Folks,

The claims in this thread about causal relationships between solar flares and planetary/satellite alignments are hogwash.

>The orbiting solar observatory has recorded another massive solar flare at 6:00 U.T. on August 3. This is becoming a trend nowadays and these flares are always preceeded by the alignment of at least two of the moons of Jupiter. The larger flares are preceeded by an alignment with the moons of Jupiter with the Earth.

So what?

Correlation ("always preceeded by the alignment") is not causation.

Because of the number and speed of Jupiter's moons, one can find multiple alignments of them each day. Io, the innermost of the four easily-visible moons, lines up with Jupiter and the Earth at least once per day all by itself because its orbital period is less than two Earth days. After you throw in the other three of the brightest moons, you get several alignments to choose from each day.

Every solar flare is preceded by some alignment of Jupiter's moons precisely because _any event one chooses is preceded by some alignment of Jupiter, its moons, and/or the Earth by a fraction of a day_.

There is no demonstrable causation between solar flares and alignments of Jupiter's moons. >Ten hours before this comparatively large flare earth scientists observed another flare, a smaller one. It was recorded at the precise time that two more moons of Jupiter were in a minor alignment.

So? Coincidence does not equal causation.

Did the author of this article tell you about all the flares that are observed to occur when there was _no_ minor alignment of Jupiter's moons at that precise time?

>What this proves is that the sun is affected by tiny magnetic fields that eminate from planets.

No, it doesn't prove any such thing. The preceding paragraphs mentioned alignments, not magnetic fields, so this claim is both unfounded and a nonsequitur.

>But the earth will pass through the fields generated by Saturn and Jupiter and their moons this October. Just as it did in 1929. Just before the great dust bowl of the 1930's.

If the implication is that "pass through the fields generated by" means that the Earth lines up with the Sun and those planets, then that is soemthing that happens *every* thirteen months (in the case of Jupiter) and twelve-and-two-fifths months (in the case of Saturn).

So let's ask why the author of the above didn't include all the years in which this happened, but the following year was *not* a dry year in the U.S. Hmmm? Why didn't the author mention than such alignments also occurred just before wet years, and just before in-between years?

>Now, August 11th, with the Solar Eclipse, the Moon & Earth are in perfect alignment with the Sun, maybe causing a magnetic influence on the Sun

Care to present the figures on the relative strengths of the magnetic fields of the Sun, Earth, and Moon? (Hint: the Sun is not going to be significantly influenced by the magnetic fields of the latter two.)

Or would that factual display tend to demolish the claim that the so-called "perfect alignment" could have any influence on solar flares or CMEs?

- - - - -

Carl,

Are you proposing the following as a testable prediction of the theory that there is a causal relationship between planetary/satellite alignments and solar flares or CMEs?

IOW, will you agree _before_ August 11 that if no CME from an X class flare reaches the Earth on August 11, 12, 13, or 14 (note that this allows some leeway on either side of the 48-hour time), that will demonstrate that there is no validity to the claim that there is a causal relationship between planetary/satellite alignments and solar flares or CMEs? Please answer before August 11.

>A CME from an X class flare would take approximately 48 hours to reach the Earth... 48 hours from August 11 is August 13, see Aztec Calendar, etc.,

-- No Spam Please (nos_pam_please@hotmail.com), August 07, 1999.

R -

I can appreciate your point of view and I've thought about many of the issues you've raised. But, frankly, I don't care what the "pollys" think of this forum or much else really. I'm not motivated to change their mind and their beliefs are their own. I don't have a mission or any agenda which compels me to do such things. Actually, their beliefs are, and should be, beyond my control.

There are issues discussed here which I try not to involve myself in. I might find them off topic or out of step with my own view of "reality" but that doesn't mean I think they should go away.

As for these being "trigger dates" I don't see it that way. I also don't view these dates with any fear what so ever. I take it for what it's worth and keep them in their proper perspective.

What I find truly interesting is the great amount of commonality in religion, prophesy, legend, etc. Many tell of a great time of unrest and a serious paradigm shift in the time we are currently living. It isn't that these dates are anything truly special, the bottom line is that we've already entered into "the time". It's here, now, already. And, if you look around and see the "signs" then it's not tough to see.

Are the earth changes and disasters we see going on all just coincidence. Maybe. Is the rise in solar activity and celestial events occurring now yet foretold centuries ago, coincidence. Maybe.

