Slashdot Mirror


NASA Confirms Solar Storm Near 2012

An anonymous reader writes "`This week researchers announced that a storm is coming — the most intense solar maximum in fifty years. The prediction comes from a team led by Mausumi Dikpati of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR). "The next sunspot cycle will be 30% to 50% stronger than the previous one," she says. If correct, the years ahead could produce a burst of solar activity second only to the historic Solar Max of 1958.`

`Dikpati's forecast puts Solar Max at 2012. Hathaway believes it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011.`

Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"

344 comments

  1. Oh nooo!!! by scsirob · · Score: 3, Funny

    This explains it all! Higher activity on the sun accounts for higher temperatures on Earth and Mars. Next thing you know there will be no explanation for global warming anymore..

    --
    To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
    1. Re:Oh nooo!!! by endianx · · Score: 5, Funny

      Not true at all! This is just proof that mans impact on the environment extends throughout the solar system. It wasn't enough for us to mess up our own planet, now we have caused solar warming as well!

    2. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Wah · · Score: 0

      If correct, the years ahead could produce a burst of solar activity second only to the historic Solar Max of 1958.`

      It's not talking about the solar max of 107,993 BC.

      --
      +&x
    3. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It is no coincidence, the Mayas kwew what they were doing. However, 21 of Dec 2012 is not the destruction of the earth, but the main point of a worldwide change which we can have the chance to be part of.
      These changes in the sun's weather are produced by the central sun in our galaxy, and this date in 2012, will be like a new birth for mankind and our blue planet.
      In the years preceeding this event, we will see how the old-age fight between good and evil will reach its peak. We need not to be afraid though, because if we are worthy to move beyond this date, our bodies are already being transformed, purified, ready for a jump in dimension.
      Millions are those fighting for a better world, and the end of times, which the Mayas and Jesus (Mat 24) spoke about are in front of us. I am personally looking forward to that day, in which everything that was lost or stolen from our past will be given back, and we will know as a race, our duty in this universe, evolving our way into infinity. FP.

    4. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Satire doesn't work well when you have no obvious target, BECOME LESS VAGUE.

    5. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Al Gore is running for President in 2012.

      Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?

    6. Re:Oh nooo!!! by MikeyTheK · · Score: 1

      Well, that will mean lower cloud cover as the sunspots will reduce cosmic radiation reaching the earth, which will mean warmer temperatures for that period.

      --
      Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
      Never forget: 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
    7. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go back to school and take some second year chemistry, it very basic science. It is not that hard to comprehend.

      Your ignorance (in both senses), is not in the least amusing. I pity you. I forgive you.

    8. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ccarson · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Here are some facts about global warming. Some of which you hear and don't hear from the main stream media:

      1.) Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 150 years (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/earth_magnet ic_031212.html). I'm an electrical engineer and during my studies in particle physics, I learned that a particles velocity can be affected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetosphere ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_magnetic_fiel d ) due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be attributed to this?
      2.) Jupitor is experiencing the same climate change that Earth is. (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060504_red_j r.html [space.com])
      3.) Mars is experiencing the same climate change that Earth is. (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ mars_snow_011206-1.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new s/news.html?in_article_id=410901&in_page_id=1770)


      How can you explain the recent same climate changes on different planets? I doubt it's all those cars being driven there.
      4.) The United Nations found that there is more Methane produced from livestock, which raises global temperature greater than CO2 by a factor of approx. 20, than any human caused CO2 combined (source: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/i ndex.html)


      Is it possible that the warmer temperatures that Earth is experiencing are caused by cyclical natural phenomena? What about glaciers in Greenland that have been shrinking for 100 years (source: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/21/060821191 826.o0mynclv.html [breitbart.com])? Also, how do you explain huge ice ages on Earth? Were these caused by huge carbon emissions or was it a small natural climate cycle that just happens? Were those climate changes, which are no doubt more extreme than what's going on now, caused by the combustion engine? I don't have answers and everyone seems to have an opinion including a Nobel laureate who says the answer is more pollution (source: http://reports.discoverychannel.ca/servlet/an/disc overy/1/20061117/discovery_pollutionsolution_06111 7/20061117?hub=DiscoveryReport)

      One last thing. Lets say we all buy into the fact that we're causing the climate change through CO2. Regardless of what actions we (America) take, China will still produce more CO2 than anyone because they want to get rich. There's no stopping it folks.

    9. Re:Oh nooo!!! by neomunk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting post, and consistent with the information I've seen on the subject.

      One little thing that sprung to my mind a few years ago as I was reading about the Mayan calendar and it's legendary implications mixed with Christian end-time lore is the fact that the apocalypse, if information from both sides is taken into account, should have started in late 2005. Mind you, (by my understanding of Christian theology) things won't get noticeably horrible until 3 1/2 years in, sometime around June 2009.

      Of course, that's assuming that the December 2012 date is the final culminating event of the whole ordeal. The end-times scenarios seem similar in their implications to me, but I'm no Theologian, just interested in the topic.

      It's really an interesting thing to think about, the unification of creation and it's subsequent re-unfolding.

    10. Re:Oh nooo!!! by tompaulco · · Score: 1, Interesting

      According to the Bible, no one can know the exact dates of Jesus' second coming, not even Jesus himself knows. There is considerable debate about whether the tribulation will be pre-rapture or post-rapture, but suffice it to say that no one, including the Mayans, can know when the end of the world will be, if Jesus himself does not know.
      Of course, if Christianity is wrong, then all bets are off and maybe the Mayans do know when Jesus is coming. But then we have a Paradox.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    11. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Seumas · · Score: 2, Informative

      Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?" Yes, coincidence. Unless you're some idiot who gets his science via Art Bell and his pseudo-science guests and you also believe in grays and "mel's hole".

      Seriously.. wtf?! Why would anyone even include that comment in a scientific submission?
    12. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it makes it easier. We do nothing now, and in 2013 after the maximum has passed and the sun activity decreases, if the Earth doesn't likewise cool, we know that solar activity isn't tied directly to the earth's temperature.

    13. Re:Oh nooo!!! by saider · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, if Christianity is wrong, then all bets are off and maybe the Mayans do know when Jesus is coming. But then we have a Paradox.

      The mayans do not know of Jesus, therefore no paradox.

      Possibility Matrix.
      0-Both are right - Mayans without knowledge of Jesus predict the end of the world. Christians predict the end of the world, which includes Jesus v2.0.
      1-Christians right, Mayans wrong - Lots of "I told you so"s bantered about.
      2-Christians wrong, Mayans right - Fewer "I told you so"s bantered about.
      3-Both wrong - Life goes on as normal and some people begin to realize that prophecy is inherently unreliable.

      Another possibility is that people cause the end of the world themselves and spin that as their prophecy coming true.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    14. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      No no, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Cindy Sheehan, Louis Farrakhan, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, and David Duke are all running for president that year.

    15. Re:Oh nooo!!! by DAtkins · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Ummm, because it was funny?

    16. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not true at all! This is just proof that mans impact on the environment extends throughout the solar system. It wasn't enough for us to mess up our own planet, now we have caused solar warming as well!

      "Man's impact"? Um, I think you mean "George W. Bush's impact". If he'd just sign Kyoto, the sun would instantly return to normal.

    17. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ltbarcly · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Claim in bible => True?

      0. "No one now living will die" -Jesus circa 30AD => Proven False
      1. Earth is flat => Proven False
      2. Sun revolves around earth => Proven False
      3. Animals/Woman created AFTER man => Proven False
      4. Animals created whole in current form => Proven False

      The bible has a pretty bad track record. I wouldn't bet that it's predictions hold true either.

    18. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit, we fucked up the sun.

    19. Re:Oh nooo!!! by FooBarWidget · · Score: 1

      Regardless of whether global warming is caused by CO2, it's still a good idea to reduce CO2 output.

    20. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, there is no stopping it. We might be able to extend our stay here on earth, but eventually most living creatures will be wiped out. There will be survivors however - a dozen or so. Weather we humans created this mess or not, mother nature will clean it up. There will be a rebirth, the planet WILL survive, However life as we know it will not.

      Many Christians will see this as the 'end times'.

      "When Gabriel stands on sea and shore, and blows his wondrous horn, old world shall die - and new, be born"
      -Mother Shipton

    21. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So let's all hop in our Hummers and go find a nice view of apocalypse.

    22. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Christianity *is* wrong because the End has never come. All the parsing of verses "No man knows the hour..." is an example of the Truest Rule in the Universe: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure. (In its sound bite form, it's: "You've taken my words out of context.")

      Secondly, if not even Jesus himself knows, then he isn't the incarnation of the Supreme Being. The Apostolic Creed clearly lays out the ultimate nature of Jesus; he's the Son of God who is also God himself: "Begotten not made in one being with the Father."

      So, if he doesn't know, then God is hiding vital information from him (thus, the rest of us) all for the sole purpose of torturing people and making people panic, i.e., George Lucas decides to do Episodes 7-9.

    23. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hush, you're ruining Al Gore's fundraising efforts.

      Everything is driven by money. Always follow the money trail. Why do you think there are people who whine about embryonic stem cell research even though only adult stem cells have yielded viable results? Because the guys getting results have private investors, and the guys not getting results run to the public to make everyone else pay them with federal funds--aka, your taxes.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    24. Re:Oh nooo!!! by campaign_bug · · Score: 1

      Regardless of whether you're correct or not, these historical events happened to coincide with mass extinctions here on Earth. Forgive me for sounding conservative here, but if I'm about to witness my own mass-extinction, I'd like to be REALLY sure that I'm not causing it myself. And despite Mars and Jupiter looking a bit cozier these days, something tells me that I wont be escaping there anytime soon.

    25. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      Sure, but it's also a good idea for me to learn tensor calculus. Nonetheless, if it costs too much (in time, money, whatever), I'm not going to do it unless the benefits outweigh the costs.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    26. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Would the big smiley face come back, like it had, back in the '20s?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    27. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      everything that was lost or stolen from our past will be given back

      Ah-ha! Whoever took my GameBoy and Gerber Mark II knife from my duffle bag, on the way back from Desert Storm; I'm looking forward to getting my stuff back!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    28. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to be REALLY sure that I'm not causing it myself.


      That's fine... don't drive a hummer, don't engage in excess consumption, turn your thermostat down, etc. Just don't try to rope the rest of us into your bullshit.
    29. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Christianity *is* wrong Correct.

      Jesus ... isn't the incarnation of the Supreme Being. Correct.

      Next question?

      "End of the World" prophecy is just to scare people into giving them money. To sum it up, "Give me your money or you'll burn in hell for all eternity when the world ends next year!"
    30. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Chysn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > The United Nations found that there is more Methane produced from livestock, which raises global temperature greater than CO2 by a factor of
      > approx. 20, than any human caused CO2 combined

      You don't consider the cultivation of livestock a human activity? Seriously?

      --
      --I'm so big, my sig has its own sig.
      -- See?
    31. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of your "facts" are nice and happy in their own little cup, but stand alone arguments always seem "factual" when they don't discuss both sides. The real fact here is, you are an idiot to think that the vast majority of the world's most recognized scientists haven't heard your "facts" before. And now that you are an idiot, it's easy to see how you missed the part where they all got together and examined the evidence (including "yours") and STILL concluded that human industrial societies are in some way responsible for global warming.

    32. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Elfan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes solar variation can affect earth's climate. However, solar variation since 1750 is a much smaller forcing than Greenhouse gasses. See the IPCC TAR section 6.13.

      I don't know why this off topic speculation was modded at +5.

    33. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      1.) Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 150 years. I'm an electrical engineer and during my studies in particle physics, I learned that a particles velocity can be affected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetosphere due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be attributed to this?

      Another theory postulates that cosmic rays are at least partly responsible for cloud formation. When the solar wind picks up, inbound cosmic rays are deflected away from us, fewer clouds form, and things get warmer. When solar output falls off, more cosmic rays get through, more clouds form, and things get cooler. "Evidence from ice cores show this [lower solar activity, high cosmic rays, and lower temperatures] happening long into the past. We have the highest solar activity we have had in at least 1,000 years."

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    34. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Regardless of whether global warming is caused by CO2, it's still a good idea to reduce CO2 output.

      ...but at what cost? Is it worth bankrupting the western world and condemning the third world to inescapable poverty (or worse) to effect a temperature change that will most likely get lost in the noise of ordinary variations?

