View Article & Comments

view the latest news articles
Solar Climate Change: May 2012 could be one of the most active Earthquake/Volcano periods in years!
Thursday, May 3rd 2012, 6:03 AM EDT
Co2sceptic (Site Admin)
MAY 2012 (&Jun1-3 for info) SLAT7LA parameters 16 April circulated 1 May.

Red Warning periods – are now standardized R1 to R5 (most extreme effect). In WeatherAction Solar Lunar Action Technique they indicate Solar-Lunar drivers of thunderstorm and related extreme events around the world. Extreme weather event risk Periods such as thunder/tornado (espec USA) development & potential Tropical Storm Formation periods are consequences of these drivers and are also periods in which standard meteorology models will notably underestimate strength of deluges, thunder, snow etc in forecasts from a day or so ahead. In these periods typically standard meteorology forecast (smf) estimates of rain/snow from a day or so ahead need to be doubled (or more for R5). Dates are UTC for estimation although there are uncertainties. FORECAST MAPS & detailed forecasts with corresponding specific likely weather events are issued for various parts of the world. Lesser extreme (‘Extra Activity’) and ‘Quiet periods’ and likely consequent weather scenarios are stated therein.

Major Earthquake Trial Risk Periods are in 2 categories, Q and q (with Q>q expected but the relationship is noisy). Volcano risk is similarlyV and v (V>v). These combine to give QV, Qv etc periods. Periods are largely the same as or overlap with Red warning weather periods and are not specific to any particular Earthquake prone region or location except now SLAT 7A may give some preferred earth hemispheres – see table. Q periods should give ~M6.0 & above earthquakes (Red on US Geological Survey) eg as on http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqinthenews/ & associated volcanism and increase of lesser quakes in low average quake level regions. M6.0 is arbitrary and other measures (eg M5.7+, M6.5+) can be considered.

SLAT 7A gives some extra indications of Quake strengths and perhaps more likely hemispheric regions (trials) of extra quakes / Volcs.


Article continues below this advert:

Image Attachment

The above is an extract from the Piers Corbyn March Earthquake & Major Volcano Red Warning chart published on May 1st, the period 5th - 7th May was highlighted as a Top Red Warning (R4) period, as per note from Piers Corbyn...Red Warning periods – are now standardized R1 to R5 (most extreme effect)

Piers Corbyn notes: 5-7th QV4 Extra Major Earthquake & Major Volcano Earth facing holes / active regions likely near centre solar disc Quakes M 6.5+ also quite likely Pacific ring - North Hemisphere probably preferred.

News for M6 and above Earthquakes to follow in the next few days (including Volcanic Eruptions etc.)

Image Attachment

CLICK to see latest active Volcano info from geocodezip.com

Also read: The Surprising Threat from Mexico's Awakened Volcano by Andrea Mustain, OurAmazingPlanet Staff Writer

North America's second-tallest volcano recently rumbled to life, putting authorities on edge. Big eruptions of Mexico's massive Popocatépetl volcano are "few and far between," as one geologist says. Yet even without any dramatic fireworks, 17,800-foot (5,425-meter) "Popo" has the power to wreak havoc.

Geologist Mike Sheridan, a professor emeritus at the University at Buffalo, said that Popo and, in fact, many other volcanoes around the world harbor a means of destruction that many people may not associate with volcanoes: mudflows.

"And they don't even require an eruption, so they are less predictable," Sheridan told OurAmazingPlanet... Click above ouramazingplanet.com link to read FULL report from Andrea Mustain
Comments section below this advert:

Comments

Have Your Say

Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 3rd 2012, 4:29 PM EDT
I'm getting conflicting messages from this
"Q periods should give ~M6.0 & above earthquakes...M6.0 is arbitrary and other measures (eg M5.7+, M6.5+) can be considered."
This means in effect that anything goes?

Do these dates 2nd-3rd & 5th-7th still have the +/- 1 day option? If so then the warning periods above are useless because they cover every single day of the period! If not then the M6 EQ on 01/05 will have to count as a miss.
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on May 3rd 2012, 5:01 PM EDT
Hi

I guess in times of low activity then Piers would be using a M5.7 but that will not be so for this month, I have seen the above chart in FULL and he has an R5 and another R4.

Its going to be a complicated month so hang on to your seat
Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on May 4th 2012, 9:42 AM EDT
Elim,

Do you have to pretend to be stupid and be so misleading (also re your other posting**) and unwilling to reveal your true identity? Why is that? What is your explanation for giving totally wrong figures on quakes?
** http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=9507

1. Have you seen all our quake forecasts this year? Do you understand what they are about?

2. The objective is to develop predictable periods of increased activity of major quakes. These are the periods shown and we currently use M6 AND ABOVE &/or M6.5+ as a standard with M6.5 more likely in Q4 and Q5 than in the other periods (Try reading what we write).

3. We could use any (higher) measure we liked and you can too. Try it for M8 (as someone suggested) and see if these come preferentially in or near our windows (which they do, but there are fewer to test). We don't use measures in the current high activity months for the world testing lower than M6+ or M6.5+ because lower ones will include many things we don't know about and might well behave totally differently, although in lower activity times M5 would have relatively more importance (see EXPLANATION APRIL RESULTS below).

4. These are public trials to find things out and not here for green therapy and political axes being ground. Other things are being done but not open to the eyes of time-wasters.

5. (For the genuinely interested). The length and choice of periods have at present been chosen so that as near as possible they cover HALF the time. So for eg M6+ or M6.5+ more than half in each month should come in QV (narrow) periods, (and a bit more in narrow periods +/- half a day etc) and they do generally.
On this see the March comments for example which show results at least 80% ahead of luck or 180& ahead of luck for the biggest (small sample):
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=9340


6. Skill appears to increase with intensity level WHICH WE EXPECTED and the highest statistical significance appears to be with the most intense quakes. THE SAME AS FOR OUR LONG RANGE WEATHER FORECASTING.
We also test wider windows eg +/-half a day +/- one day to see if our boundaries are correct (and by looking at the results now make some quake periods earlier than the corresponding weather periods and this has given improved subsequent success). When we do this of course the test measure is not against 50/50 but against the new higher % of 'on' days.

7. Under the narrow windows the quake on 1st was 1hr and 17minutes early. Elim, I am not surprised you didn't mention how close it was. Now WHY WAS THAT?
We need a way of dealing with such and wings on windows is one such way and appears to be helping understanding since we only specify to one day then there must be uncertainties of +/- half a day - that is basic measurement theory (Metrology as opposed to Meteorology)


ASSESSMENT (Not substitute for independent assessor) of APRIL and EXPLANATION NOTE ON LEVELS.