If we do exist in a symbiotic relationship with this planet which I do believe is true, then there must be a few among us who can tap into that energy and see more than just the "signs" we all have the ability to see. And, I honestly believe that we've removed ourselves further away from this ability through reliance on technology. We've deadened our senses and our instincts because of technology. So, when pondering the world and the time in which these old religions and prophecy and visions came to be, I tend to think that the connection those people had with the world around them was much, much stronger. In fact, at that time, being close to nature was absolutely necessary just to survive at all.

We have telescopes and satellites, etc. Don't you ever wonder how it is that cultures thousands of years before us were so advanced in their capability to map and view the stars? Much of what we "discovered" with modern science they knew long before our current, modern age ever existed.

But, the way I see it, you can be a DGI and a DWGI about many things in life. Some people call appreciating nature to the point of protecting it "tree hugging". To each their own. I see this issue the same way. You can see the world around you yet still be disconnected from it by never really paying attention to it and what surrounds you.

Just my .02"

Mike

=============================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 07, 1999.

Michael Taylor,

Sincerely, what makes you think we are symbionts, and not parasites?

-- flora (***@__._), August 07, 1999.

No Spam Please...

Sure, if no major flaring occurs in that time frame, I'll gladly acknowledge it was just another theory that didn't hold up...

I thought it made an interesting tie together of those two dates that seem to be common to a lot of metaphysical threads if heard mentioned lately.

And yes R, this is OT, as it stated in the thread header... some of like a break everynow and then from the constant squabbling about who's telling the truth and who's lying about the very real y2k impact coming down the road. Most agree that there wi;; be an effect, just splitting hairs as to our personal convictions over the severity and how it will impact our daily lives.

As far as August 11, the only thing I know for sure is that August 11 will be a Solar Eclipse, which I find fascinating, and wish I could be in Romania to see it in person. I also know for sure that we are in or rapidly approaching the Solar Max for Cycle 23. As I am not an astrophysicist, I do not know if there is any correlation between the two. It sounds like an interesting theory, and fun to play with intellectually.

That if "nothing" happens around that time frame and the result will be the discrediting of this board is absolute bullshit. Just because we happen to indulge in a little off topic conjecture has no relation to the overall seriousness of the board or its participants...

Lighten up, and if you don't like OT threads, don't f*cking read them...

I promised to spell check before I posted again, but I lied :)

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 07, 1999.

At least the 11th. to 13th. is only a week away, this kind of hype reminds me of the Jupiter effect from the ealy 80s, LOTS of hype and nada happening.

Of course there is always a chance of chaotic turbulence due to unstable conditions. But there is not a damm thing we can to about solar, system events so untill that time in the future we can only look at the past for indications.

I sure do believe though that fact is stranger than fiction, although most would rather have the Television spoon feed the pap rather than checking out the mind blowing consiquences that modern science has come up with.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), August 07, 1999.

Andy

A wind up? No, was just lurking through csy2k and say the thread that went with it, and just sort of linked things together, seemed logical, so thought I would throw it out and see what people who know more about the subject than I might have to say about.

I'm interested in what they might respond back, however trivial, so post if you hear back.

Thanks!

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 07, 1999.

I for one- am pleased to see threads such as these. and no- I don't give a hoot what the trolls might think about these threads or strictly on-topic y2k ones- they think we're all looney anyway- so what??

I find it interesting that there is a convergence of dates in various prphecies coupled with some interesting solar, comet and other related activities. Should be something to watch closely IMO. I also find it interesting that the mainstream media doesn't touch it- nor most of y2k either. do we just dismiss y2k because the press doesn't find it worthy to write much about?? Also- many potential issues associated with any sort of astrological "incident" require preps similar to y2k type preps.

-- farmer (hillsidefarm@drbs.net), August 07, 1999.

Flora, great point! I'm an optimist : )

I've been thinking about this a little and it's interesting that we expect some sudden "event" to occur on the day of yet we have no problem speculating that it will take some time for Y2k to unravel and cause trouble.

If we look around us we see such things as the damage we are doing to our planet, the locust swarms overseas, the droughts, the diseases, and the weather. Prior to the 90's we had an average of about 1000 destructive tornados in a decade. In the 90's, we've had at least a 1000 a year. Things are happening now.

We are so used to instant news that we expect everything to happen immediately. I tend to think that things will unravel more slowly. It's not that we'll need patience to see things happening. It's just that the bottom wont drop out on the 11th through the 13th. Heck, it might take a whole month ; )

Mike who is always an optimist

=========================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 07, 1999.