      Compare this to the way automobile emissions have been cleaned up over the past 35-40 years. The first steps taken produced fairly dramatic results at a not-unreasonable cost. Cars that are rolling off assembly lines today are running so clean that any further changes are likely to have a negligible impact on air quality, but will cost at least as much as previously-taken measures (if not more). Bang for the buck has been forgotten; cost-benefit analysis appears to have become a forgotten concept.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    35. Re:Oh nooo!!! by aeryn_sunn · · Score: 1

      Actually, Bush did not need to sign the Kyoto treaty because it was already signed by Clinton. The whole Bush/Kyoto line of discussion is bunk in that it was up to the Senate to ratify it and they failed to. Interestingly enough, none of the Democrats in the Senate at the time really made any real effort to get it ratified (I mention Dems, only because they claim to be more "green" than Repubs). Matter of fact, I don't ever recall Gore taking up the "ratify Kyoto" mantel at all after Clinton signed it.

      Of course, the debate is that Kyoto would have had devestating effects on the U.S. economy.

      anyway, kinda convinent now that Gore is all about the environment as opposed to 8 years ago. Just a thought, not a judgment.

    36. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Informative

      3.) Mars is experiencing the same climate change that Earth is. (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ [space.com] mars_snow_011206-1.html and http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/new s/news.html?in_article_id=410901&in_page_id=1770 [dailymail.co.uk]) How can you explain the recent same climate changes on different planets? I doubt it's all those cars being driven there.

      Debunked almost two years ago. Sheesh.
    37. Re:Oh nooo!!! by coderedave · · Score: 1

      That is true about the magnetic field weakening. Our magnetic field is going through something called reversal. Which over time the poles will swap, thus making the magnetic field weaker. Although statistics have shown that temperature has gone up drastically in years. So I think it might be an account of both us(humans) and nature itself. And there is nothing we can do about it, we won't be able to clean up all the air to save us.

    38. Re:Oh nooo!!! by burndive · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, I see that tongue bulging out your cheek.

      None of those claims are actually in the Bible, except for the woman part of #3, which has NOT been disproven. If you think science has disproven it, then you don't understand the nature of science.

      --
      ...because "hacker" sounds way sexier than "code drone."
    39. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theres a ton of really compelling arguments in your post.

      Have you ever thought that cause is not democratic? Understand the difference between correlation and causation? Maybe the sample data is too small of a sample? Maybe politics plays into money? Maybe you just can't handle being wrong about everything you ever followed the crowd on?

    40. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      That's like citing the bible as proof of God. :P

    41. Re:Oh nooo!!! by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

      Just because the Earth's magnetic field strength doesn't mean there is necessarily going to be a reversal soon. A reversal will be preceded by a weakening, but it is not expected that every, or even most, weakenings will lead to a reversal.

      --
      a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
    42. Re:Oh nooo!!! by johansalk · · Score: 1

      4.) The United Nations found that there is more Methane produced from livestock, which raises global temperature greater than CO2 by a factor of approx. 20, than any human caused CO2 combined
      We gotta find a way to stop all those cows farting.
    43. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First it was not happening, now its happening throughout the solar system, what next? Fear is a powerful motivator when it comes to creative excuses.

      How many of you global warming skeptics have investments affected by petroleum interests? (I'd bet the majority.) How many of you have chemistry degrees? (I'd bet virtually none.)

      Carbon dioxide and water are intense infra-red electromagnetic radiation absorbers, it is a simple fact. The implications should be obvious.

      Those that doubt the possibility that anthropogenic carbon dioxide can have an effect have obviously never performed a simple acid-base titration, the last drop out of many thousands is the one that changes the hydronium ion concentration by orders of magnitude.

      Yes it is scary, yes it will mean the financial ruin of many, but more than that it will mean the deaths of billions.

    44. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure he formulated his post, and put in a valid point that didn't quite apply.

      That would indeed be our fault, but it still makes most of the other arguments for global warming stupid.

    45. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > 4.) The United Nations found that there is more Methane produced from livestock, which raises global temperature greater than CO2 by a factor of approx. 20, than any human caused > CO2 combined (source: http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/i ndex.html [fao.org]

      ---

      Yeah, I wonder how many domestic cows would be alive if a.) human beings didn't exist to feed the dumb things, and b.) natural predators such as bears, big cats and wolves were still running around at pre-wiped-out-by-man levels.

    46. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hooorrrraaaaaay!

      Finally, my plan for mass Un-natural selection is coming to fruition.

      HHmmmuuuuaaaawwwhhhhhhh!

      (Evil Grin)

      I'm a Chemist. I'm a Physicist.

      Who gives a crap. Everyone is whining over global warming. If you were so damned concerned with the death of billions, what did you do to stop the genocide in Africa?

      Who gives a crap.

      You're born, you live, you die! That is the natural progression of things.

      Do you think a billion Chinese are going to give up their ability to industrialize their nation just so you can stop global warming? Do you think India would give up it's ability to industrialize their nation just to stop global warming?

      Boo freaking hoo!!!!

      Stop being such a naive ninny!

    47. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right on, ccarson! you tell'em bro!

    48. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cptgrudge · · Score: 1

      We gotta find a way to stop all those cows farting.

      Ask and ye shall receive.

      --
      Qualitas edurus commercium, nullus penitus net rimor, nullus deus beneficium
    49. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Shadowlore · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't consider the cultivation of livestock a human activity? Seriously?
      Maybe he's part of the IPCC which also doesn't consider it to be so.

      In a sense they are right. Cow gas and cow belches are not human activity. Yes mankind has increased the numbers of them.

      And the key difference is political impetus and control. Seriously, bovine contribution to GW is approximately 11% greater than human industrial outputs. But you won't see the AGW disasterbators saying we need to reduce the number of cows, or put cows under collection facilities, etc.. Why not? Because for most of the AGW disasterbators it isn't about the environment or the science. It is about control and forcing people to live a lifestyle the AGW disasterbators want them to.

      The AGW proponents say it is our industrial output (particularly cars and the "carbon footprint"), but don't talk to the media about the other sources -even when said sources are greater in GWP. The worst moment for AGW proponents was when the founders of the notion said they needed access to government to get them to change the laws to make people do things. It's been downhill since then.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    50. Re:Oh nooo!!! by jlehtira · · Score: 2, Informative

      So much wrong there that I don't know where to start.

      1) The magnetic field proposal is actually interesting. That might actually have an effect. But, a magnetic field does not stop light from passing, and that's how the vast majority of energy comes to Earth. Actual particles are affected by the magnetic field though. They get moved from their original trajectories to polar areas, causing northern lights there. As far as I know, this phenomenon is not strong enough to significantly warm up the polar regions, but hey, there might be an effect.

      2) "The storm is growing in altitude," de Pater said. "This growth signals a temperature increase in that region", she said.

      Right. Storms form better when there's more heat available, that's what we know from our Caribbean hurricanes too. But deducing *global* warming on Jupiter from the fact that there's a new storm forming, is very bad science and very uncertain indeed. Regional warming tells us nothing about global warming.

      3) "It is not yet clear, though, if the evidence of a single year's change represents a trend."

      Let me tell you what, no it doesn't. Not here on Earth, and not any more on Mars. Also, this article too is taking one isolated spot and saying it reflects a global change. Think of El Niño on Earth: that too makes some places warmer and some other places cooler than otherwise when it happens.

      There are no recent same climate changes on different planets. There's no CO2 ice cap melting on Earth or Jupiter, there's no huge permanent storm system forming on Earth or Mars and there's no excess CO2 or CFC being pumped into atmosphere on Mars or Jupiter.

      4) "the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent - 18 percent - than transport."

      Transport too is only one single cause for our emissions. Besides, nobody really claimed that it would be the cars themselves that are the biggest culprit. And, CO2 is currently far more significant than methane, even when we've more than doubled the atmospheric methane too. So right you are, it's not only cars and not even only CO2 that we should cut down.

      It is possible that the warmer temperatures on Earth are caused by cyclical natural phenomena. That said, we do not know of a cycle that would come near to explaining recent warming. And, because we know a method by which CO2 traps heat, we can be fairly certain that on top of any natural phenomena we have added an unnatural phenomenon. And according to our best science, that unnatural phenomenon is "very probably" what is causing the warming here.

      CO2 is not the only thing that affects climate. And our climate is a chaotic system too: it is fundamentally capable of huge changes without apparent reason.

      And one last thing. China is only producing less than two thirds as much CO2 as USA, despite their far bigger population. And while they certainly have the capacity to produce more CO2, it's actually up to human beings. My guess is that China will never actually match USA in the total amount of CO2 ever produced - it'll take a long while to catch up to the current emissions, and then a whole lot more to match the USA's excess this far. Every reduction counts, and everybody cutting emissions and being bound by the same limits is the only moral way. China did agree to the Kyoto protocol, and I think that means they've agreed to limit emissions when they come close to the western pollution some coming decade or century.

      I don't want to get rich, I want to be happy. And I recommend such priorities for everyone else too.

      For references: http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf (IPCC summary) and wikipedia for "energy conservation" and "kyoto protocol"..

    51. Re:Oh nooo!!! by jlehtira · · Score: 1

      That is true about the magnetic field weakening. Our magnetic field is going through something called reversal. Which over time the poles will swap, thus making the magnetic field weaker.

      Having sat through a lecture about this just yesterday, let me add some info.

      First, we don't know what's happening. Our magnetic field is in a constant state of change anyways, and is known to have gone down momentarily only to spring back up later without reversing. Sure, making it sound certain makes a better story!

      Second, our magnetic field is not ideal or simple. While the majority of it manifests itself as a north-south dipole field (two opposing poles), there's a nonideal component with multiple weaker poles laid on top of it. The relative strength of it is about 20%, and strengthening. I asked about this, and it seems that even if our dipole field goes down to nothingness, it's perfectly possible that the same amount of energy goes into creating a nontrivial field. Maybe we'll simply see "northern" lights all around randomly for a change.

    52. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all seriousness...

      People need to realize if they want to cut down on pollution, there are these places called "Asia" and "Africa".
      They create a whole lot more atmospheric pollution than the USA does.

    53. Re:Oh nooo!!! by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Funny how people who don't accept climate models will instanly accept far less robust economic models tailored to their own self interest. Sure oil contributes to the AGW problem, but the elephant in the middle of the room is coal fired generators not shinny new SUV's.

      Changing to wind power over the next couple of decades (as coal plants reach their end of life) would significantly affect the coal industry and reduce GHG emmission to a level that can be absorbed by the bioshpere. Now this large scale infrastructure change could send a few coal companies to the wall if they failed to disversify (the classical "buggy whip" argument), but can you please either...

      1. Explain how would it would "bankrupt the western world"?
      ...or...
      2. STFU.

      BTW: The "third world" is already "codemned to inescapable poverty (or worse)".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    54. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Missing Possibility

      4-Common teory of Mayas calendar its incomplete

      Present interpretations based on computer models better explain their view of universe (we dont even share the notion of time) as previously mentioned here http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?threshold =0&mode=nested&commentsort=0&op=Change&sid=208132& cid=16971732&pid=16971732

    55. Re:Oh nooo!!! by ltbarcly · · Score: 1

      0. "No one now living will die" -Jesus circa 30AD
      Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; --John 11:25, meaning Lazerus died, and is alive now alive because of Jesus.

      and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"-- John 11:26, meaning that if you are still alive and believe in jesus you won't die in the first place.

      The meaning of this passage was changed when Jesus and a bunch of his buddies DID die, and now is taken to mean 'spiritual life' vs 'physical life'. But the meaning is clear if you don't base your reading on the assumption that Jesus is always right.

      1. Earth is flat, assumed to be true in the bible.
      http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm
      Isaiah 11:12
      12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

      Revelation 7:1
      1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

      Job 38:13
      13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

      Jeremiah 16:19
      19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

      Daniel 4:11
      11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

      Matthew 4:8
      8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV)

      2. Sun revolves around earth
      How can you deny this one? Galileo was threatened with burning at the stake, by your 'spiritual leaders' of the day, for busting this myth. Christians believed the bible told them that the Sun went around the earth when that was 'common knowledge' and once that was proven wrong they re-read the bible and now they claim that it says the earth moves around the sun. How convenient.

      Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth." (Heb. 1:10)
      "He established the earth upon its foundations, so that it will not totter, forever and ever." (Ps. 104:5)
      "For the pillars of the earth are the Lord's, and he set the world on them." (I Sam. 2:8)

      3. Animals/Woman created AFTER man
      You got me here, the bible does say god created animals before man. It also says that woman was created out of a rib and that man was created whole, in his present form, without ancestors, out of dirt. Huzzah for magical superpowers.

      4. Animals created whole in current form
      Genesis clearly states that the animals were created in the first week. Trying to sneak in arguments like "But it could have meant God evolved the animals" or other twaddle is just an attempt to make the bibles nonsense relevant in the face of being proven wrong. If that's what the bible 'means', why didn't anybody figure it out before darwin? If this isn't in the bible, why do the fundies insist on teaching it in school? Or is this the beginning of yet another GREAT WEASELING by christians to change the bible to fit what science has proven instead of old wives tales and superstition?