The purpose of these trials is to seek solar-lunar based triggers for the biggest quakes because we think the large changes in the earth's crust are so driven. Smaller quakes may well be just internally driven noise with little relation - or opposite relation to large events or driven by something else.


To use a weather comparison. Consider predicting massive hail whereas a smaller event involving water might be drizzle or fog (and note in comparative terms an M8 is 1000 x bigger in amplitude than M5). So we can have periods for large hail and we could test by looking for large hail or someone might say let's test by looking for drizzle or fog because its all water.
(In fact I think you would find drizzle and large hail are anti-correlated.) Now that would be very stupid but of course this is what Elim has done and his/her 'test' of M5 says more about him/her than our forecasts. Elim's forecast of low quakes using our windows for high quakes doesn't work (in these active periods). We MUST LOOK AT THE BIG EVENTS). Well of course it doesn't work we don't expect it to work. We design our parameters not you.

What you have shown Elim is We didn't forecast something...wait for it...which we didn't issue forecasts for. Brilliant, how profound; and that David Beckham you know we've proved he didn't score goals at matches he didn't attend, shame!

Elim how about using our quake periods to predict election results - after all landslides and earthquakes are connected or... anything you name it.

Anyhow let's have a look at April.
There were a lot of good confirmations and there appears, basically to have been a set of events mainly on 11th which may have been 8-10th extension, which we missed in narrow windows, reducing skill mainly for M6+ while skill is maintained for M6.5+ However you look at if March is included we are ahead of luck in M6+ as well as higher. Now on this I haven't looked at Volcanoes but they would help the case further it appears


Here we have a question, quakes come in groups (in time) - a bit like sunspots do on the surface of the sun (That is not the reason, just an analogy) and we need a way of predicting and defining groups really - which is what big quakes are about.

1. The Most powerful periods, QV4,
- what we are mainly looking at.

8-10th extended + half day gives
(VERY) big quakes M8.6 and M8.2 - confirmed
in N hemisphere - confirmed
interestingly ALL M6+ quakes on 11th were in N hemisphere
with earth facing huge coronal holes - confirmed on 10th:
http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?PHPSESSID=4ghb90693p0iriiu180etcqpn2&month=04&day=10&year=2012&view=view

21-24th no need for extension
M6.0 on 21st - confirmed
in South hemisphere - confirmed
with earth facing coronal holes pair and active regions confirmed
http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?month=04&day=21&year=2012&view=view


2. The others - looking at quake counting.
Now on this stuff we know there will be big ones we miss probably because we don't yet think we understand all the triggers but the results are interesting and show most skill - as in March - for biggest events.

Using success level, S, (1=chance).
Qin = number in the periods, Qt = number in month.
(using most recent USGS and it can change as they revise!)
Din = days in periods Dt = Days in month.

S = (Qin/Qt)/(Din/Dt) TABLE:

M level narrow +/- half day +/- one day

M8+...(0/2)/(15/30)=0...(2/2)/(20.5/30)=1.5...(2/2)/(24/30)=1.25

M6.5+..(4/8)/(15/30)=1...(6/8)/(20.5/30)=1.1...(7/8)/(24/30)=1.1

M6+..(9/22)/(15/30)=0.8..(12/22)/(20.5/30)=0.8..(18/22)/(24/30)=1.02


So we see windows are almost right +/- half day gives best skill for highest quakes. Skill on this month for M6 is not present, but it was in March. Overall it is there for M6+, but less than for higher quakes.

The CH/active regions earth facing and hemisphere results are significant and important and continue successes in previous months

Thanks Piers

PS. to CR what should be done when people enter false figures in 'assessment'?
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on May 4th 2012, 11:21 AM EDT
Hi Piers and thanks for dropping in

I have mentioned to Elim that I will count up the points on each section of the month.

I'm glad to say that there are others who agree with the way you put the points together.

If I was you, I would not take up your time to justify your position in this matter, I'm glad to say Elim is a skeptic and he is doing what we do in regard to "Man Made" climate change.

My only issue is, is, if there is a M6.5 in the next few days will Elim be confused as to if it counts as a hit?
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 4th 2012, 3:58 PM EDT
There are too many pages with ongoing comments!

I did an analysis of March + April as suggested and placed my findings here http://bit.ly/Iit2zA I'm happy for you to dissect them, but please cut down on the ridicule, let's try and keep it professional.

Quote Corbyn:(This page) "we currently use M6 AND ABOVE &/or M6.5+ as a standard with M6.5 more likely in Q4 and Q5 than in the other periods (Try reading what we write)."

Quote Corbyn: (This page) "M6.0 is arbitrary and other measures (eg M5.7+, M6.5+) can be considered."

On this basis I extended the magnitude range, I note that this is in fact not acceptable in this trial.

Quote Corbyn: (This page) "Under the narrow windows the quake on 1st was 1hr and 17minutes early. Elim, I am not surprised you didn't mention how close it was. Now WHY WAS THAT?"

This is worryingly unscientific for your trial, the narrow window has defined parameters, the EQ on the 1st did not fall within the narrow date criteria although it did fall into the wider window.

@Co2sceptic
Hi and thanks for remembering that I'm not a warmist!
No, I won't be confused now that I know both wide and narrow windows are still operational.
Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on May 6th 2012, 11:43 PM EDT
JUST A SECOND
Yes Elim, of course 1hr 17min out is 'out', but you you havn't answered why you chose to ignore the shortness of the time. If it were one second out would you still not mention it? No explanation needed, everyone can draw their own conclusions.

The point of half day (eg) wings on periods is to get a grip on such things while according higher prob of success by chance to keep the test objective. Where narrow period misses are consistently one-sided that would indicate a shift of periods would be needed.

More on this post is on WeatherAction site where loads of people commenting make it very clear why this issue of credit where it's due and the need to strike while the iron is hot (or in this case very cold to confuse a metaphor) is important:-
http://www.weatheraction.com/displayarticle.asp?a=453&c=5

I have been advised not to waste time on Elim so here is some more important stuff:-

Another point to understand in these trials is that they are about specific statements not about all possibilities. The skill of a racing tipster is tested by the skill of the tips not by what he didn't say about other races.

Our quake trials are of the form
"A or above will happen in or near period B"

It does NOT mean we are also saying
"A or above will NOT happen outside periods B or near".

For quakes this means there will probably be other quakes of other causes which we don't yet know about, however we are establishing or hoping to establish that maybe all the biggest quakes (which then mother aftershock quakes) are triggered by our solar-lunar process.

In technical terms the chi-square test is therefore inapplicable as was the case for our early gale forecasts. However that didn't stop people applying it even though they knew it was inapplicable.

This point also leads to questions as to what is the correct average expectation chance rate of quakes in each month. Is it the average of what did happen in that month, or the average over the last 3 months or? The issue really is did some measure of big quake power go up significantly in or near the periods predicted. So far the answer is yes providing we look at the biggest quakes, and QV4 and QV5 are favored in results so far for the biggest quakes and associated predicted coronal holes (CH).