"Don't you ever wonder how it is that cultures thousands of years before us were so advanced in their capability to map and view the stars? "

They didn't have outdoor lights to block the view of the stars, and they didn't have TV or very good indoor light to keep people inside at night. They didn't have GPS systems so they needed to be able to navigate by the stars.

I heard somewhere that the military academies are no longer requiring their students to be able to navigate by the stars. That seems kinda sad, somehow.

-- biker (y2kbiker@worldnet.att.net), August 07, 1999.

Personally, I find the convergence of the folklore of the Hopi, Dogon, Aztec; the arrival of Comet Lee; a meteor shower; solar flares; the Casini space probe; the GPS effects; y2k destabilization; and the astrological events coming up to be a fascinating "coincidence." You can even throw in Nostradamus for good measure!

Many people have posted about dreams and premonitions. Although I have not shared that phenomenon, I have been struck with a major drain of energy, inability to focus and sudden loss of motivation in the past two weeks. It is like I am nearing the end of my y2k prep. journey emotionally, even though I still have tasks on my list to do. Sort of like "Game Over."

I did feel an overwhelming urge to fill all my water storage barrels and tanks. My curiosity is peaked. I hope the moderators allow this OT to continue.

-- marsh (armstrng@sisqtel.net), August 08, 1999.

I'm with you here Marsh - this "convergence" has GOT to be more than mere coincidence, check out the Mother Shipton prophecies too and check out my old signature line...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 08, 1999.

If you really want to "freak" and desire more information check out this site,

http://www.sightings.com/ufo4/quat.htm

Mike

==================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 08, 1999.

5/13/81, Pope John Paul II was seriously wounded by a Turkish assassin.

He missed two bullets aimed at his skull as he bent down to look at a medal of the Lady of Fatima worn by a young girl in the crowd. In the recuperating room he read everything he could about Fatima, and he reread the Third Secret.

-------

" Precisely at the end of the second millennium, there accumulates on the horizon of all mankind enormously threatening clouds, and darkness falls upon human souls."

Pope John Paul II, 12/8/83, making reference to the Third Secret of Fatima

---------

So many coincidences...

Mike

===============================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), August 08, 1999.

No Spam

You asked for reliable evidence for the connection of planetary alignments and solar flares/CMEs. I will limit this to total solar eclipses occurring during solar maximum, as that was the subject of the threads you chose to attempt to debunk.

First for those who care to make their own observations, a few links to the data and charts.

For a list of Total Solar Eclipses from 1900 to 1998 -

http://www.earthview.com/timetable/pastTSE.htm

For plots of solar cycles, as well as historical solar and geomagnetic data beginning in 1954-

http://www.dlc.com/solar/

As data was not available prior to 1954, I limited myself to Solar Cycles 19 - 22. After examining the plots of the cycles, I selected Total Solar Eclipses that occurred during the peaks of those cycles. I also included the March 18, 1988 event you referenced, although that occurred at the very beginning of Solar Max in Cycle 22, but since you included it, so will I.

Here are the events I selected to examine to see if any pattern appeared that would suggest a casual link between planetary alignment between just the earth and the sun. Geomagnetic effectiveness would not be a measure, as the geoposition of the active regions, as well as other possible magnetic influences, would determine as to whether the effects would impact the earth. However, solar flux and sunspot number would be an indicator of increased flares/CME's, geoeffective or not, associated with the event.

Solar Cycle 19 - Max time frame chosen - April, 1956 - October 1959 June 8, 1956 October 23, 1957 October 12, 1958 October 2, 1959

Solar Cycle 20 - Max time frame chosen - October 1966 - October 1972 (note - this was a fairly quite cycle, more so than any other listed here) November 12, 1966 November 2, 1967 September 22, 1968 March 7, 1970 July 10, 1972

Solar Cycle 21 - Max time frame chosen - June 1978 - June 1983 February 26, 1979 February 16, 1980 July 31, 1981

Solar Cycle 22 - Max time frame chosen - September 1988 - March 1992 March 8, 1988 - included as No Spam specifically mentioned this one July 22, 1990 July 11, 1991 June 30, 1992

Of these 16 Total Solar Eclipses I observed two patterns.