    56. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Ah. So the buffalo hunters of the 19th century who almost exterminated the bufalo and virtually starved the indians out helped save the planet from an earlier threat of global warming eh?

      I guess we should blame the alaskan pipeline for the current problem. I understand the carribou herds are way up.

      But what about Terminex? Maybe they can save the world by expanding their genocide of termites.

    57. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      The climate guys have had to acknowledge the presence of effects now. They just categorize them as unknown and assumed to be minor - despite the growing body of serious evidence to the contrary.

      What is known now is the effects are not from direct energy which varies slightly - and that is what they point to in order to avoid the really serious effects of solar magnetic activity variations and it's impact on cloud formation via cosmic ray flux. This is more like comparing a rise of co2 of 5% to a rise in methane of 5%. Essentially, it's no comparison.

    58. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      If you've ever looked at the output of something like a large area gamma ray detector sitting on a bench in the lab, you'll start to understand that cosmic ray flux (and other atmospheric radiation sources) are probably not just another source of cloud formation. I suspect the experts who assume it is are actually unaware of just how much of it there actually is around the sky. It and h2o vapor may not be the only requirements for forming clouds that way - it probably isn't considering we do not have virtually 100% cloud cover all the time.

      Once realized just how much there is of cosmic rays and radiation background, it becomes much harder to accept that this is not the primary natural cloud formation mechanism.

      As for global warming (manmade or otherwise) clouds (especially if one includes rain effects) are a serious forcing agent and they help provide a regulating negative feedback.

      Water vapor accounts for around 96% of all greenhouse gas effects. Clouds are water vapor on steroids.

    59. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Jupiter's southern hemisphere is in serious turbulence now. Last year brought out Red Jr. the new (and first ever) new red spot since The red spot was first discovered. There's lots of storms going on there now. (current scientific observations).

    60. Re:Oh nooo!!! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      It'll be interesting to see what happens to migratory birds. It'll be a good time to invest in high strength sunscreen producing companies too. Hopefully, we'll be lucky enough to avoid any serious coronal mass ejections during that time as I'd hate to lose a bunch of atmosphere. It might be a good time to disinvest of any holdings in GPS related companies or for that matter - any space based companies with satellites that depend on the earth's field for protection. Same goes for any companies still making magnetic compasses - if they haven't gone broke by then.

      Otherwise, it'll pretty much be business as usual for a few thousand years.

    61. Re:Oh nooo!!! by insanius · · Score: 1

      You think if humans weren't around cows wouldn't fuck and fart? Seriously?

    62. Re:Oh nooo!!! by WizADSL · · Score: 1

      As soon as I read this on the home page, this is exactly what I thought to say.. I'm kinda glad you beat me to it!

    63. Re:Oh nooo!!! by Dave_1963 · · Score: 1

      But look on the bright side....I am a ham radio, C.B. radio, and TVDXer. A high sunspot count means fabulous reception from all over the world. I was not around for "The big one" in the late '50's, but you could talk around the globe on a fraction of a watt of power, and you could receive tv stations from Africa, England (on a pal standard tv) and other exotic locales. I can hardly wait!

  2. Umm, old news? by Zarhan · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article is dated March 10, 2006.

    1. Re:Umm, old news? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 5, Funny
      News goes in a cycle.

      This news will be repeated again and again, reaching DUPE MAX sometime just AFTER the SOLAR MAX predicted.

      It is not, however, a harbinger for the end of dupes.

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    2. Re:Umm, old news? by daeg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As someone who used to work in news, I can tell you that is entirely false. After the event, there are even more stories that you can pull from an event than there were leading up to the event. For instance: Did the storm affect anything? Was it stronger than predicted? Why? Does it affect local animals at all? What about children? Was your child affected? Can we link to to increased teen suicide? Was it caused by aliens? Can we find someone that thinks it was aliens? Was the prediction wrong? Was it right? Was it both right and wrong? Are there any local experts that can weigh in on the subject? ...no? Can we make some experts?

      Local news was terrifying to say the least.

    3. Re:Umm, old news? by ehrichweiss · · Score: 3, Funny

      You forgot the biggie: Can we relate this to Anna Nicole? Bring that out at the right moment and the story will reach record numbers of readers and it'll be covered forever. I only wish I were kidding.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    4. Re:Umm, old news? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 1

      You are kidding. It can't be related to Anna Nicole. However, I expect it may very well be blamed on President Bush.

      They did it an the earthquake, why not?

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    5. Re:Umm, old news? by Gospodin · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, DUPE_MAX keeps getting redefined higher as they upgrade hardware on the Slash-servers. When it was a 32-bit integer, we might have had a chance to witness the End of Dupes. But at 64 bits, we're really screwed.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    6. Re:Umm, old news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not, however, a harbinger for the end of dupes.

      Second Coming = Jesus Dupe?

    7. Re:Umm, old news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Second Coming = People Duped.

    8. Re:Umm, old news? by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      I wasn't exactly kidding. If my mother farted in her car and it somehow got related to Anna Nicole, she'd be immortalized by the media. That's just what the media does to keep the emotional rollercoaster going for the uneducated masses. Yes, it was a joke but that doesn't mean that it's not quite plausible.

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
  3. Apocalypse? by muellerr1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"
    Great. It wasn't enough that the fundies were predicting apocalypse, now there's a secular apocalypse to look forward to. And here I thought we were done with Y2K. Sheeple sure loves them some end times.
    1. Re:Apocalypse? by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're just jealous because you haven't spent the past several years building a sacred Mesoamerican ball court in your cornfield. If I build it they will come...

    2. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mayans were not "secular", and neither is any hypothetical contemporary belief in Mayan prophecies. You mean something like "pagan".

    3. Re:Apocalypse? by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      Belief in a Christian apocalypse is non-secular, while belief in some other religion's apocalypse is secular?

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    4. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Would it really be such a bad thing, though? Just think: we wouldn't have to worry about the 32-bit timer on Unix systems overflowing in 2038!

    5. Re:Apocalypse? by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Yes, in the same way that secular humanists are all secretly fundamentalist Muslims.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    6. Re:Apocalypse? by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      Come on, you're just being mean to actual pagans. Anyone living today who believes in Mayan prophecies is just delusional.

    7. Re:Apocalypse? by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      Yes, when that culture, along with its religion, has been dead for centuries and all that's left are scarce or undecipherable relics such as this calendar system. Are you seriously implying that the OP practices an authentic Mayan religion? It's either that, or you're lumping superstition about nice round numbers in with religion.

      Also, the term I used was 'fundie.' Though I meant it in a Christian sense as that's the dominant religion of my culture, that could mean a fundamentalist of any religion.

    8. Re:Apocalypse? by muellerr1 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      To all those mods who modded me flamebait: I'm an insensitive clod--I hadn't realized that you were sheeple. Yeesh, used to be that making fun of fundies guaranteed the +5's.

    9. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, you're just being mean to actual pagans. Anyone living today who believes in Mayan prophecies is just delusional.


      I'm not so sure:
      Mayan activists 'purify' sacred site in Guatemala after Bush's visit.

      But seriously, their astronomical observations are as valid today as they were when originally recorded. If Mayan "prophecies" are just delusions, then the recent lunar eclipse was the most convincing (mass) delusion I have ever experienced.

      Nothing like the book burnings of the Conquistadors and the Nazis to get the blood pumping eh?

      "Grunt, Grunt, Grunt." [Tim Allen style] There, we have communed. Oh sorry, that's a bad word, I forgot.

      How about: "I am down wit ur shit G." Yes, perhaps that will do...
    10. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:Apocalypse? by oblonski · · Score: 1

      anyone ever read Graham Hancock's Fingerprints of the Gods? or his Heaven's Mirror. all this stuff sounds loony on the face of it, but many bright mathematicians are still working on trying to unravel the Mayan "mysteries" namely their calender and intricate system of mathematics, and what happens is that these people's system of timekeeping, which is mathematically more precise and accurate than any we "moderns" have developed thus far, comes to an end, stops, on the Julian calender equivalent 23 December 2012! I wonder how far plans are to colonize Mars or establish settlements on the moon, won't be finished in time anyways... ah well...

      --
      Move along now, nothing to see here! Go on!
    12. Re:Apocalypse? by Guuge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You clearly don't know what the word 'secular' means. Grab a dictionary. You'll find that this sort of Pythagorean mysticism is not at all secular. Indeed, the word you're looking for is "mystical".

      The supposed difference between fundamentalist dogma and mystical superstition is not compelling to me, but you can observe it if you wish.

    13. Re:Apocalypse? by JensenDied · · Score: 1

      Its alright, if this blows over we still have the asteroid in 2034. we can still put that off.

      --

      09:F9:11:02 - 9D:74:E3:5B - D8:41:56:C5 - 63:56:88:C0

    14. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As many other comments on this article have pointed out, the Mayan calendar does not "stop." The Mayan concept of time is cyclical rather than linear, and when the calendar reaches the end it just starts over again at 1. It's comparable to how we start over with January every year, just on a much longer scale.

    15. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My grandmother told me all my life that "we're living in the end times". She was right, finally, when she died in 2003 at age 99, 50 years after I was born.

      It is always the end times - for someone. Your last day will come, too. It may be right now, or it may be in 90 years, but you WILL see the apocalypse. It will, however, be your own personal apocalypse.

    16. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately, y'all Europeans didn't kill all the Mayans, they are still around.
      The classical Maya culture has been altered by the invaders, but it continues.

    17. Re:Apocalypse? by oblonski · · Score: 1

      that time is 'cyclical' for the Mayans is not in dispute, let us not get into semantic sophistry here, the point is that the current time cycle, by their reckoning, 'concludes itself', 'run it's course', 'completes itself', 'comes full circle', whatever politically correct terminology you may want to employ, point is the 'transitional' phase before the next 'cycle' begins is somewhat of a mystery, hence all the speculation, serious or not, about the 'END' of time and what possibly could happen when it does 'come around'

      --
      Move along now, nothing to see here! Go on!
    18. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's right, your fucking leader cmdrdildo is using religious dogma. where is the shouts of "fucktard" and "asshat"? your own fucking leader has shown his faith in god.
       
      you faggots are being lead astray by someone who worships the fucking sun as a god. he's one of you fuckers.

    19. Re:Apocalypse? by db32 · · Score: 1

      Heh, I just patched my kernel for the 13.0.0.0.0 roll over. All you suckers are gunna be screwed!

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    20. Re:Apocalypse? by pluther · · Score: 1

      Actually, the Maya calendar is pretty well understood now.
      And it is quite accurate, amazingly so, given its time. But it's not quite as accurate as the to-the-microsecond calendar that we use today.

      And it doesn't "end" on December 21, 2012 any more than our calendar "ended" on December 31, 00. If they'd kept it for another thousand years, they were more than capable of adding another digit to it.

      --
      If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
    21. Re:Apocalypse? by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      Mayan Culture lives on the side of my van.

    22. Re:Apocalypse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cycle n.
      A periodically repeated sequence of events

      Repeated. As in, keeps going. As in, no end. Don't be thick.

    23. Re:Apocalypse? by Any+Web+Loco · · Score: 1

      How is an apocalypse predicted by another civilisation's religion a secular apolcalypse?

    24. Re:Apocalypse? by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Sorry but the early evolution theorists had to insist on long term stability for their new found religion.

      Unfortunately, we do not live in a long term stable planet, within a long term stable star system, within a long term stable galaxy, within a stable local group, within a nice quiet quiescent universe.

      BTW, andromeda is headed our way on a collision course - which could very well send us whizzing out into the nether realms outside of the galaxy or spiraling in towards the central regions. Not to fail to mention just what might happen when our 300 million solar mass dense central object (usually referred to as a super massive black hole) splats into Andromeda's billion + solar mass supermassive central black hole. That could be a sight best viewed (for survival purposes) from the other side of the universe.

      If algor plans to stop this cataclysmic event (the andromeda train wreck) - he'd better get started now because in 10 years, it'll be too late. I look forward to seeing his solution to the problem. (actually it's already too late by about 10 billion years or more)

  4. End of the world? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes - it's just a coincidence

    --
    You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    1. Re:End of the world? by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1
      I agree.

      The end of the world will be a coincidence. And, I might add, not very significant in the cosmic scheme of things.

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  5. Yes, you've found a coincidence. Yippee. by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"


    No. Yes.
  6. Bah... by mdm-adph · · Score: 1

    ...every knows the Mayan calender only ended on that date because they ran out of rock face to chisel it on. I'm sure it could've gone on for millions of years.

