random (it is emphatically  not periodic, and it's wrong to say we're "overdue" for a reversal). We know that the process is  usually slow, but it can sometimes happen very quickly- the 40,000 year old Laschamp event happened over the course of less that 500 years. The Cretaceous Superchron lasted 10 million years.

Wow... that tl;dr overreaction speaks volumes, I'd say.



As you're apparently eager to discuss the topic, this sort of outright rejection of scientific information seems extremely counterproductive. Is there something you need clarified or perhaps need more information about?
 
2014-01-29 02:22:35 PM

Xcott: namatad: I predict that sooner or later the GW deniers will notice this fact and start pointing out that the earth was warming during the same period that the field was weakening!

STUDY IT OUT

I found the article confusing on this point.  They point to an uncited study that claims a "natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere."  But wouldn't that be a result of a stronger magnetic field, not a weaker one?

Wish they provided a link.  All I could find Googling was a few denier sites that provide the same quote.



You're correct. According to the mechanism that TFA alludes to, one would see the opposite correlation that namatad points out.

Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons why the Daily Mail, whether fairly or not, gets its 'Daily Fail' tag around here. Not only have they they shoehorned in this somewhat contradictory bit, they provide no details besides telling us it's a  "Danish study" (as if this was the mostimportant and therefore only detail to relay). This renders it very difficult to check.
 
2014-01-29 04:23:38 PM

Damnhippyfreak: Xcott: namatad: I predict that sooner or later the GW deniers will notice this fact and start pointing out that the earth was warming during the same period that the field was weakening!

STUDY IT OUT

I found the article confusing on this point.  They point to an uncited study that claims a "natural period of low cloud cover due to fewer cosmic rays entering the atmosphere."  But wouldn't that be a result of a stronger magnetic field, not a weaker one?

Wish they provided a link.  All I could find Googling was a few denier sites that provide the same quote.


You're correct. According to the mechanism that TFA alludes to, one would see the opposite correlation that namatad points out.

Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons why the Daily Mail, whether fairly or not, gets its 'Daily Fail' tag around here. Not only have they they shoehorned in this somewhat contradictory bit, they provide no details besides telling us it's a  "Danish study" (as if this was the mostimportant and therefore only detail to relay). This renders it very difficult to check.



Presumably they're talking about this:

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/may/13/evidence-that-c os mic-rays-seed-clouds
 
Displayed 13 of 163 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report