Pattern 1 - what I can only describe as a trough effect. There is a step decline in solar flux and sunspot number typically beginning 2-3 days prior to the event, followed 2-3 days after the event by a spike in solar flux and sunspot number. This occurred in 8 of the 16, although 1 event, February 26, 1979, saw only a minor increase following the event, however, the other 8 were fairly well pronounced.

Pattern 2 - the spike. In these cases a sudden surge in solar flux and sunspot number occurring on or within a day or two of the actual event. I observed these in 7 of the events.

July 11, 1991, was a clear exception, but interestingly enough, there was a sharp spike in the Planetary A Index July 9, and again on July 13.

March 7, 1970, will a weak trough example, showed a sharp Planetary A Index spike on March 8.

July 10, 1972, as well as March 18, 1988, both showed spikes in Planetary A Index 7 days after the events, with spikes continuing after the March 18, 1988 event from March 25 - April 5.

So basically, we have 4 of 16 events, ie., 25% of Total Solar Eclipses have associated either immediately around the event (12.5%), or within 7 days of the event(12.5%), large spikes in the Planetary A index.... statistically significant?

Now does this PROVE anything. I don't think so, not conclusively. Unfortunately, we only have 4 solar cycles to work with that have matching solar and terrestrial data to work with. Does it suggest that there might be a correlation, especially if taken with other planetary alignments occurring during each of these events? Does to me. But then I guess I never researched a paper on astronomy when I was a freshman in high school, so who am I to say?

Look for yourself, draw your own opinions......

For some reason my formating goes to hell when I post, but it should still be readable enough :)

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 08, 1999.

Another quick speculation, and that's all it is, then I've had enough research for a Sunday afternoon...

2 of the 16 TSE's had effects 7 days after the event. 7 days from August 11 is August 18, what I believe astrology buffs call a Grand Cross?

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 08, 1999.

"Ask someone who claims this is possible to show you their assumptions and calculations of the forces involved, then publish the figures here (so we can debunk them)."

Like I said, I'm waiting No Spam...

-- Carl (clillly@goentre.com), August 08, 1999.

No Spam, your words...

"Are you proposing the following as a testable prediction of the theory that there is a causal relationship between planetary/satellite alignments and solar flares or CMEs?

IOW, will you agree _before_ August 11 that if no CME from an X class flare reaches the Earth on August 11, 12, 13, or 14 (note that this allows some leeway on either side of the 48-hour time), that will demonstrate that there is no validity to the claim that there is a causal relationship between planetary/satellite alignments and solar flares or CMEs? Please answer before August 11."

August 8th where I live... still no response from you.. thinking? Although, as you asked me to do the research, I now extend the period for geoeffective impact from August 9 - August 18.. read the data I dug out at your request...

Of course,given your use an anon e-mail, you could just lay low, and if your right, pop out after the 18th, or if wrong, pick a new handle and claim you knew it all along..

I've used my real e-mail in my posts, haven't had problem one from spam...

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 09, 1999.

Carl - No Spam has a habit of popping up in the middle of the night (USA time :) Patience glasshoppa, No Spam is fiendishly working out at this very moment how to debunk your research - BTW, first class job there!!!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 09, 1999.

All right No Spam, maybe I did overreact to your dismissal of the ideas being played with here, in what I took as a caustic and offhand manner. I apologize publicly for flaming you personally.

As to your request as to my background in mathematics and science, I am not a mathematician, astronomer, or astrophysicist.

However, my father had a Masters in Mathematics, and was Systems Analyst on the big iron. I grew up with him throwing little mathematical puzzles at me while I was growing up, which actually was kinda of annoying. After the Army, I attended Cal Poly San Luis Obispo as a comp sci major, took all the prerequisite math course, calculus, probability and statistics, physics, logic, etc., besides the actual programming courses.

All my friends who graduated ahead of me landed in boring jobs spending more time documenting code that actually hacking, so when IBM cam out with the PC, I ran over to the local Computerland and went to work selling and repairing PCs. Wrote quite a few little custom apps for, as there wasnt much off the shelf back then. Been in the PC business now for 18 years, have worked with clients such as Raymond Kaiser Engineers setting up their project management software out at Vandenburg AFB as they were building Space Launch Complex #6, ditto for Santa Maria Electric on the Shuttle Recovery Building

Its the perfect job for me, as I get bored doing the same thing over and over again. This way Im always looking at new problems, and how to solve them. Ive worked with aerospace, military, banking, construction, medical name a field and I probably at one time or another had a hand in computerizing one function or another.