    --
    It is by my will alone my thoughts acquire motion; it is by the juice of the coffee bean that the thoughts acquire speed
    1. Re:Bah... by peragrin · · Score: 1

      actually it makes a nice round number. Think of it like y2k for the mayan people. It was far enough into the future to not worry about it.

      Oddly enough the Mayans thought farther ahead than Unix programmers. twice. Y2k and the year 2038.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    2. Re:Bah... by whitehatlurker · · Score: 1
      Think of it like y2k for the mayan people.

      Does this mean my ancient Mayan computer will no longer work after 2012?

      Oddly enough the Mayans thought farther ahead than Unix programmers.

      I am undecided as to whether having a calendar that outlasts your culture is a good thing or not.

      --
      .. paranoid crackpot leftover from the days of Amiga.
    3. Re:Bah... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...]...every[one] knows the Mayan calender only ended on that date because they ran out of rock face to chisel it on. I'm sure it could've gone on for millions of years.[...]

      No, that's not it; few people understand that the early Mayan astronomers were in fact that age's engineers: they were responsible for all calculations that pertained to harvests, tides, etc... Anything that could be important to the survival of the people.

      Naturally, being engineers, there was a management infrastructure (priests) above them.
      So, OF COURSE, one day their PHP (pointy-headed priest) walked in and told them their project had been cancelled.

      "But I'm just starting the calculations for the year 14.0.0.0.0 calendar!" one of them protested.

      "You can always get a job in support (bloodletting)" answered the boss.

      So all the sinister things people see in the fact that the Mayan calendar ends on a certain date really ARE justified, it's only that the calendar was done in by downsizing, and downsizing truly IS evil.

  7. December 21, 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    12/21/2012 12+21+20+12=65 !! That's how old Jesus would be if he was born in 1942!! COINCIDENCE??

    1. Re:December 21, 2012 by fuego451 · · Score: 1

      After carefully studying your equation, I have found another terrifying result: If Jesus had been born in 1965, he would be 42.

      We need to somehow get this information to the proper authorities e.g., astrologers, numerologists.

  8. Coincidence? by Skidge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?" Yes. Yes, it is.
    1. Re:Coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It gets even easier soon. Just wait for the dupe!

    2. Re:Coincidence? by pl1ght · · Score: 1

      Hahaha, owned. Thats how bogus the doods statement is. Kudos on that retort. God slashdot you guys are getting more and more hokey everyday.

    3. Re:Coincidence? by greg0020 · · Score: 1

      After reading all of the posts so far, I must say I am quite disappointed at the shallow, dismissive behavior exhibited by many of you. Either you are: a) So very afraid of the concept that the Mayans predicted an event that might affect your cozy little arrogant world. b) So wrapped up in the current science that your mind is a closed box unwilling to admit that an ancient civilization could have had any sort of astronomical ability. Those who have studied the Mayans knows their calendar doesn't just end in 2012. They actually did predict major astronomical events occuring which would have devestating effects on the planet. I'm not saying we should all believe this and dig a bunker, but for Pete's sake have a deeper, more well-informed discussion that I know you all are capable of doing.

    4. Re:Coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What would those who have studied the Mayan calendar say about 2012? Absolutely nothing? That our year 2012 will happen to coincide with the rolling-over of some Mayan cycle? BFD. The "2012! COINCIDENCE?!" remark is getting all the respect it deserves.

    5. Re:Coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is no coincidence, the Mayas kwew what they were doing. However, 21 of Dec 2012 is not the destruction of the earth, but the zenith of a worldwide change which we have the chance to be part of.

      These changes in the sun's weather are produced by the central sun in our galaxy, and this date (in 2012), will be like a new birth for mankind and our blue planet.

      In the years preceeding this event, we will see how the old-age fight between good and evil will reach its peak. We need not to be afraid though, because if we are worthy to move beyond this date, our bodies are already being transformed, purified, ready for a jump to another dimension/time.

      Millions are fighting for a better world, and the "end of times" events which the Mayas and Christ (Mat. 24) spoke about are happenig now. I am personally looking forward to that day, in which everything that was lost or stolen from our past will be given back, and we will know as a race, our duty in this universe, evolving our way into infinity. FP.

    6. Re:Coincidence? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CmdrTaco's mention of the Mayan "end of the world" (more so the end of this segment of time, and the long year starts over again) wasn't because of the year, but because it will coincide the Solar Max of the increased solar activity.

      This could have actually been interesting and insightful discussion... looks like so many AOLers are flooding slashdot that all insight is dying a slow and painful death... Maybe it's time to jump ship to another site thats not in its death spirals...

  9. Sure.... by Zeek40 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If they're as accurate at predicting storms on the sun as they are here on earth, I'll believe them when it's happening.

    1. Re:Sure.... by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      The funny thing about your post is that, if there really is a big solar storm, one of its first consequences will be a reduction of the quality of the weather forecasts because the satelites will suffer from increased noise in their sensors and communication devices and (in case of a realy nasty solar storm) temporary electronic failures.
      But don't worry, odds that this activity peak would cause the end of the world as we know it is basically the same as the one of 1958 (0.0000000000000000%).

    2. Re:Sure.... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      They are just about as accurate on the sun as on the earth. On the earth, every twelve months or so there are some major storms in the south atlantic. Just like on the sun every 12 years or so there are some major storms. It's the same thing, we know it will happen, we're just not clear on the details.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Sure.... by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Actually, it isn't a storm - it's a cycle and we've seen enough of them to get a good idea of things. Also, we can see a bit of the conveyer system that's setting up for the next cycle. What's more important - there's not any politics in this at present time - not even pressure from the local chamber of commerce to claim what a great place to live due to the lovely weather.

      As for predictions - it's more like saying there's going to be cold fronts in December coming south from the frozen northlands than trying to say it's going to be rainy and cloudy and 94 degrees on july 4th in washington DC this year.

      Except for the period 1750? or so where there were no sunspots seen
      for 50 yrs which violates the nominal 11 yr sunspot cycle we've grown to know and love, it's a decent bet that we've got a doozy coming. It'll be fun for ham radio, more fun than the 60s 70s 80s or even the 90s. The bad news is - no sunspots seemed to translate in to a bit of global cooling last time around and modern research suggests hotter, sunnier and more drought - so the manmade global warming true believers are going to be out in force in a few years with much less liklihood of getting snowed in yet again.

      As for weather here, I've given up trying to figure out how they can botch the 3 day forecast so bad and so often and decided to concentrate on understanding how they can botch the current conditions so often and so bad.

  10. Coincidence by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar?
    Yes, I am familiar with the Tzolk'in Calendar.

    December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?
    Yes, coincidence. I was first exposed to the-world-will-end-in-2012 when I read Graham's book Fingerprints of the Gods. I wasn't sold on his numerology.

    Let me break it down for you: the Mayans had a very advanced & complex calendar that took into account a lot of different cycles and even some of the most extraordinary hiccups that come with man's attempt at keeping track of time. For the Gregorian calendar, we have leap years except we skip one every four hundred years and even with that in place I think we lose a day every 8,000 years. And you will find that every model has some special issues.

    So, back to the Mayans, their measurements of days came in sets of 13, contrary to our sets of 7 days in a week. So the world is no more likely to end on 13.0.0.0.0 than it was on the new years even in year seven. Just because 13 was always the last number in their cycles just means that we start a new cycle. No cataclysmic event needed to mark it. The cycle simply repeats and they most likely go to 1.0.0.0.0 there's no such thing as overflow in their calendar.

    Fun hokey astrological implications? Yes. Cold hard scientific data pointing to the end of the world? No.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Coincidence by painQuin · · Score: 5, Funny

      the ones you have to watch out for are the cultures whose calendars count down

      --
      A guilty conscience means at least you've got one.
    2. Re:Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the Gregorian calendar, we have leap years except we skip one every four hundred years and even with that in place I think we lose a day every 8,000 years

      Correction: We have leap years every 4 years, skip one every 100 years, but add one back every 400 years.
    3. Re:Coincidence by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Gregorian calendar has leap years as follows:
      Every year divisible by 4 is a leap year.
      Except when that year is also divisible by 100, in which case it is *not* a leap year.
      Except when that year is also divisible by 400, in which case it *is* a leap year.

      Hence 2000 was a leap year. 2100 will not be.

      The fun hokeyness is due to the Western assumption that everything is linear, in spite of the fact that we repeat months, days of months, and days of weeks constantly. We don't find it odd that there are thousands of Wednesdays or March 21sts, but somehow we can't understand there ever being more than one 2007.

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    4. Re:Coincidence by jrumney · · Score: 5, Funny

      but somehow we can't understand there ever being more than one 2007.

      There was another, 4014 years ago. What I can't figure out is how prehistoric man knew when Jesus was going to be born/die/be baptised or whatever event you believe led to the changeover, and how clever it was of him to count backwards.

    5. Re:Coincidence by revlayle · · Score: 1

      I always thought was a crock. People who believe this always say "Then why does it end on 12/21/2012??? It must be significant!" My answer: "Well, the calendar's got to end somewhere. My calendar ends on 12/12/2007. OH NOES! WE GONNA DIES!"

      Anyone can extend the Gregorian calendar as we know the rules on how to continue that calendar (hence why we get 2008 calendars). I'm sure, if someone really wanted to, that the Mayan calendar *could be EXTENDED* beyond 12/21/2012 as well. Doing so would be academic, as probably no one uses the Mayan calendar for everyday use.

      I mean c'mon, there's not a patch for Windows yet that lets me use it.

    6. Re:Coincidence by Grashnak · · Score: 1

      "Well, the calendar's got to end somewhere. Ya, damn inconsiderate of them not to have carved out their calendar until the end of time. Not like it would have taken them forever or anything... lol
      --
      Life needs more saving throws.
    7. Re:Coincidence by Knux · · Score: 1

      I was going to try to explain that to you... then I realized it was a joke...

      And unlike other /. readers, that would explain it anyway just to be modded insightful, I'll just stop here and go get some cofdee.

    8. Re:Coincidence by Knux · · Score: 1

      I'll just stop here and go get some cofdee.

      Ow crap! I misspelled coffee.

    9. Re:Coincidence by revlayle · · Score: 1

      (what I meant by "extending the Mayan calender beyond 12/21/2012", of course I meant extending it beyond the equivalent Gregorian date of 12/21/2012, I hope that was clear)

    10. Re:Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh us hokey westerners. Let's all adopt a quaint, noble, and ancient form of time keeping instead.

    11. Re:Coincidence by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      But before we had it right, we had to get rid of a couple weeks at the end of the middle age to resync on the sun. The Gregorian2.0 is OK, but despite its near obsolecence problem and the lack of developemnt effort, the Mayan1.0 was right long before.

    12. Re:Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, once you get some cofdee in your system, you'll be a lot more mentally alert, so you can catch any spelling mistakes.

    13. Re:Coincidence by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      Yes, well, the Maya were also known for human sacrifice. You have a lot of encouragement for getting your days and nights right when the last guy who got it wrong has his chest cut open with a stone blade and his heart removed right in front of you.

      You think to yourself "Hey, I *need* my heart. I should figure out when the equinoxes are so I don't end up as the next scapegoat for a bad harvest."

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    14. Re:Coincidence by Doctor+Memory · · Score: 1

      Uh, that should be C0FdEE (according to my LED hex keypad...)

      --
      Just junk food for thought...
    15. Re:Coincidence by dfn5 · · Score: 1

      Let me break it down for you
      blah blah blah. It is much simpler than that. From the article...

      the most intense solar maximum in fifty years
      It didn't say the most intense solar maximum ever. It just said in the last 50 years. So what did the Mayan calendar have to say about that event? Well we are still here, so it couldn't have been much.
      --
      -- Thou hast strayed far from the path of the Avatar.
    16. Re:Coincidence by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      I'll just stop here and go get some cofdee.
      Ow crap! I misspelled coffee. Understandable, since you obviously hadn't had any yet.
      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    17. Re:Coincidence by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      Yes, well, the Maya were also known for human sacrifice. You have a lot of encouragement for getting your days and nights right when the last guy who got it wrong has his chest cut open with a stone blade and his heart removed right in front of you.

      You think to yourself "Hey, I *need* my heart. I should figure out when the equinoxes are so I don't end up as the next scapegoat for a bad harvest." And they say you can't force creativity........
      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    18. Re:Coincidence by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar)

      The most amazing thing is that both happen to fall on the solstice. How often does that happen?

      Have a holly, jolly Christmas
      It's best time of the year
      I don't know if there'll be snow
      but have a cup of cheer

      --
      What?
    19. Re:Coincidence by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      He wasn't that clever - he was off by about 5 years.