NOTE we do NOT say all CH lead to quakes but that certain special predicted CH do. I have to say this so people understand (not deliberately misunderstand) and don't go off mis-testing.
It's like a tipster saying the jockey in red will win the Derby. That does NOT mean that another Jockey in red will win the next race.

AND EXTREME EVENT - HAIL & TORNADO NEWS
The R4 period above predicts Very High tornado risk (compared with normal) in 5-7th (which is in this case is the same as QV4 period) and we also warned of more HAIL events generally in these Maunder-Dalton type circulation patterns and lo-and-behold here we have (one sent via the above link to WA site):-

Philippe (Alsace) wrote:
Hi Piers and everybody, Was near Paris this week end. Numerous internet references about flash floods in the region ile de France and more interesting a [color=red]hail storm[color] in the city of Dreux (west of paris) on sat evening...bye bye
http://communaute.lachainemeteo.com/communaute-meteo/meteo-dreux/neiges---giboulees---grele-/photo-orage-de-grele-84978.php#ancre_photo http://www.lechorepublicain.fr/eure-et-loir/actualite/pays/pays-drouais/dreux/2012/05/06/un-violent-orage-de-grele-cree-un-veritable-chaos-a-dreux-diaporama-actualise-1161082.html
THIS IS AN AMAZING PIC Thanks Philippe!!!
This is a confirmation of an explicit EuroMap forecast for HAIL in France in region including Paris in period 5-7 May

INCREDIBLE VICIOUS DEADLY Tornado in East Japan 6 May VIDEO!!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-17976320


Piers

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Monday May 07, 2012 at 12:24 AM EDT
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 7th 2012, 4:26 AM EDT
You've got a great hypothesis Piers, that there is a positive correlation between solar activity and EQ frequency. This is ideal for a retrospective study with the excellent records that are available to you. Using your current 'prediction' method of evaluation is doing you no favours. Taking each month in isolation gives far too small numbers to safely draw any conclusion. Screaming 'success' in bold coloured type if you get a positive hit looks very amateurish I'm afraid and contributes to a lack of credibility that isn't totally justified.

I understand why you choose just to count EQ's that fall within your prediction windows, EQ's outside these times may have a different cause.However you can't ignore them because you don't know that they are different to the on target EQ's. As I demonstrated here http://bit.ly/Iit2zA the (very small sample)March + April results showed that your prediction days did no better than random chance.

This isn't about prediction yet Piers, it's about correlation and providing solid evidence for your hypothesis. Get your retrospective study done and published - this will give you 'ownership' of the work and then you and others can look at testing it into the real world as a potentially useful EQ prediction tool.

Good luck.
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on May 7th 2012, 6:00 PM EDT
Under the line of M6.5, but this may be the first of any note so far in this window. I noticed that Sun Spot Area 1476 has only burst into life life TODAY after a couple of low CME over the weekend, more to follow

Azerbaijani 5.8 magnitude earthquake echoes in Armenia - panarmenian.net

PanARMENIAN.Net - At 8:40 am, May 7 local time a 5.8 magnitude earthquake hit Azerbaijan and echoed in some Armenian provinces and the capital as well.

The epicenter was located at Azerbaijani-Russian frontline, in Zaqatala town. According to European Seismological Center, it hit at 10km depth.

3-4 magnitude earthquake was recorded in Armenian capital Yerevan, as well as Vanadzor, Tavush, Ijevan, Sevan and Artashat towns.

Comment edited by Co2sceptic (forum) on Monday May 07, 2012 at 6:03 PM EDT
Posted by Co2sceptic (forum) on May 7th 2012, 6:03 PM EDT
Elim

You don't have to answer these questions, but it would help Piers

Q1) Who are you?

Q2+) Also, I for one can't understand why your so keen on putting Piers down, have you an ulterior motive in this topic. remember this is a TRIAL and NOT a method of work that he says he is 100%.

I cant find any source that says they can predict ANYTHING about Earthquakes in advance, so if this period (5th - 7th) is a FAIL then the lookback on his results so far, still puts the results at over 80%. So Piers has done more then anyone else has managed to do so far, so whats your beef?

Please also display the results you have used to put him down, and the remark you have made about the weather prediction for MAY, whats that about, who else said in MID APRIL other then Piers that MAY would be COLD in the UK. Again you make it sound as if it was easy to do and you could have done it etc.

Taking each month in isolation gives far too small numbers to safely draw any conclusion.

The above remark you have made indicates that you have not understood what Piers is trying to achieve. Piers has NEVER stated that ALL Earthquakes are down to Solar Activity! What Piers is trying to show is that the HIGH END results at M6+ or M6.5+ or even M7+ tie in with his high level events on the surface of the Sun. The reason this trial is being produced is to get some sort of handle on the range of Earthquakes M6+ or M6.5+ or even M7+. What you are trying to do apart from tease Piers, is to say that Piers is trying to state ALL Earthquakes are from Solar activity, and this is NOT TRUE, so how is it your going on about lesser quake levels when Piers is working on this Trial for higher levels?

At the end of the day I suspect your just a kid who is flattered he can chat to Piers and tease him, but doing so is taking him away from his work and time.

I have already stated to Piers that he is getting involved with a person that is taking up far to much of his time, if you have turned his results upside down, let's all have a look!

Elim, it's time to put up or shut up!

Comment edited by Co2sceptic (forum) on Tuesday May 08, 2012 at 3:06 AM EDT
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 8th 2012, 10:37 AM EDT
Hi Co2

I'm sorry that you've not been able to find "any source that says they can predict ANYTHING about Earthquakes in advance" (your capitilisation) of course this sort of research isn't always freely available on the internet, but if you take a trip to your local university library you may be allowed to read through some of the many journal articles there.

I do want to understand this trial but it is very confusing.

"What Piers is trying to show is that the HIGH END results at M6+ or M6.5+ or even M7+ tie in with his high level events on the surface of the Sun." (my underlining)

I assume these R periods are Piers predictions of solar activity, so if say an M7 EQ occurs in a prediction window but the solar activity predicted doesn't occur how is this scored in the trial?

As for the May cold I certainly haven't put him down, who knows what the CET will show by the month's end - I don't. I'm amazed at your perspicacity though - on the 1st May you were able to write a headline about "the record cold May in the UK"!
Posted by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on May 8th 2012, 5:16 PM EDT
WE ARE BUILDING A CATHEDRAL IN THE SKY, WITHOUT A BLUE-PRINT.
CO2 Sceptic and others, THANKS very much for your positive and useful comments.