Does this qualify me to do a complex mathematical model of the gravitational interactions of the solar system, and any possible influence this might have on solar weather?

No I took a theory proposed over at csy2k, took a couple of other ideas, put them together, and said, Hey, does this look interesting?

Do I have enough of a math & science background to do a cursory examination of data sets and spot what appears outwardly any way to be correlation?

Yes.

So, again, I apologize to you for my caustic remarks aimed at you personally.

If you do have the skills, and time, to totally debunk the theory as proposed by the self asserted mathematician, as well as show me how the research I did proved absolutely nothing outside of minor coincidence, please do, if you feel the need.

-- Carl (clilly@goentre.com), August 09, 1999.

I have no objection to OT threads being posted. However I would ask this question.

What if this forum was used as even further ammo to discredit Y2k concerns?

As near as I can tell this is the only place for civil discussion about Y2k.

I hear an awful lot here about conspiracy theories and the evil nefarious minds over at debunking. Yet it seems none of you are aware that all things are vulnerable. Even this forum. I am sure there is more than one person who would like to see it shut down. Of course then we could all troop over to csy2k (bring your own bats and sledge hammers ;-)

I never assume that what I write here will not be used against me, or the forum, or the need to prep for Y2k. I have no wish to tell others what I think is ok post (perish the thought!) I have no desire to be sysop.

How would you like to be quoted in Newsweek as a forum regular with a bunch of Nostradamus/Aztec day of the Dead stuff? Rather than the real reason we are here at THIS forum. The intelligent discussion of the ramifications of technical glitches relating to Y2k.

I know what OT means and you know what OT means but I will bet you thousands of bucks that Joe 6-pack has no idea what an OT thread is. If Joe reads in Newsweek or Time all about the bunch-o-nuts at TB2000 ranting about Aztec calendars then Joe is going to laugh everytime he hears the word Y2k.

I have heard expressed several times on these threads "Hey where's the trolls?" It is the very absence of trolls on these threads that makes me cautious.

Again I have no desire to see such threads deleted. Just expressing my own concerns and thoughts. I expect no one to take my advice but myself and very much enjoy reading these threads.

Nonetheless, in terms of overall forum credibility, I believe they are damaging and will be interested to see how it plays out in Aug/Sept.

I have the utmost respect for all of you and hope that the next few days bring us nothing more than some cool pictures.

-- R (riversoma@aol.com), August 10, 1999.

Only 24 hours to go to know if August 11 proves remarkable.

-- h (h@h.h), August 10, 1999.

CK,this out.

Biblical astronomy,and the eclipse

http://www.atlbible.org/astronomy/astronomy.htm

-- y2kme1 (y2kme1@hotmail.com), August 11, 1999.

still alive

-- couple hours (more@to.go), August 14, 1999.

35 minutes in Denver :)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 14, 1999.

Damn. And I wanted the friking world to end, just to teach the stupid polys a lesson

-- Cult. member (Official@DooM™.cultist©), August 14, 1999.

Carl,

As you may have seen by now, my responses to your notes about patterns connecting total solar eclipses to sunspot numbers and solar flux are posted to another thread, Please explain the Aug. 11th thing to me. at http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001CpV (It would have been more appropriate for me to have posted to this thread that you started, instead, but I didn't notice that until later. My apologies.)

Here are my responses to some items raised in this thread but not the other in past days:

>No Spam, your words...

>"Are you proposing the following as a testable prediction < snip > Please answer before August 11."

>August 8th where I live... still no response from you.. thinking?

There was no response from me on this thread because I had not yet reread this thread to see this query from you. I was concentrating on the other thread.

>Although, as you asked me to do the research, I now extend the period for geoeffective impact from August 9 - August 18..

I do not agree to this amendment of the proposal.

>Of course,given your use an anon e-mail, you could just lay low, and if your right, pop out after the 18th, or if wrong, pick a new handle and claim you knew it all along..

No, Carl, that is _not_ my style, as you would know if you were a long-time reader of this forum or had read much of the forum archives. I have posted hundreds of times using the e-mail address nos_pam_please@hotmail.com (which is real, albeit pseudonymous -- if you would send e-mail to that address I would receive it), and I am not about to stop doing so now. If you had read enough of the forum archives to see a substantial number of my past postings, you would also know that _my_ style, when finding myself mistaken, is to promptly apologize and proceed from there.

-- No Spam Please (nos_pam_please@hotmail.com), August 15, 1999.