    20. Re:Coincidence by blu3+b0y · · Score: 1

      The Mayan calendar is actually more accurate with respect to solar time than the Gregorian.

      Here's a Tulaa World newspaper article I wrote years ago about various calendar systems.

      Wikipedia describes the 13.0.0.0.0 myth as occurring because the last cycle of the world ended just before that rollover. However, the really really long count in the Mayan calendar implies there are 13^20 long count cycles from the end of the world.

    21. Re:Coincidence by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


      Yeah, and you didn't have to just reset your clock, you had to get a whole new sundial at that switchover.

      --
      sig?
    22. Re:Coincidence by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      We need cycles only when there duration is less or comparable to human life span. In Russian the word for "century" has the same root as "eternity". No, we do not need another 2007 (1984 - may be).

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    23. Re:Coincidence by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1

      The BC calendar counted down, and you saw what happened to every society that was around back then.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    24. Re:Coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Copy & Paste from the link of a previous post http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?threshold =0&mode=nested&commentsort=0&op=Change&sid=208132& cid=16971732&pid=16971732 ...the mesoamerican calendar was based in numerical relations, derived from the observation of the visible planets and through the analisis of their astronomic periods

      The mayas to designate a day used 20 names, counted with a numeric system base 13 (from 1 to 13), grouped in 5 days "weeks", and 20 days "months", to form 260 unique combinations like designations for days (number:name) in a repetitive calendar we call "tzolkin" divided in 65 days "seasons" (of course i am making a simil, werent called like that) Examples of the names are: Imix, Ik, Akbal, Kan, Chicchan, Cimi, Manik, Lamat, Muluc, Oc, Chuen, Eb, Ben, Ix, Men, Cib, Caban, Etznab, Cauac, Ahau. An example of a tzolkin date could be "1 Imix"

      The list of names had intercalated orientation (orient, nort, ponient, sout) so every "week" (5 days) started and ended with the same orientation... and every of the 260 designations of days informs elapsed days and orientation. They also divided the calendar in periods of 52 days (unique combinations of 13 numbers with 4 orientations)

      This system its then based on the relation of two sets: the base 13 numbers and the 20 names. The consecutive asociation was done trought simple counting, making pairs... there were not needed any operations with positional notation.

      All this counts (asociations) are cyclic... repetitive, but not identical because every repetition starts at a diferent point in the cycle. I think of them, like time units (for example [day:orientation] to name a "week") The name of the repetition its given by is starting day (for example "week" 1-nort) The relation of two sets with a difference in cardinality of 1 its very common in the maya "time units" (for example 5 days:4 orientations) and its called "movement efect" because the maya didnt have a word for "time", to talk about the elapsing of time they used words related to movement

      The maya also used a calendar of 365 days we call haab (divided in 73 "weeks" of 5 days or 18 "months" of 20 days plus 1 week... of bad luck) The haab is an alternate form of the tzolkin that relates (trought consecutive asociation) the number of day (from 0 to 19) and name of the month. Examples of the names of the month are: Pop, Uo, Zip, Zotz, Tzec, Xul, Yaxkin, Mol, Chen, Yax, Zac, Ceb, Mac, Kankin, Muan... An example of a haab date could be "4 Ahau - 18 Pop". Therefore, the day 0 Pop was the maya new year, and the haab date (for example "1 Imix - 0 Pop") designed the name of the year. The tzolkin-haab dates gave the mayas 94,900 unique combinations (of 260 tzolkin dates with 365 days of haab months) to name his days.

      Here comes the really interesting part... To measure longer periods of time, the maya keeped lists of dates "sampled" from the tzolkin-haab succession of days at some fixed interval. Doing a mathematical analysis of the numeric properties of this calendaric system, was found that some astronomical intervals produced lists of "sampled" dates sorted (as a whole or in part) in ascending, descending order or with a fixed marker. The astronomical intervals where aproximated because the mayas used only whole numbers.

      For example here are some lists of "sampled" dates at fixed intervals (using for simplicity 1Imix-0Pop as origin, not the historical 4Ahau-8Cumhu)
      365 days : 1Imix-0Pop, 2Cimi-0Pop, 3Chuen-0Pop, 4Cib-0Pop, 5Imix-0Pop, 6Cimi-0Pop, 7Chuen-0Pop, 8Cib-0Pop...
      Here, obviously se fixed marker its the "0 Pop" or new year day
      584 days : 13C

    25. Re:Coincidence by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      The Gregorian calendar has leap years as follows:
      Every year divisible by 4 is a leap year.
      Except when that year is also divisible by 100, in which case it is *not* a leap year.
      Except when that year is also divisible by 400, in which case it *is* a leap year.


      Except after C.

      And that's just weird.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    26. Re:Coincidence by caol.kailash · · Score: 1

      What I find interesting is the similarities between the cycle end thing and the Hindu cycles. Right now we're considered as being in a Kali Yuga, one in which the Goddess of Death reigns and everything goes to hell (basically, and hell as figure of speech not literal in the Christian sense obviously.) Each Yuga lasts about 12,000 years (in some accounts and if I remember correctly) and there's no reason 12/21/2012 couldn't be the end of this 12,000ish year cycle, especially since it has 2 12s and 21 (which one can look at as an inverted 12 almost, but that seems like pushing it too far.) So if we go with the misunderstanding of this being the end of the world in the Mayan Calendar, and look at the Hindu calendar as support, we're screwed. And in Kabbalistic Numerology (at least according to The Kabbalah Centre International) 2 is a negative number, because 1 represents unity but 2 begins the separation from everyone. 0 is the seed so is a positive number because since it's limitless it holds everything. So if you take each number individually, there's four 2's, three 1's and one 0 making a 4:4 negative:positive ratio, which could represent (at least to me) that there would be more an even fight between the two energies. 12/22/2012 would be more negative under this analysis, 12/23/2012 would be back to the even ratio. I can't remember about 4-5, but 6 is positive so 12/26/2012 would be 4:4. I think it would only change significantly and for a longer period on the 30th when it becomes more positive (12/30/2012 is 3:5 neg:pos) Also, in Kabbalistic Numerology, 13.0.0.0.0 would be positive. I already mentioned what 0 is, but I think 13 is positive (could be wrong) But it's moot, cause it'd be 4:1 or 5:0 pos:neg or even 5:1 if you break up the number 13.

  11. Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Peter+Trepan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it the one where all twelve are nude except for loincloths and headdresses?

    Um... no, I'm not familiar with it.

    --

    Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.

    1. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Bandman · · Score: 5, Funny

      Was it a dream where you see yourself standing in sort of sun-god robes on a pyramid with a thousand naked women screaming and throwing little pickles at you?

      Why am I the only one who has that dream?

    2. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by paitre · · Score: 1

      God I love a good Real Genius reference.

      Good job.

    3. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your ideas intrigue me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    4. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      best movie evar...

    5. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      too bad, Miss K'ank'in was a babe!

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    6. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. Time for me to order it on DVD. ...

      Be right back...

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    7. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      The final acts were disappointing. Why was the fact that they creating an incredibly precise weapon immediately regarded as evil? In WWII, whole cities were firebombed in the hopes of maybe hitting the actual infrastructure target, as well as some psychological effect. In the current age of the smart bomb, such wholesale and inefficient use of ordnance is considered irresponsible and immoral.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    8. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Freudian implications of that dream are just, well... staggering!

    9. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by TFloore · · Score: 1

      Why was the fact that they creating an incredibly precise weapon immediately regarded as evil? In WWII, whole cities were firebombed in the hopes of maybe hitting the actual infrastructure target, as well as some psychological effect. In the current age of the smart bomb, such wholesale and inefficient use of ordnance is considered irresponsible and immoral.

      I'm not really disagreeing with you, but putting a slightly different emphasis on things.

      We like precision guided munitions because they decrease civilian casualties, and otherwise make us look less bad on CNN. This is very true.

      But there is a secondary effect there. We keep talking about precision munitions as if they are targeted purely at property. We aren't killing people with fewer innocent bystander deaths, we are taking out that factory with fewer innocent bystander deaths.

      Because, of course, there are no evil people in the world, only evil real estate.

      Put that way, it is obviously idiotic, but that doesn't stop people from acting like it's a defensible position.

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
    10. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by warm+sushi · · Score: 1

      "Why am I the only one who has that dream?"

      Because the drugs work differently for everyone.

    11. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's just hope the sequel comes through. And is good.

    12. Re:Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? by mrdogi · · Score: 1

      Great, now I'm gonna have to watch that movie again. Thanks!

  12. Great more doom by __aalnoi707 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    First its Y2K then killer asteroids, Unix timestamp running out in 2038 now this. Whats next?

    1. Re:Great more doom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you worry your pretty head, they'll think of SOMETHING.

    2. Re:Great more doom by Cauchy · · Score: 1

      And patent it...and sue...

    3. Re:Great more doom by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Don't worry - that asteroid will hit us in 2036, thus solving the great 32-bit unix timestamp.

      (does anyone run 32-bit unix anymore? Windows, yes, but Unix?)

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    4. Re:Great more doom by cparker15 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Aren't most Unix installations still 32-bit?

      --
      Have you driven a fnord... lately?

      You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.

    5. Re:Great more doom by Gr8Apes · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      64 bit unices available:

      HP UX 11.x
      AIX 4.3
      Solaris 7+ (note that UltraSparc processers IIe and III on up require 64 bit kernels)
      SGI Irix since at least 6.5
      Compaq Tru64

      All of these are pre-2000.

      BTW, a funny thing I found while looking this up - SCO as of 2004 had no UNIX98 compliant OSes. Maybe that explains their lawsuit based business plan?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    6. Re:Great more doom by cparker15 · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm aware of the 64-bit Unices, however I'm not aware of their density in the field. Do installations of 64-bit Unices really outnumber 32-bit now? I've not yet made the jump from 32 to 64 (lack of need).

      --
      Have you driven a fnord... lately?

      You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later.

    7. Re:Great more doom by Gr8Apes · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well, considering that UNIX98 also included Y2K compliance....

      But, I cannot answer your questions. I can offer an anecdote that my personal latest sighting of one of those specific UNIX versions was in 2002. I'd assume (I know) that later versions came on later hardware, and thus are 64 bit.

      As for BSD/Linux, the majority of those installations are probably still 32 bit, but I'd expect that to change within the next 10 years, well before 2038. (OMG - a 10 year hardware cycle for PC hardware?!?! If you're not running Windows, sure! ;)

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    8. Re:Great more doom by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      What's next? Probably another BSD security hole. But I gotta get laid again first.

      --
      C|N>K
    9. Re:Great more doom by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      Killer asteroids have nothing to do with the other items you mentioned. A sufficiently big asteroid could wipe out a species (and it probably has, in the past).

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    10. Re:Great more doom by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      What makes you think you should include killer asteroids with those other issues?

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    11. Re:Great more doom by manifoldronin · · Score: 1

      First its Y2K then killer asteroids, Unix timestamp running out in 2038 now this.
      What, did you learn about Y2038 after the killer asteroids? What kind of /.ter are you?
      --
      Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
    12. Re:Great more doom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much improved HF propagation! I can't wait for 24's peak. That'll be NICE! :)

      20m PSK31 is looking pretty quiet today...

    13. Re:Great more doom by rujholla · · Score: 1

      LOL don't forget US govnmt running out of SSN's

  13. The Mayan calendar change isn't significant by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

    It's just the end of the current round of the long count in the calendar. Then it start over.

    It's not the end of anything in any significant sense, just the turning of a wheel. It's just as reasonable to think of it as a beginning.

    1. Re:The Mayan calendar change isn't significant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You aren't familiar with the shift to the Sixth World, are you?

    2. Re:The Mayan calendar change isn't significant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm modding you -1 Trog

  14. Ham Radio operators know what to do! by Bruce+Perens · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Get ready for those long-distance ham radio contacts when the ionosphere goes crazy, and conditions generally improve even when it's not crazy! And now that there's no more Morse Code test, we'll see a lot of people who were stuck on VHF before on the HF bands.

    Looking at auroras will be cool too. Be sure to reserve the left seat on US to Europe red-eye flights, I've seen amazing aurorae out that window, nothing that you could see from the ground.

    Bruce

    1. Re:Ham Radio operators know what to do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I always sit on the right side of those flights. That way I can look down the aisle of seats, right at the pert tits of the mid-30's Swiss businesswoman sitting watching the aurorae.