Trials are trials and there to learn from. Foolish people misunderstanding them and making up tests to fail is just, well, brain-dead but also time-wasting and annoying.

And here I want to make a point about advancement of science. In developing SLAT for weather. We had to look at lots of stuff (OVER YEARS) that showed just a bit of success ahead of luck before we understood. So doing a test of something which might succeed by luck at 80% and getting 85% success is advance. It's not a trick or game its a scientific method. You only need to beat the roulette wheel by a few percent and you can then start to break the bank! (until banned)

If we get a set of predictable parameters that show consistent Success ie getting results ahead of luck then we make these into a forecast system. As it is now we are playing around with a lot of things and have got consistent success in some respects IN THE IMPORTANT DIRECTIONS WE EXPECTED AND DESIRED - tornadoes/thunder and the biggest quakes in +/- half day most active predicted periods R4/R5. (Others also will deal with significance).

What we are doing is like building a tower without a blue print. We are way up there and waving struts and compression sections around to go higher and higher (like the cathedrals were built). We have to test and test to get them in the right place then we can build further.


To measure where we are at we have to look at everything basic in each time period (and its timing) and on this the Nasties ONLY look at one (the weakest) parameter retrospectively and in only part of a sequence of forecasts. It's called cherry picking of the nasty kind.

Now looking at the 5-7 May R4 and linked QV4 we must examine every forecast statement numbered below because each is a member in building the tower. I will also say what would have probably happened had William Hill (imaginary £10 per bet) account betting still been open to me:

1. Extreme weather - thunder Risk compared to normal VERY HIGH.
On this I would have placed bets for extreme thunder or eg hail to measure it objectively (since that was in the main forecasts) in a) Britain, b) N France (see the Euromap forecast.
BOTH WERE CONFIRMED at odds well say would have been 3/1 against
So on this £20 placed gives winnings of £60

2. VERY HIGH TORNADO RISK compared to local normals.
Bets would be placed a) Britain, b) N France probably at 10/1 (fair odds prob 20/1 but they never gave above 10/1. Result on £20
a)France lose I think, b) Britain win £100

For this hail and tornado confirmation see:
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=9586


3. EARTH FACING (must be large) CORONAL HOLES / Major active regions
- YES there was a big pair, see:
http://spaceweather.com/archive.php?month=05&day=07&year=2012&view=view
Fair odds maybe 10/1 or 5/1 Of course you have to define how close and so on but there aren't many often this big and well placed so say 5/1
- result win £50

4. An M6.5+ quake in the period (or +/- half a day) Odds don't matter because its a Lose £10

5. (Largest in) Pacific ring - N hemisphere preferred.
For this in the past we looked at any quakes around but really we only want the big ones and there were none so what to say? Leave it but NOTE the majority on the M5+ table (that being all there is to look at) were NH, and the biggest were Pacific ring but in fact the largest - Tonga - was SH. This would get classed as 'non runner' (stake returned).

So the result on stakes of £60, LOSE £20, WIN 60+100+50=£210.
Nett winnings £190 on stake of £60 ie over 300% PROFIT. Well of course play around with whatever - halve it to 150% but by any reasonable measure this is miles better than luck which would give 0% profit. However a Nasty would just look at one thing retrospectively; in this case the quake that didnt come in this time window.

SO WHAT WAS GOING ON? Getting such a strong coronal hole pair yet no big quake is actually surprising.

Did we get volcano activity instead? (Difficult to bet on with real or imaginary bets).
One could consider the depth of what happened but it doesn't look special. It might be the period was just put too early and a major quake will come very soon in which case the rules for timing might need a shift.

Also there are probably other magnetic and solar wind factors to check. On the Moon an interesting point is the 'Super-moon' (perigee full moon) on 5th/6th which we always said was not as such involved in our theory of triggering quakes but Full moons or perigee full moons might in fact be a hinderence on or before the full moon for our process. [Note, eg, there were 4 M6.5+ quakes within one day of the last 12 full moons. One came the day before full moon, NONE were on the full Moon day and 3 were the day after. The expected number with the data would be 1.6 each day. Of course this is a tiny sample and just an illustration. Post full moon extra quake activity has been noted before but perhaps the perigee aspect of this full moon is a dampener to our special Coronal Hole etc driven events.] People may recall there was a lot of talk of quakes on the last Super-moon and we said No. Nothing important happened then either.

Comment edited by Piers Corbyn (Twitter) on Tuesday May 08, 2012 at 5:39 PM EDT
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 8th 2012, 5:34 PM EDT
I do want to understand your trial Piers, so I will ignore your continued immoderate language and repeat (differently) the question I asked earlier.

Are you only looking for coronal hole events as triggers for an R warning? If so, what happens if a coronal event does not occur during the prediction window but significant weather/geological events do - how do you interpret that within your trial?
Posted by Ulric Lyons (forum) on May 8th 2012, 10:21 PM EDT
@Elim (Twitter) on May 8th 2012, 5:34 PM

Good question Elim, as I also independently noticed coronal hole correlation, maybe I should comment. There are around 30% of Mag7+ EQ`s that do not have an Earth facing coronal hole present. I would think that the coronal holes are not triggering the EQ`s directly, but are typically correlating to certain solar wind conditions when they are Earth facing.

Comment edited by Ulric Lyons (forum) on Wednesday May 09, 2012 at 6:53 AM EDT

Comment edited by Ulric Lyons (forum) on Monday May 14, 2012 at 5:17 PM EDT
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 9th 2012, 2:41 AM EDT
Thanks Ulric, so as expected there are signs of a correlation. What I don't understand is why this trial isn't conducted retrospectively with archival material and continuing with analysing current events as they happen. i.e when there is an EFCH look at the weather before, during and after - same with seismological events in this period. Or has this already been done and the findings published?

How can a hypothetical visit to the bookies provide anything more than (very weak) anecdotal evidence.
Posted by Elim (Twitter) on May 9th 2012, 4:23 AM EDT
Ah, a quick bit of research and I see there have been plenty of academic studies on solar triggers for EQ's. Especially interesting is the work of John F Simpson which way back in 1967 "Solar activity as a triggering mechanism for earthquakes"
"The graphs presented in this paper permit probabilistic forecasting of earthquakes, and when used in conjunction with local indicators may provide a significant tool for specific earthquake prediction."


Also a 2003 paper "On the relation between solar activity and seismicity" from the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Influences Laboratory, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.

"The main source of high-speed solar wind are solar
coronal boles and coronal mags ejections (CMEs). They
are both regularly monitored by satellite and groundbased
instruments, which makes it possible to forecast
periods of enhanced seismic risk. To he geoeffective, the
solar wind from a coronal hole or from a CME has to first
arrive at the Earth, so the geoeffectiveness of solar wind
from a both coronal hole and from a CME mainly.
depends on their position relative to the Earth. For the
CMEs an additional factor is their size and speed. Faster
and wider CMEs are more geoeffective. It has been
recently found [22] that a useful tool in identifying the
population of geoeffective CMEs is the detection of longwavelength
(decameter-hectometer) type I1 solar radio
bursts, as the CMEs associated with them are much faster
and wider than average. However, much further study is
needed before the enhanced seismic risk related to solar
activity can be reliably evaluated."


Plenty of interesting reading to be done!
Oh, and Paul Hudson tells me there has been a large retrospective study already done of 300+years of solar and seismic activity. So that's good to know!
19 comments found
showing page 1 of 2
« previous    1 2    next »

Comments Login

Login with your Twitter or Forum Account



OR

Sign in with your existing Forum Account







I forgot my password





Show #11-20

Current Poll
» How much "Man Made" CO2 Is In The Earth's Atmosphere?
I think ALL of the CO2 in the Earth's Atmosphere is from man.
I'm not sure how much "Man Made" CO2 is in the Earth's Atmosphere.
There is .04% CO2 in the Earth's Atmosphere and of that "Man" has added an extra 4% (1 part in 62,500)