    2. Re:Ham Radio operators know what to do! by Bardez · · Score: 1

      And you can even communicate with your dead father in the past about the world series, save some nurses and watch a guy's arm dissolve through time! See: Frequency [IMDB]

      --
      Perception is the thin dividing line between reality and fiction.
    3. Re:Ham Radio operators know what to do! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      You're ignoring the flip side - droughts and sweltering summer heat due to the reduction in cloud formation. And TV news casts filled with nutcakes whining about manmade global warming. Next, they'll be blaming your qrp rig for heating up the ionosphere too.

    4. Re:Ham Radio operators know what to do! by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1
      I would love to see propagation on 10m and 6m like it was back in the late 80's. I remember talking to a guy in Russia while driving down I-64 to Virginia Beach using a whopping 25W SSB on 10m. Those were the days. If the sunspot numbers are high enough, we might see decent 2m propagation as well - that's always fun.

      73 de k4det

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  15. Second to 1958 activity by SpelledBackwards · · Score: 1

    If it is second to the great storm of 1958 (need I remind you that we lived through it?), then what's the big deal besides a greater reliance on technology these days? If it were 5 times stronger than the '58 storm, then I could see a concern arising.

    Only thing I can think of is the smaller features in electronics lending themselves to higher susceptibility to cosmic radiation than before.

    1. Re:Second to 1958 activity by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 1

      Apart from solar activity causing powerplants to be shut down (as I recall reading), keep in mind that we very much depend on satellites being alive, these days, and satellites are less well naturally shielded than earthbound electronics.

    2. Re:Second to 1958 activity by Rooked_One · · Score: 2, Funny

      like the millions of cell phones that millions of people base their lives on? Its times like these I really appriciate my little black PAPER book.

    3. Re:Second to 1958 activity by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny
      It was 1958. The powerplants shut down because all the plant workers had to get home to beat their wives, listen to Elvis records, and oppress black people.

      It also probably didn't help that crazy scientists were sending lightening strikes directly into the power grid to help whiney punks get back to 1985.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    4. Re:Second to 1958 activity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, the solar flare isn't going to fry everyone's electronics (unless they make a habit of keeping their digital address book in geosynchronous orbit). It's just going to interfere with radio communication. So everyone will be able to look up their friend's phone number in their Treo/Sidekick/paper book. They just won't be able to call anyone without a landline.

  16. Sweet! by DoctorPepper · · Score: 4, Informative

    Looks like I need to really get to work on my Elecraft K1. With a solar maximum like they're predicting, QRP is going to be awesome!

    --

    No matter where you go... there you are.
    1. Re:Sweet! by brain1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wonder how high the maximum usable frequency will rise to? Worldwide QRP on 6 meters? 2 meters? Can't wait.

    2. Re:Sweet! by DoctorPepper · · Score: 1

      Heh, I'm thinking 70 cm! :-)

      Got to get my VHF/UHF sideband/CW station back on the air!

      --

      No matter where you go... there you are.
    3. Re:Sweet! by brain1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You know, now that I think about it, there wasn't a lot of VHF/UHF gear for amateur radio back then during that huge solar max. Mostly old surplus, vibrator power supply, VHF trunk-mounted FM wideband business radios recrystalled for 2M. 70cm was largely unexplored territory. Forget everything above that, unless you happened to have a military surplus klystron laying around somewhere. 1296 MHz and above was hugely experimental and the average amateur couldn't touch the gear to play around with those bands.. So, this is really the first time we as amateurs get to explore ionospheric reflection propagation at those high frequencies. Exciting. Only sour note is that a lot of birds out in space are going to have myriad problems. Surface charging, solar panel deterioriation, charged particles ripping through circuitry. Ugh. Only the RAD-hardened military stuff will get through relatively unscathed. We'll see, but I wouldn't want to be one of the operators of those birds. 73

  17. Batteries!!!! by mulvane · · Score: 1

    More batteries!! That's gonna be a lot of wasted solar energy. I need to double up on cells, and make sure I have enough batteries to store as much as possible. (Granted, I'm not account for 1% loss per day of total capacity of the store).

  18. We arranged this for the Olympics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    So that we'd have sunshine in London during the games. :-)

    1. Re:We arranged this for the Olympics by cbacba · · Score: 1

      but will you have problems holding the equestrian events due to the heat - like atlanta did?

  19. Coincidence? by thefirelane · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Yes, next question

    This is easy.

  20. Re:Yes, you've found a coincidence. Yippee. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar)

    Noted. I'll be sure to eat mexican food on the 19th, and some german food on the 20th to make sure I have really bad gas on the 21st.

    That way, if the world ends, I can take the credit because I was farting all day.

  21. So what does it mean? by flaknugget · · Score: 0

    So can anyone say, with any amount of certainty, how a major solar storm will effect us earthlings? Or is that a silly questions?

  22. Msayan, something I found interesting by Drakin020 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    http://futurenewsinfo.blogspot.com/2004/12/nuclear -war-futurists-view-bible-code.html

    FTA

    What follows is taken from Carlos Barrios' presentation, in his own words: "On December 21, 2012 we will begin to see the fifth sun. With this period will come harmony of space and time, with this period will come balance and a big relation to Mother Earth.

    Jut thought that was interesting.

    --
    The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    1. Re:Msayan, something I found interesting by neomunk · · Score: 1

      How is this offtopic? What, they don't have a -1 I Don't Believe You mod, so you call it offtopic? This is one of the most ONtopic posts in the whole batch I've read so far.

      Even if the dude is full of shit, it's very on-topic. Quit being a mod-punk.

    2. Re:Msayan, something I found interesting by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree it shouldn't have been modded offtopic. It should have been modded Overrated instead.

    3. Re:Msayan, something I found interesting by Drakin020 · · Score: 0

      Yeah the mod system is messed up.

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
  23. Maybe by atamyrat · · Score: 1

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?" Maybe
  24. So you're implying... by Kohath · · Score: 1

    So you're implying that NASA designed the Mayan calandar?

  25. Full of Tubes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Also keep in mind, that in 1958, most all electronic devices in commercial usage were based on vacuum tubes ("valves" for you Brits). Tube-type electronic circuits are very resistant to damage and disruption of operation by the kind of radiation that would reach Earth from solar events... and also from nuclear radiation as well. Solid-state electronics though beginning to become available, were not in widespread use very much at all.

  26. Just in time... by corpsmoderne · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... for the US elections

    "65535 votes for X in this voting machine??? errr! Must be the solar storm..."

    1. Re:Just in time... by deft · · Score: 1

      ... for the US elections
      "65535 votes for X in this voting machine??? errr! Must be the solar storm..."

      WHOAH! WHOAH! WHOAH!
      How did the solar storm know which republican to vote for in florida?

      --

      There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    2. Re:Just in time... by cbacba · · Score: 1

      don't worry - the leftist dems have decided to get rid of the voting machines. They've decided once they're in power to make things easy and automatically cast votes for everyone, saving millions of tax dollars.

  27. That was 1955 by argent · · Score: 1

    You can't blame the lightning strikes on Emmet Brown, that was three years earlier.

    1. Re:That was 1955 by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No, that damn kid kept coming back. Emmett finally cut him off and just left him stranded there in 1960.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  28. The Mayan calender doesn't end in 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and neither will the world:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesoamerican_Long_Cou nt_calendar#2012_and_the_Long_Count

    I wish this unfounded rumor could be laid to rest.

  29. I'll get back to you on that... by Mykroughpsyoughpht · · Score: 1

    And answer your question January 1st, 2013.

    1. Re:I'll get back to you on that... by Hanners1979 · · Score: 1

      No doubt this story will be re-posted on the front page in 2013... ;)

    2. Re:I'll get back to you on that... by AusIV · · Score: 1

      No doubt this story will be re-posted on the front page in 2013... ;)
      And a dozen times between then and now, just for good measure.
    3. Re:I'll get back to you on that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On xxxdot.com, you mean?

      Brought to you by Carls Junior.

  30. But the Jaguars man! by geekoid · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Won't anyone think of the Jaguars!

    Not to mods: If you believe that was off topic, then you need to brush up on your Mayan mythology.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  31. Another incoming Fantastic Four movie ? by Rastignac · · Score: 1

    Enough is enough...

    --
    -- Rastignac was here.
  32. An interesting subject.. by zyl0x · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Supposed "remote viewer" Major Ed Dames has not-so-accurately predicted such a solar flare. He calls it the "Killshot" and says it will end most life on the planet.

    And naturally he is selling the secrets of how to survive this solar flare on DVD for the low low price of $24.99. Still, it's interesting to see a psychic's claim being backed by scientific observations.

    --
    Blerg.
    1. Re:An interesting subject.. by cbacba · · Score: 1

      predicting solar flares is more of a crystal ball affair. The bad news is last year or so they detected a solar flare from a star that was only about 0.8 solar mass which was a million times more potent than anything seen on earth. From what we've seen so far, a flare about 6 sigma above the typical could very likely blow most of the electric utility grid transformers in the world - taking years to bring electricity back to many areas in and outside of the US.

      Something 6 orders of magnitude higher than what we've seen - especially in the upcoming era of low/no earth magnetic field could be a 'kill shot'. We now know it can happen but have no clue as to if it will happen.

  33. Considering the "political" and environmental by Shivetya · · Score: 2, Interesting

    climate I would be curious what side effects they think this will have on our world other than electromagnetic issues?

    Does sunspot activity correspond to an decrease in the amount of radiation hitting the earth? If we are at a low point now for sunspots will their increase be truly noticable?

    I am only wondering as some scientists have put forward the idea that the sun's activities plays a much greater role in our environment than many give it credit for.

    So will an increase in sunspot activity affect us? ( I have no idea, hence I am asking from people who do)

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    1. Re:Considering the "political" and environmental by Detritus · · Score: 1

      There was the Maunder Minimum, which seemed to correlate with the peak of the Little Ice Age. I don't know if anyone has come up with a convincing argument that explains how sun spots affect the Earth's climate. They can make the atmosphere expand, which contributed to the premature demise of the SkyLab space station.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:Considering the "political" and environmental by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So will an increase in sunspot activity affect us?"

      I'm not a climatologist, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. That said, I tend to doubt one slightly higher than average solar cycle maximum is going to have an noticeable effect on climate.

      What's more interesting, to me, is the behavior over multiple cycles. For instance, a long-term disappearance of sunspots in the 17th century corresponded with the Little Ice Age:

      http://www.ucar.edu/research/sun/climate.jsp

      If you look at the cycles of the past century or so, the predicted cycle 24 peak isn't really all that impressive compared to those of the past 60 years.

      http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/144063main_Pred ictionPlotLG.jpg

      However, comparing cycles 12-16 to subsequent cycles is interesting. The sun does seem to have become more active in general. Has this had a global effect? More importantly, if there has been a global effect, is it detectable against local effects on climate? Keep in mind that even the Little Ice Age was largely regional.

      Oblig. links:

      http://www.sec.noaa.gov/Education/index.html
      http://www.ucar.edu/research/sun/
      http://spaceweather.com/
      http://www.spacew.com/

    3. Re:Considering the "political" and environmental by pln2bz · · Score: 1

      I don't know if anyone has come up with a convincing argument that explains how sun spots affect the Earth's climate.

      One very detailed explanation has indeed been suggested. The problem is that, despite being well thought out, few people are interested in hearing about solutions that are out-of-the-mainstream:

      http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=8gfbew e7:

      [...]

      Since the late 1970s, three Sun-watching satellites recorded surprising changes in heat, ultraviolet radiation, and solar wind. Dr. Sam Solanski, director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, said, "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures." "The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was...." Dr. Solanski admitted to not knowing what is causing the Sun to burn brighter. A leading authority, Eugene N. Parker, adds, "...we really do not properly understand the physics of the varying luminosity of the Sun." This highlights the fundamental problem with the global warming verdict from climate experts. It is based on profound ignorance about how the Sun really "ticks" and what forms of energy are input to a planet's climate. For this they can blame astrophysicists.

      [...]

      Before ridiculing this article for being against the mainstream, be aware that Wallace Thornhill is not chopped liver. And traditional astrophysics has no real good answer right now for why the Sun (and the whole solar system in fact) has been on a warming trend. The simultaneous warming of the planets is typically suggested to be pure coincidence, and Earth's global warming is typically suggested to be coincidental to the Sun's warming.