skip to results

Articles by Climate Realists and Topics

» Recently used highlighted

ALL #-E F-J K-O P-T U-Z
10:10 No Pressure
2010 Forecast
2011 Forecast
2012 Forecast
2012 USA Election
2013 Forecast
24 Hours of Reality
28Gate
A Chart to Debunk AGW
A Graph to Debunk AGW
A Moment Of Clarity
Acidic Oceans
Adam Yoshida
Adrian MacNair
Adrian Sach (Donation)
Advert
AfricaGate
African Drought
Ahmed Boucenna
Al Ritter
Alan Broone
Alan Carlin
Alan Caruba
Alan Cochrane
Alan Jones
Alan Moran
Alan Nicholl
Alan Siddons
Alan Smith (Donation)
Alan Tenczar (Donation)
Alan Tichmarsh
Alberta Election 2012
Alberto Miatello
Alec Evans (Donation)
Alec Pearson (Donation)
Alex Epstein
Alex Jones
Alex Newman
Allan Macrae
Allen Quist
Alok Mukherjee
Amanda Baillieu
Amazon Rain Forests
AmazonGate
American Meteorological Society
Amy Ridenour
An Inconvenient Truth
Andre Bijkerk
Andrew Bevan (Donation)
Andrew Bolt
Andrew Duncan (Donation)
Andrew J. Hoffman
Andrew Kenny
Andrew McKillop
Andrew Montford
Andrew Neil
Andrew Orlowski
Ann McElhinney
Ann Widdecombe
Anna Sanclement
Anthony Bright-Paul
Anthony Cox
Anthony G. Martin
Anthony J. Sadar
Anthony Watts
Anton Evseyev
Anton Yevseev
Antonio Mario Lorusso (Donation)
Arcady Tishkov
ArcticSnap.Com
Arno Arrak
Art Horn
Arthur Rorsch
Arthur Wiegenfeld
Arvid Pasto
Astrophysics v Meteorology
AtlasGate
Aubrey Vaughan
Audio
Augusto Mangini
Barrington Davey (Donation)
Barry Brill
Barry Cooper
Barry Napier
Barry Schwartz
Barry Woods
Barun S. Mitra
BBC
BBC Review
Ben Fordham
Ben Pile
Benny Peiser
Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) Project
Berthold Klein
Betting
Beverly K. Eakman
Bill Board
Bill DiPuccio
Bill Frezza
Bill McKibben
Bill Stratton
Bjarne Andresen
Bjorn Lomborg
Blast From the Past
Bo Christiansen
Bob Ashworth
Bob Berman
Bob Carter
Bob Ellis
Bob Godfrey
Bob Lutz
Bob Tisdale
Bob Webster
Book
Boris Johnson
Brainwashing
Brendan O'Neill
Brent Bozell
Bret Stephens
Brian McNair
Brian Sussman
Brice Bosnich
Bring It On
Bruce Thompson
Bryan Fischer
Bryan Leyland
Burger King Sign
Buzz Aldrin
By Jove I Think They've Nearly Got It
C. R. de Freitas
Calem Smith
Cameron English
Campaign Against Climate Change
CampusReform.org
Carbon Trading
Carey Roberts
Carl Brehmer
Cartoon
Cathy Taibbi
Catlin Arctic Survey
Cause & Effect
Censorship
CERN
CFACT
Charles Anderson
Charles Booker (Donation)
Charles Memminger
Charles O'Connor (Donation)
Chip Knappenberger
Chris de Freitas
Chris Smith
Chriss W. Street
Christian Gerondeau
Christmas Donation
Christopher Booker
Christopher C. Horner
Christopher Chantrill
Christopher Essex
Christopher Jones (Donation)
Christopher Pearson
Chuck Rogér
Claes Johnson
Claude Allègre
Claude Sandroff
Cliff OLLIER
Climate Cognitive Dissonance
Climate Fools Day
Climate of Doubt
Climate Protest
Climate Reality Project
ClimateGate
ClimateRapidResponse.org
ClimateRealists.Com
climaterealists.org.nz
ClimateWiki.org
Climatic Research Unit
Clive James
Clouds
CO2 Experiment
CO2 Is Green
CO2 Level
CO2 Propaganda
Coldest Journey On Earth
Combustible
Comet C/2013 A1
Comment
Comment On Article
Conrad Black
conservation
CONVOY OF NO CONFIDENCE
COP18
Copenhagen Conference
Countryside Party
CowGate
Craig Idso
Craig Rucker
Crop Yield
Daily Quake
Dan Miller
Dan Pangburn
Daniel Compton
Daniel Croak (Donation)
Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Hannan
Daniel Henninger
Daniel M. Sweger
Danielle Smith
Daren Jonescu
Darren Pope
Darren Samuelsohn
Dave Clewlow (Donation)
Dave Dahl
Dave Epstein
Dave Hatter
David Appell
David Archibald
David Becker (Donation)
David Bellamy
David Bennett (Donation)
David Bredenkamp
David Brockless (Donation)
David Brook (Donation)
David Child
David Deming
David Dick
David E. Sumner
David Evans
David Garner (Donation)
David H. Douglass
David Hanna (Donation)
David Hathaway
David Henderson
David Howse (Donation)
David Icke
David Ivory
David Klenk (Donation)
David Lappi
David Legates
David Lungren
David R. Legates
David Rose
David Schnare
David Smith (Donation)
David Spady
David Spiegelhalter
David Whitehouse
Dean Grubbs
Death Threats
Debra J. Saunders
Delayed
Denis Ables
Denis Rancourt
Dennis Ambler
Dennis Boothby
Dennis Byrne
Dennis T. Avery
Derek Alker
Deroy Murdock
Des Moore
Dexter Wright
Diana Allan (Donation)
Dick Warburton
Dominic Lawson
Dominik Jung
Don Blankenship
Don Easterbrook
Don Parkes
Don Petersen
Don Pierce (Donation)
Don Surber
Donald Trump
Donald Williams (Donation)
Donna Laframboise
Doreen Alli Linder
Doug L. Hoffman
Doug Wyatt
Douglas Cohen
Douglas Cotton
Douglas J. Keenan
Duggan Flanakin
Duncan Davidson
E. Calvin Beisner
Earthquake Research
Earthquakes (>=7.5) 2012
Earthquakes (>=7.5) 2013
Earthquakes (>=7) 2012
Earthquakes (>=7) 2013
Ed Berry
Ed Caryl
Ed Hiserodt
Ed Hoskins
Ed West
Editorial
Education
Edward Barnes
Edward F Blick
Edward Lane
Edward Moran
Edward R. Long
Edward Wimberley
Edwin X Berry
Elisa Pardo
Elizabeth Auld (Donation)
Email
Emily Oster
Energy & Fuel
EnergyGate
Environmentalism
Erik Kempers (Donation)
Erik Wemple
Erl Happ
Ernst Georg Beck
Exclusive
F. Swemson
Facebook
FakeGate
Falling Birds
Fan Page
FAQ
Ferenc Miskolczi
Film & TV
Financial
Finis Gillespie (Donation)
Fire James Hansen
FloodGate
Floor Anthoni
Food
Forrest Mims III
Fortunato F Condo (Donation)
Forum
Frank Davis
Frank J. Tamel
Frank J. Tipler
Frank Lansner
Frank Sherosky
Fraser Nelson
Fred Dardick
Fred Singer
Frederick Forsyth
Freeman Dyson
Fritz Vahrenholt
Front Page News
Frozen Al Gore
Funding
Gai Lehn (Donation)
Garrett Bastardi
Garth Paltridge
Gary DeBois (Donation)
Gary Novak
Gary Sutton
Gary Thompson
Gary Williams (Donation)
Gavin Cooke
Gayam Walter (Donation)
Geert Groot Koerkamp
Geoff Sharp
Geoffrey Lean
Geoffrey Lehmann
Geoffrey Temple (Donation)
Geological Society of America (GSA)
George Carlin
George Christensen
George Gardner (Donation)
George Giles
George Jonas
George Kukla
George Pell
George Will
Gerald T. Westbrook
Gerald Traufetter
Gerald Warner
Geraldo Luis Lino
Gerhard Kramm
Gerhard Loebert
Gerrit van der Lingen
Giora Shaviv
Girma Orssengo
Glenn Beck
Glenn Czulada (Donation)
Glenn Schleed
Global Warming Meltdown
Global Warming or Global Governance?
Global Weirding
Godfrey Bloom
Gone Fishing
Google
Gordon J. Fulks
Graham Stringer
Grant R. Jeffrey
Green Bonds
Green Cars
Green Ideology
Green Religion
Green Tax
Green Tories
GreenViolence
Greenwashing
Greg Sullivan (Donation)
Gregg Thompson
Gregory Fegel
Gregory Young
Guillermo Gonzalez
GV Chilingar
Habibullo Abdussamatov
Haiti Earthquake
Hank Campbell
Hans H.J. Labohm
Hans Jelbring
Hans Kelp (Donation)
Hans Schreuder
Hans von Storch
Harold Ambler
Harold W. Lewis
Harrison Schmitt
Harry Binswanger
Harry Eagar
Harry Jackson
Harvey M. Sheldon
Headline Story
HeartlandGate
Heather Brown (Donation)
Heinz Lycklama
Henri Suyderhoud (Donation)
Henrik Svensmark
Henry Lamb
Henry Payne
Hide The Decline Video
Himalayan Glacier Data
Holly Martin (Donation)
Horst Borchert
Horst-Joachim Lüdecke
How About That!
How to Comment
Howard Bigham (Donation)
Howard Hayden
Howard Nemerov
Hurricane News
I Can Change Your Mind About Climate
Iain Murray
Ian Clark
Ian Drever (Donation)
Ian McEwan
Ian Plimer
Ian Ridpath (Donation)
Ian Wishart
Ice Chart
IceGate
Ileana Johnson Paugh
ImmunityGate
Important Announcement
Important Notice
Indur M. Goklany
International Climate Science Coalition
IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
IPCC Review
iPhone App
Irina Shlionskaya
Ivan Kenneally
Ivar Giaever
Ivo Vegter
J. D. Longstreet
J. Winston Porter
J.R. Dunn
Jack Dini
Jack Kelly
Jack Van Wingerden
James A. Marusek
James Delingpole
James E Steelman (Donation)
James Hawes (Donation)
James Heiser
James Inhofe
James Lewis
James Lovelock
James M. Taylor
James Macdonald
James Maropoulakis Denney
James R. Barrante
James Randi
James Rust
JAMES SHOTT
James Stewart (Donation)
James Tully (Donation)
Jan Janssen
Jan Suhr (Donation)
Jan-Erik Solheim
Janet Albrechtsen
Janet Daley
Janice Meyer (Donation)
Japan Earthquake
Jarl R. Ahlbeck
Jasper Kirkby
Jay Ambrose
Jay Lehr
Jay Richards
Jean Michel (Donation)
Jean-Michel Bélouve
Jeb Bush
Jeff Jacoby
Jeff Kuhn
Jeff Mirus
Jeff Poor
Jeffrey Bossert Clark
Jeffrey Folks
Jeffrey Glassman
Jeffrey Jagmin (Donation)
Jeffrey T. Kuhner
Jennifer Marohasy
Jeremy Clarkson
Jeremy Ross
Jerome Bastien
Jerome J. Schmitt
Jerry Taylor
Jet Stream Shift
Jill Farrell
Jim Berkland
Jim Chiodo
Jim Crawford
Jim Elsner
Jim Guirard
Jim Hollingsworth
Jim Lacey
Jim Luse
Jim Macdonald
Jim McConalogue
Jim O'Neill
Jim Peden
Jim Salinger
Joanne Nova
Joe Bastardi
Joe Daleo
Joe Fone
JOEL CONNELLY
Joel Gehrke
Johannes Schreuder (Donation)
John A. Shanahan
John Abbot
John Barnhart
John Brandt
John Brignell
John Burtis
John Christy
John Coleman
John Daly
John Droz, Jr
John Dunn
John Griffing
John H. Sununu
John Hinderaker
John Humphrys
John K. Swayze
John L. Casey
John Leonard
John Lott
John Lucas (Donation)
JOHN M. BRODER
John Mackey
John Mangun
John McLaughlin
John McLean
John Nicol
John O'Sullivan
John P. Costella
John Rabb (Donation)
John Ransom
John Redwood
John Reid
John Robson
John Rosenthal
John Spooner
John Stossel
John Sutherland
John Vennari
John Ziraldo
John Zyrkowski
Johnny Ball
Jon E McCloskey (Donation)
Jon Ferry
Jonathan A. Lesser
Jonathan Drake
Jonathan Drake (Donation)
Jonathan DuHamel
Jonathan Powell
Jonathon Moseley
Joseph A Olson
Joseph Bast
Joseph Bencini (Donation)
Joseph E. Postma
Joseph Farah
Josh Fulton
Judith Curry
Julia Reid (UKIP Member)
Julian Kenny
Jürgen Krönig
Jurriaan Maessen
Jyrki Kauppisen
KangarooGate
Karin McQuillan
Karl Bohnak
Kelly O'Connell
Kelvin Kemm
Ken Cuccinelli
Ken Green
Ken Ring
Ken Stewart
Ken Ward Jr.
Kenneth Haapala
Kenneth P. Green
Kesten C. Green
Kevin Baldeosingh
Kevin Klees
Kevin Libin
Kevin Mooney
Kevin VS Marshall (Donation)
Kevin Watts (Donation)
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
Kingsley Guy
Kirk Melhuish
Kirk Myers
Kirtland Griffin
Kiwigate
Kjell Stordahl
Klaus L.E. Kaiser
Klaus-Eckart Puls
L. GORDON CROVITZ
Lance Endersbee
Larrey Anderson
Larry Bell
Larry Cosgrove
Laura Hills (Donation)
Laurence I. Gould
Law/Policy
Lawrence Solomon
Lee C. Gerhard
Leighton Steward
Len Srigley (Donation)
Leo Hickman
Leon Ashby
Leon Clifford
Leonard Weinstein
Let It Be
Letter
Letters@ClimateRealists.Com
Lewis Page
LF Khilyuk
Little Ice Age - BIG Chill
Lona Landowski (Donation)
Lord Beaverbrook
Lord Lawson
Lord Monckton
Lord Turnbull
Lorne Gunter
Lorrie Goldstein
Louis Woodhill
Lubos Motl
Lucka Kajfež Bogataj
Luke Barnard
Lyn Jenkins
M. Paul Lloyd
Mac Johnson
Madhav L Khandekar
Magnetic Polar Shift
MalariaGate
Malcolm Colless
Malcolm Roberts
Mann Made Climate Change
Marc Morano
Marc Sheppard
Marcel Meyer (Donation)
Marcus Brooks
Marie Luise Dött
Marita Noon
Mark Howarth
Mark Landsbaum
Mark Lawson
Mark Paquette
Mark Phillips (Donation)
Mark Piney (Donation)
Mark R. Warner
Mark Schumacher
Mark Shea
Mark Vogan
Mark W. Hendrickson
Martha Montelongo
Martin Cohen
Martin Durkin
Martin Hertzberg
Martin Hodgkins (Donation)
Martin Hurd (Donation)
Martyn Brown
Matt and Janet Thompson
Matt Dempsey
Matt Gurney
MATT PATTERSON
Matt Philbin
Matt Ridley
Matthew Cawood
Matthew Penn
Matthew Proctor (Donation)
Matthew Sinclair
Matti Vooro
Maurice Newman
Maurizio Morabito
Maxwell T. Boykoff
Meet The Sceptics
Meetings
Melanie Phillips
Merv Bendle
Met Office
Met Office BBQ Summer
Met Office Climate Scam
Met Office Decadal Forecast
Met Office Long Range Forecasts
Mexico 2010 Cop16
Michael Andrews
Michael Asher
Michael Asten
Michael Atkinson (Donation)
Michael Babbitt (Donation)
Michael Barone
Michael Beenstock
Michael Boyles (Donation)
Michael Buerk
Michael Cejnar (Donation)
Michael Coren
Michael Crichton
Michael F. Haverluck
Michael Hammer
Michael J. Economides
Michael Lind
Michael Miller (Donation)
Michael O'Leary
Michael Oberndorf
Michael R. Fox
Michael Shellenberger
Michael Shermer
Mike Foreman (Donation)
MIKE HULME
Mike Lockwood
Mike Norton-Griffiths
Mike Sneddon (Donation)
Million Kid March
Miranda Devine
Mobile Site
Mohib Ebrahim
Mojib Latif
Monthly Eclipse
Mr. FOIA (hero of Climategate email's)
Murdo MacDonald (Donation)
Muriel Newman
Murry Salby
Music
Mytheos Holt
Name Calling
Nancy Greene-Raine
Nancy J. Thorner
Nancy Neale
NASA
Nasif S. Nahle
Neal Bennet (Donation)
NED ROZELL
Neil Collins
Neil Henderson
Neil Mahony (Donation)
Neil McKnight (Donation)
Neil Reynolds
Neil Snyder
Neville Nicholls
New Site