      Even if you disagree with Thornhill's analysis, it's extremely important to treat him and others commenting on the problem with respect. Although it is currently not in vogue in these parts to be respectful to people like Thornhill, the importance of getting the analysis right eventually in the end overrides all self-serving playground desires to publicly condemn somebody for being different. As rational people, the last thing we need to be doing is discouraging physicists from speaking on the subject just because they don't say what other people already believe. You can choose to believe him or not, but it makes sense to listen, and anybody who decides to convince others that he is a fool will not be able to take that back if he's one day shown to be right.
      --
      "A man cannot begin to learn that which he thinks he already knows." --Epictetus, 1st Century A.D.
    4. Re:Considering the "political" and environmental by vtcodger · · Score: 1
      ***Does sunspot activity correspond to an decrease in the amount of radiation hitting the earth? If we are at a low point now for sunspots will their increase be truly noticable?***

      No, decreased sunspot activity is thought to be associated with LOWER overall solar radiation. For example, the virtual disappearance of sun spots around 1700 (the "Maunder Minimum") corresponds to the "Little Ice Age" which featured growth of mountain glaciers in Europe and repeated freezes of the Thames at London. The Wikipedia article is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum . Read it, and you'll know as much as I do about the subject -- probably more.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    5. Re:Considering the "political" and environmental by cbacba · · Score: 1

      sunspots are relatively cooler so less energy - but it's small (unless you've got massive amounts of solar surface area involved). The real factor is the magnetic effects on cosmic ray flux which impacts cloud formation - which has MAJOR effects on temperatures.

      Figure no sunspots - cold cloudy weather
      Lots of sunspots - hot dry, drought conditions with sunny skies

      note this is the preponderence or overall effect, not some daily prescription for everywhere all the time.

      Looking out side and thinking back for 4 months- we've had cloudy weather, coolest jan on record - a fairly good amount of rain - but then we're at the sunspot minimum - and the last cycle went out with a literal bang - some really serious coronal mass ejections and solar storms in its last two years - rather than the more usual whimper.

  34. Re:Insightful??? by Malakusen · · Score: 2, Funny

    It answered both questions effectively and efficiently. I'm sufficiently impressed.

    --
    Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to conviction
  35. Re:Insightful??? by El+Torico · · Score: 1

    Wow, that's even more insightful! Too bad I used my mod points on the now infamous "binary post". Just kidding, I don't have mod points today.

    --
    In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
  36. An Interesting Read On The Subject by bc90021 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Bringing up the Mayan Calendar, and the sun's various cycles, is a book called "Apocalypse 2012". (Not an affiliate link.) It's not as dire as the title might sound, though the author (Lawrence E. Joseph) does explore some of the various issues with that date. One concept he examines is that as the solar system moves around the galactic center, the earth has been shielded from various radiations it will no longer be shielded from after that date.

  37. Everybody Panic ;-) by Alien54 · · Score: 1

    as we all know, some idiot predicted that the Earth would be hit hard in the nearish future, almost wiped out entirely, due to a Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) aimed directly at the planet.

    Not very likely, although a lot of satellites, etc. will probably suddenly become due for major upgrades.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  38. Coincidence? by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"
    In Dubuque Iowa a woman severely burns her hand at the same exact moment her daughter is giving her boyfriend a hand job 8 miles away in his car.. Coincidence?

  39. Re:Insightful??? by dunc78 · · Score: 1

    Plus responding to me would have undone your moderation anyway :)

  40. Re:Insightful??? by revlayle · · Score: 1

    Would the answer:

    "Yes. Yes."
    ...be moderated higher? Because that is how I would have answered the question.

  41. Re:Insightful??? by VE3MTM · · Score: 1

    Insightful???

    Yes. No. No.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 Whoops, silly middle mouse button...
  42. Climate Change Linked to Solar Activity by WED+Fan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This article from NASA JPL is very informative on the subject.

    The researchers found some clear links between the sun's activity and climate variations. The Nile water levels and aurora records had two somewhat regularly occurring variations in common - one with a period of about 88 years and the second with a period of about 200 years.

    I think we need to take a look at the hysteria. It is turn our attention away from what we can do to better this planet. And, the idea of carbon offsets just makes people feel better for their polution levels.

    Global Warming has become the new Medieval Church and anyone who does not walk a precise line on the message faces the New Inquisition.

    We do need to live more green, more clean, and more simple. But, the public won't buy off on that message if we keep tying it to the Holy Church of Global Warming Hysteria. If we can show more immediate effects of living green and clean the public will follow.

    We need to separate those whose real agenda is socio-economic change from the environmental argument. They aren't really interested in the environment, anyway. We need to remove the scammers, like the "carbon offset" (unregulated, uncertified, non-verifiable) companies to improve public perception.

    We need to substitue Ed Beagley Jr. for Al Gore. Ed lives, breathes, talks, and walks the environment. Al Gore, while talking about it, still jets around the world, when he could use his own invention, the Internet, to show up at appearances, he maintains a house in Tennessee that uses 20 times the amount of energy as his neighbors, he is a glutton who preaches about the wonders of a diet.

    --
    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    1. Re:Climate Change Linked to Solar Activity by onemorechip · · Score: 1

      We do need to live more green, more clean, and more simple. But, the public won't buy off on that message if we keep tying it to the Holy Church of Global Warming Hysteria.

      Using labels like that only sounds like you are promoting your own brand of hysteria. As for the latest anti-Gore hysteria (started by a "research institute" with a dubious reputation), it's been debunked; summary here.

      --
      But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
    2. Re:Climate Change Linked to Solar Activity by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

      You quote the highly reputable Wikipedia as a source of refutation:

      "its figures from Nashville Electric Service. But company spokeswoman Laurie Parker said the utility never got a request from the policy center and never gave it any information."

      However, as was pointed out to that argument, they didn't receive a request for the information because none was needed. It is published on the web. This is akin to me saying that you didn't eat lunch today because you weren't at Joe's Upchuck Palace. Gore's usage was not refuted, it was substantiated. The figures are a matter of public record, and available on a number of sites, for the entire town. Actually, if you check with your utility, you will probably find your address and usage figures are available online.

      The Czech President has put into words an idea that I have had for a long time. That is, the "Global Warming" lobby has become a pseudo-religion, replacing dead Communism, as the socio-economic ideology that will eventually threaten the freedom of democracies and their citizens.

      It is certainly acting like a religion, complete with those, all too ready to yell, "heresy" and pull out their "scriptures" of speculative (theory shot) studies, pounding them out as "truth" from the pulpit.

      It is a church where the moderate, environmentally concerned is lambasted as "sinner" and "outcast" for not drinking the Holy Communion of climate hysteria.

      --
      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    3. Re:Climate Change Linked to Solar Activity by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Ed lives, breathes, talks, and walks the environment.

      Sort of. Ed also makes it look bad. he misses a lot by falling for most 'saver" methods. Personally I've yet to figure out if his reality show is a con on him or not. Take for example his "rainwater collection" system of a 40-55 gallon drum. Anyone who actually uses, has designed, or developed a rainwater system knows that this simplistic method doesn't actually accomplish the goal. If people see this and think "hey I can do that" and do what he did, then they will "blame" the concept rather than their failed implementation. This is no different than people's association of "solar power" with PV cells. Ed is a great preacher when preaching to the choir. When he speaks to the heathens he comes off as a loon and harms more than helps his cause.

      That said I do like that he drives his Prius to events rather than flying, and rides his bike or walks whenever feasible. However, buying "carbon credits" for his wife to fly does not actually do anything for the environment. Likewise, insisting on "no bag" at the store is also foolish and not-helpful. It's theater for himself and nothing more. if he was educated about the realities of the entire system he'd choose paper and compost the bag, for example. Ed is essentially driven by guilt. Someone has made him feel guilty about his existence and he is driven to "make up for it", thus he is easily led into anything that might relieve him of some of that guilt.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  43. Date Correction by tenma4 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I believe the actual date from the Mayan calendar is Sunday, December 23rd, 2012. A friend and I have had a wager riding on this one for 11 years...

    1. Re:Date Correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      root@CrypTop:~# date -s "21 dec 2012"
      vr dec 21 00:00:00 CET 2012
      root@CrypTop:~# cday
      French Rep. Nonidi, Frimaire 29, 221
      Great Under. Frob Day, Dismembur 21, 985
      Gregorian Friday, December 21, AD 2012
      Hebrew Tevet 8, AM 5773
      Julian December 8, 2012
      JDN 2,456,283
      Mayan 13.0.0.0.0, 4 Ahau, 8 Cumku
      Moon first quarter
      Shire Highdei 1 Yule 7476

      No birthdays or other events found for today.

      That's all for today.

      I guess you owe your mate!

  44. MAyan calendar? by Vexorian · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?
    No. Yes.







    * Expects to get +5 Insightful for this lame post *

    --

    Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    1. Re:MAyan calendar? by gangien · · Score: 0, Redundant

      * Expects to get +5 Insightful for this lame post *

      Is this some kind of reverse-reverse psychology on the mods or something? I guess it's sort of working, atm you have a +2 insightful. Nice tactic instead of the usual, "I know I'll be modded down" bs.

    2. Re:MAyan calendar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ancient societies were star watchers so they might have noticed solar storm trends and adjusted their calendars to these great events.

      So to answer your question, were there large solar storms during the previous Mayan Calendar periods? If so, you're on to something. If not, it's a coincidence:
      0.0.0.0.0 August 11, 3114 BCE
      1.0.0.0.0 November 13, 2720 BCE
      2.0.0.0.0 February 16, 2325 BCE
      3.0.0.0.0 May 21, 1931 BCE
      4.0.0.0.0 August 23, 1537 BCE
      5.0.0.0.0 November 26, 1143 BCE
      6.0.0.0.0 February 28, 748 BCE
      7.0.0.0.0 June 3, 354 BCE
      8.0.0.0.0 September 5, 41 CE
      9.0.0.0.0 December 9, 435 CE
      10.0.0.0.0 March 13, 830 CE
      11.0.0.0.0 June 15, 1224 CE
      12.0.0.0.0 September 18, 1618 CE

  45. Re:Insightful??? by dunc78 · · Score: 1

    Damn, you found a bug in my code.

  46. you'd think it would've ended sooner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't _their_ end times happen a few hundred years ago? I'd say they actually overshot the thing a bit.

  47. next slashdot poll by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Funny

    which do yuo prefer to look at

    aurorae/auroras

    or

    areolas?

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  48. We're not going to pass through the tail ... by RembrandtX · · Score: 2, Funny

    We're not going to pass through the tail of a comet are we ?
    I mean .. solar storms I can handle, but those damn comet tails hold zombies.
    Self preservation would make me hide out in a tin garden shed, or the back of my big-rig,
    but really, the world is just doomed from that point on.

    --

    --Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
    1. Re:We're not going to pass through the tail ... by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Not zombies, space vampires.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:We're not going to pass through the tail ... by ChaoticLimbs · · Score: 1

      Nice 'Night of the Comet' reference. Nobody ever makes them. I guess it's because other than you and I, nobody anywhere has seen that film in like a decade.

  49. Increased activity warms Earth, and by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    shield against cosmic rays which cause water droplets to form, which makes clouds which cools the Earth, so that when activity is high, Earth heats up.

    This shows a FAR higher correlation to climate change than does CO2, which appears to be an effect, and not a cause.

  50. Oh Noes++ by pentalive · · Score: 1

    Isn't this about when "they" say the magnetic reversal will be in
    full swing?

    Worst solar max ever $32.50

    Myan Calendar ends $15.10

    Global warming now solar system wide $11.50

    No protection from solar flares due to
    weakening of the earth's magnetic field....

    priceless.

  51. No, it was lack of a "Zero"... by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 1


    Actually, the problem was that they were using 36-bit integers to represent seconds.

    Now there was a subfaction amongst them who argued for abandoning the 36-bit representation, and moving to a 64-bit address bus, but the 36-bitters pointed out that that wouldn't be reverse-compatible with the existing segmented address space, so they cooked the 64-bitters and ate them with fava beans and a nice Argentinean Malbec.

    Subsequently, because they hadn't invented the concept of "zero" yet, when the 36-bitters came to discover the wrap-around problem, in what would come to be known as "December", of "2012", they all threw their hands up in despair and committed hara-kiri.

    1. Re:No, it was lack of a "Zero"... by eldepeche · · Score: 1
  52. Eschatology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know what I just love about crazy "end-of-the-world" crap and how it always seems to come up?

    That I can always predict that life on planet earth will not be destroyed. First, every "end of the world" prediction has shown to be false (evidence - I'm writing about it right now). Second, even if I'm wrong - nobody will be around to point this out.

    Granted, this is one time where I think everybody wants me to be right...

  53. Investment opportunity by eugene71 · · Score: 1

    Might be an idea to invest our hard earned dosh in the sun screen business. We'll need to trash this 13.0.0.0.0 date though, its too freaky.

  54. Note that im not religious by unity100 · · Score: 1

    But just an observant of shit that is going around lately with the world.