Newsletter
Newspaper Article
Newt Gingrich
Nicholas Drapela
Nicholas Ricketts (Donation)
Nick Minchin
NICOLA SCAFETTA
Nigel Calder
Nigel Farage
Nigel Sitwell (Donation)
Niger Innis
Nikolai Dobretsov
Nils-Axel Mörner
Nir Shaviv
Noel Matthews
Noel Sheppard
Noor van Andel
Norm Kalmanovitch
Norman Alexander (Donation)
Norman Page
Norman Rogers
North Sea Storm Surge
Not Evil Just Wrong
Occupy Wall Street Protest
OG Sorokhtin
Ole Humlum
Oliver K. Manuel
Open Letter/Fax
Opinion
Opposing Views
Orrin G. Hatch
P Gosselin
Pachauri Conflict of Interest
Pal Brekke
Papers Challenging AGW
Pat Michaels
Patrick Henningsen
Patrick McMahon
Patrick Moore
Patrick Q Collins (Donation)
Patrik Jonsson
Paul Biggs
Paul C. Knappenberger
Paul Chesser
Paul Crovo
Paul Driessen
Paul H. Jossey
Paul Hamaker
Paul Homewood
Paul Hudson
Paul M. Murray
Paul Macrae
Paul Mulshine
Paul Murdock
Paul Oakley
Paul Roderick Gregory
Paul Shlichta
Paul Vreymans
Paul Wornham
Penn & Teller
Penny Rodriguez
PETE DU PONT
Peter A. Ziegler
Peter Ainsley (Donation)
Peter Buxton (Donation)
Peter C Glover
Peter Farrell
Peter Ferrara
Peter Ferro (Donation)
Peter Foster
Peter Foukal
Peter Gill
Peter Heck
Peter Hitchens
Peter J. Havanac
Peter LaChance
Peter Landesman
Peter Lilley
Peter Ravenscroft
Peter Schwerdtfeger
Peter Sissons
Peter Spencer
Peter Taylor
Peter Wilson
PETITION
Petr Chylek
Petter Tuvnes (Donation)
Phelim McAleer
Phil Bottomley (UKIP Supporter)
Phil Brennan
Phil Green
Phil Valentine
Philip Foster
Philip J. Klotzbach
Philip Sherwell
Philip Stott
Phillip A W Bratby
Phillip Leavitt (Donation)
PhotoGate
Pierre Latour
Pierre R. Latour
Piers Akerman
Piers Corbyn
Play
Please Donate
Pointman
Polarbeargate
Press Release
Prop 23
Public Poll (Climate Realists)
Public Polls
Public Warning
Q & A
QR Code
Queensland Flood
Rael Jean Isaac
Ralph Hostetter
Ralph Percy
Ralph Selman (Donation)
Randall Hoven
Randy Fardal
Raven Clabough
Ray Bates
Raymond Richman
Rebecca Terrell
Repeal The Act
Reply To Article
Reply To Letter
Reply To Media
Reply To Video
Report
Retraction
Rex Burr (Donation)
Rex Murphy
Reynold Stone (Donation)
Rhodes Fairbridge
Rich Apuzzo
Rich Lowry
Rich Trzupek
Richard Baehr
Richard Bruce (Donation)
Richard Cohen
Richard Courtney
Richard F. Yanda
Richard Haddad
Richard Holle
Richard J. Grant
Richard James
Richard Lamb (Donation)
Richard Lindzen
Richard Littlejohn
Richard Mackey
Richard North
Richard Pollock
Richard Treadgold
Richard Wellings
Rick Moran
Rick Perry
Rick Santorum
Rik Myslewski
Ritesh Arya
Rob Lyons
Rob Smith
Robert Bryce
Robert Coombes (Donation)
Robert D. Brinsmead
Robert Donnelly (Donation)
Robert Ellison
Robert Ferguson
Robert H. Austin
Robert Hodges
Robert Laughlin
Robert M Wagner
Robert Matthews
Robert Rohlfing
Robert Sprinkel
Robert Tracinski
Robert W. Endlich
Robert W. Felix
Robert W. Wood
Robert Wood (Donation)
Robin Horbury
Robyn Wolfe (Donation)
Rod Liddle
Roger Andrews
Roger Aronoff
Roger F. Gay
ROGER HELMER
Roger L. Simon
Roger Pielke Jr.
Roger Pielke Sr.
Roger Tallbloke
Roger W. Cohen
Ron House
Ron Johnson
Ron Nurwisah
Ronald D. Voisin
Ronald Pate (Donation)
Ronald R. Cooke
Ross Clark
Ross Kaminsky
Ross McKitrick
Rosslyn Smith
Roy Clark
Roy Eappen (Donation)
Roy Spencer
Royal Society Review
Rupert Darwall
Rupert Wyndham
Russell Cook
Russian Temperature Data
Ruth Dudley Edwards
Ruth Lea
Ruth Rodger (Donation)
Ryan Maue
Salvatore Del Prete
Sammy Benoit
Sammy Wilson
Samuel Rodriquez
Sarah Palin
SatelliteGate
Satire
Science Under Attack
Scott Armstrong
Scott Denning
Sea Chart
Sea Level Gate
Sebastian Lüning
Selvaraj Kandasamy
Selwyn Duke
Shannon Goessling
Sherman Griffith (Donation)
Shunichi Akasofu
Simon Heffer
Simon Turnill
Site Announcements
Skeptic's Guide
Social Networking
Solar Climate Change
Solar Cycle 24
Solar Cycle 25
Solar Flare & Earthquake 2013
Solar News
SolarCycle25.com
SPICE
Sponsorship Donation FootstepMaps.com.au
Sponsorship Donation InfoComm Engineering
Spot The Deliberate Mistake
Spot The Difference
Stanislav Mishin
Stanley J. Penkala
Statement
Stefan Gorzula
Stephen Ashworth
Stephen Doughty
Stephen Glover
Stephen Murgatroyd
Stephen Wilde
Sterling Burnett
Steve Bettison
Steve Dickman (Donation)
Steve Fielding
Steve Goreham
Steve Hansen
Steve Jobs
Steve LaNore
Steve McIntyre
Steve Running
Steve Watson
Steven F. Hayward
Steven Goddard
Steven H. Yaskell
Steven Milloy
Stewart Franks
Stewart Meagher
Stuart Blackman
Stuart Clark
Supermoon
Svend Hendriksen
Swine Flu
Syun Akasofu
Tait Trussell
Ted Nordhaus
Teena Clipston
Terence Corcoran
Terence P. Jeffrey
Terrence Aym
Terri Jackson
Terry Crowley
Terry Hurlbut
Terry McCrann
The Branch Carbonian
The Emperor's New Clothes
The Geological Society
The Great Global Warming Swindle
The Green Swindle
The Greenhouse Conspiracy
The Marshall Institute
The Royal Society of New Zealand
The Rules Of The Game
Thomas Costello
Thomas E. Brewton
Thomas Fuller
Thomas Gillan (Donation)
Thomas Lifson
THOMAS P. SHEAHEN
Thomas Richard
Tim Ball
Tim Blair
Tim Channon
Tim Coleman
Tim Cullen
Tim Schowalter
Tim Stanley
Tim Worstall
Timothy Birdnow
Timothy Casey
Timothy Crome (Donation)
Todd Kuipers (Donation)
Tom Bethell
Tom Chivers
Tom Harris
Tom Nelson
Tom Quirk
Tom Russell
Tom V. Segalstad
Tony Abbott
Tony Elliott
Tony Hake
Tony Newbery
Tony Pann
Tony Phillips
Tony Rose
Torben Sørensen (Donation)
Transcript
Transit of Venus
Tree Ring Data
TreeGate
Trevor Kavanagh
Tropical Storm "Power Up" 2013
Trudy Schuett
True or False?
True Stetson
Truth Squad
Try this at home
Twitter
Tyler Watts

Click to get your own widget

CO2 Contributed by
Human Activity:
12 to 15ppmv

Letters
Disclaimer
  • » News articles may contain quotes, these are copyright to the respective publication which will be stated, along with a link to the source article where available.
  • » If you feel your copyright has been violated please contact us and the article will be removed or amended at your request.
Articles Recently Viewed

4,829

Donations
  • » Please support the site by making a donation. No matter how big or small, your contribution helps to support the cause.
Recent Most Read

Show #11-20

See Stephen Wilde's Latest Article

Show articles by Stephen Wilde

All Time Most Read

Show #11-20