  55. Astrology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Even wierder - since 1952 RCA has used the positions of the planets (i.e., astrology) to predict sunspots and their effects on the long range HF radio
    communications net they maintain for the Dept. of Defense across the Pacific. There is some correlation between the positions of the planets and the
    intensity of sunspots - i.e., there is a real world correlation between astrology and the sunspot cycle and the aurora strength, etc.

    With regard to the Mayan calendar: don't assume that they had a cyclic view of things in all regards. I recall that one of the ancient civilizations (Sumer?) experienced a social collapse because they had one of those "chiseled in stone" calendars and folks started predicting the end of the world a few centuries
    before the end of the calendar - and it became a self-fulfilling prophecy as everybody in the society got wierded out 'cause they didn't know how to turn the
    page on the calendar, to the extent it lead to a social collapse.

  56. Re:HA ha HA ! You lying kniving shitheads ! by Thuktun · · Score: 0, Troll

    Sorry, I didn't get past your subject line, where you couldn't spell "conniving".

  57. no, but.. by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

    No, I'm not, but I'm a married adult with a job and interests in the real world.

  58. Mayan Internet by todorb · · Score: 0

    13.0.0.0.0

    is this something like a mayan IPv5 network address? it wasn't until recently that we got larger address space than the mayas with IPv6.

  59. The beauty of unix by bberens · · Score: 1

    I write code for a series of production centers (they print customized maps). The original system was developed 10 years ago and aside from a few hard drive crashes/replacements they're on the same exact SUN hardware/OS they were on 10 years ago. All the while the code base has matured and expanded greatly. Of course, I love programming in Motif... but aside from that there's not really any hurdles. I'm glad they aren't win98 or NT 4.0 boxes because that would have meant having to charge them for new hardware and operating systems 2-3 times over the same 10 year period. On top of that we would have had to rewrite quite a bit of that old code during each upgrade.

    --
    Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    1. Re:The beauty of unix by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      But if it's Solaris 7 or above, and especially if you're running on a Ultrasparc IIe or III or above, you're already running 64 bit UNIX. See this list

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  60. Global Warming, is there no end to Bush's evil? by BigFire · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    This just proved that not only is the CO2 on Earth killing the baby seals in the Arctic Ocean, it's actually causing Solar Storm from the sun. Is there no end to Bush's evil?

  61. tsk tsk tsk you are worng by unity100 · · Score: 1

    Misspellings or grammatical errors does not reduce/demean the value of facts or ideas contained in anything.

    but, as you also wont be reading this post as you wont have passed the misspelled subject header, you will be deprived of the above important life-lesson.

    bad for you.

    1. Re:tsk tsk tsk you are worng by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misspellings or grammatical errors does not reduce/demean the value of facts or ideas contained in anything.

      zOMG UR SOOO RITE

  62. Re:HA ha HA ! You lying kniving shitheads ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's really a mark of the times in which we live (GWB and all) when a Monty Python fan can't tell if you are a loonie or a comic genius.

  63. Again? by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

    How often do we hear about solar flares or storms affecting communications and satellites...etc... I don't remember ever loosing my cell phone or TV or Internet or anything do to this.

    --
    If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    1. Re:Again? by cbacba · · Score: 1

      internet and cellphones didn't exist back the last time there was a big cycle. I doubt you remember tv in the 50s.

      Of course a slight rain is all that's necessary for me to lose satellite internet.

      Big ones are fairly infrequent. Big ones headed our way are even more so. A really big one headed our way might take out far more than the stuff you mention - like the whole power grid with severe damage to equipment.

  64. we didn't listen! by NokX · · Score: 1

    who knew that hummers had emissions that caused solar storms. now we do and al gore must do whatever it takes to come out with another film and charge people $8 for the truth.

  65. Re:Insightful??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're looking for the word concise. Wonderful word.

  66. Coincidence? by Surt · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"

    Nope, it's true every time.

    --
    "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  67. hence by cyclomedia · · Score: 2, Informative

    instead of bashing on about global warming we need to bash on about

    1. asthma

    2. the fact that every sandstone building in an urban location is black from years of exhaust fumes, or are lungs immune from the same effect?

    3. recycling is the natural norm of things, hence decomposition, bugs, worms and mould whilst use-once trow away for ever is clearly not.

    4. smog

    5. landfills look ugly and smell bad

    6. motorways/freeways and their junctions take up vast acres of land compared to a railway system of the same capacity. look ugly and create a lot of noise

    7. if you live within walking/cycling distance of your job imagine the time and money you'd save on commuting...

    8. ...and you'd get fitter...

    9. ...and therefore be happier

    10. look up, you can't see the stars because of all the light pollution, stars are pretty, light pollution is yellow and ugly.

    11. power stations are big andspew out big clouds of smoke/steam which sure doesnt look pretty

    12. if you grow your own vegetables then you don't have to give your money to walmart just for the privelidge of eating...

    13. ...and you know for a fact what pestisides and fertilizers were used to grow them...

    14. ...and you get yet more exersise whilst gardening

    I just reeled that all off the top of my head and some of it is no doubt apocryphal, but it just demonstrates that there are a whole host of reasons for going green apart from the endless arguments about global warming.

    --
    If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
    1. Re:hence by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      7. if you live within walking/cycling distance of your job imagine the time and money you'd save on commuting...

      The problem with that is that when your company lays you off because their revenues were too low, or you decide to find a different job at a competing company because your company would rather not give you a raise to keep up with market rates, you'll suddenly not be within such convenient distance of your new job.

      11. power stations are big andspew out big clouds of smoke/steam which sure doesnt look pretty

      This is true for fossil fuel power plants. Other types aren't so bad, such as hydroelectric (heavily used here in the US) and nuclear. Don't like air pollution and don't have a lot of rivers nearby? Use nuclear!

      12. if you grow your own vegetables then you don't have to give your money to walmart just for the privelidge of eating...

      I didn't realize Wal-Mart had a major presence in the UK. Here in the USA, we have lots of stores which sell organically-grown fruits and vegetables, like Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Sprouts, etc., along with lots of farmers' markets. It's more expensive of course, but I don't have a lot of free time to maintain a garden, and I get paid well for my day job.

      14. ...and you get yet more exersise [sic] whilst gardening

      I get more exercise riding my bike than crawling around in the dirt.

    2. Re:hence by WED+Fan · · Score: 1

      I just reeled that all off the top of my head and some of it is no doubt apocryphal, but it just demonstrates that there are a whole host of reasons for going green apart from the endless arguments about global warming.

      And, not to mention, that it is more "present" and the public can get behind these things a lot more easily than the "gloom and doom" hysteria.

      "I want to live in a cleaner, nicer looking, nature smelling neighborhood. How can I make that happen?" The answer is much easier than trying to answer, "How do I stop the planet from getting hotter?"

      --
      Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
    3. Re:hence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You want people to both live in highrises in the city and to grow their own food. What color is the sky in your world?

      and you get yet more exersise whilst gardening

      What is up with "whilst" on geek blogs? Why doesn't "while" work here?

    4. Re:hence by codemachine · · Score: 1

      11. power stations are big andspew out big clouds of smoke/steam which sure doesnt look pretty

      This is true for fossil fuel power plants. Other types aren't so bad, such as hydroelectric (heavily used here in the US) and nuclear. Don't like air pollution and don't have a lot of rivers nearby? Use nuclear! Most environmentalists have a problem with the "use once, throw away radioactive waste for 4,000 years" model as well.

      If the concern is only CO2 emissions, then nuclear is a good option, and the nuclear industry is certainly trying to take advantage of the CO2 hype to attempt to look "green" in comparison. The reality is that we still don't know what to do with the relatively small amount of nuclear waste we're creating right now. How do you store radioactive waste for thousands of years without it leaking? How do you put up signage indicating "Danger" to people of the future who come upon this site who may not know of our language or culture? How do we keep this stuff out of dangerous hands if our society goes all to heck?

      The problem of storing nuclear waste safely is a problem that spans such a long period of time that the answers are almost impossible. How can you predict thousands of years into the future? It is so many generations ahead that it isn't possible.

      But even after saying that, compared to the nearer term problems that global warming could cause, it is possible that nuclear power is something that we need to do a lot more of. The waste problem is real, but it is already one we have to tackle anyhow. A choice of "neither" would be best though. Smaller scale solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, etc could do wonders, but governments always think large scale and big plants.

      There seriously has to be a better way than spewing pollution into the air or creating nuclear waste.
    5. Re:hence by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      It's really quite simple. Do you want toxic waste that's relatively small in volume, and can be stored away safely somewhere, or do you want toxic waste that's huge in volume and is pumped into the atmosphere where we all get to breathe it? That's the bottom line here.

      As for long-term problems, that's not that difficult either.

      1) The waste can easily be reprocessed to be reused as fuel, so there's very little waste. Of course, this involves turning it into weapons-grade fuel, so we need to get over our stupid fear of "weapons-grade" nuclear material and just do it, instead of being complete wusses. The end-product is extremely little radioactive waste when this route is taken.

      2) For whatever is left over, how hard is it to NOT forget where it is, and deal with it later when technology improves? All we have to do is wait 100 years, then after the Space Elevator is in full operation, put all the waste on that and fling it out into space on a path for the Sun. Problem solved. If not that, I'm sure someone else will come up with another solution.

      As for signage, the skull and crossbones has always served well as a universal symbol for danger, at least for humans. And if all society goes to heck, who cares what happens? Then we deserve whatever happens for being complete morons and allowing society to collapse.

      There seriously has to be a better way than spewing pollution into the air or creating nuclear waste.

      If you have a solution, let's hear it. Otherwise, step aside and stop blocking progress. Despite what the extremist environmentalists would like, the rest of us aren't going to go back to the days before electricity because they don't like the options.

  68. Experiment with the ionosphere from your own home! by leighklotz · · Score: 1

    You can bounce radio signals off the ionosphere with fairly simple equipment, if you have a ham radio license you can do it too. The interesting thing is that not everything is known about the ionosphere. For example, an open question is whether Long-Delayed Echoes exist or not, or whether they are just Backscatter, or if they are real.

  69. Remember Galaxy 4? by Pontiac · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funny how people forget..

    When Galaxy 4 died it took out 80% of the pagers in the US plus several video feeds used by the major networks (I worked for CBS at the time)

    This was 2 years before the 2000 Solar max when solar activity was ramping up.
    More storms in 2003 took out power in parts of Switzerland and killed 2 Satellites

    There were several solar flare warnings around that time.

    http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2000/ast14jul_2 m.htm

    July 14, 2000 -- This morning NOAA satellites and the orbiting Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) recorded one of the most powerful solar flares of the current solar cycle. Space weather forecasters had been predicting for days that an intense flare might erupt from the large sunspot group 9077, and today one did.

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/power_outage _031031.html

    The sixth in an unprecedented series of strong space storms dished out by the Sun over a 10-day period plowed past Earth Thursday, apparently cutting power to 20,000 Swedish customers. The powerful series of outbursts also claimed two satellites as casualties while fueling a host of minor disruptions to radio broadcasts and airline flight plans.

    http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/articles/eisbaker.html

    A very intense flux of electrons, evident in the magnetosphere earlier this year, may have caused a satellite failure (or at least exacerbated the situation) leading to the loss of telephone pager service to 45 million customers, research has shown. The electrons, known as highly relativistic electrons (HREs), were especially numerous in the weeks preceding the failure. Researchers say HREs have triggered spacecraft anomalies in the past when fluxes are elevated. They therefore believe this energetic electron event could have been behind the failure of the attitude control system of the Galaxy 4 spacecraft at 2200 UT on May 19, 1998. A backup system also failed, either at the same time or earlier, so operators were unable to maintain a stable Earth link.

    Galaxy 4 is a heavily used communication satellite at geostationary orbit*. Its sudden failure caused not only widespread loss of pager service but also numerous other communication outages. Using a wide array of datasets, our team of scientists analyzed the space environment for the times in question and found evidence of highly disturbed solar, solar wind*, and geomagnetic conditions in late April and early May. The combination of coronal mass ejections*, solar flares*, and high speed solar wind streams led to a powerful sequence of interplanetary disturbances that hit the Earth. These disturbances produced a deep, powerful, and long-lasting enhancement of the HRE population throughout the outer Van Allen radiation zone. The kinds of disturbances witnessed are indicative of the types of events that may commonly occur during the approaching peak in solar activity in the years 2000 and 2001. It will be most important to determine how well space systems can stand up to the multifaceted effects of the space environment over the next several years.


    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ cell_phone_020306.html

    Next time your cell phone drops acall, don't rush to blame your service provider. The culprit may well be anangry Sun.

    A new study of 40 years of solardata shows that during peaks in activity, bursts of energy from the Sun canpotentially cause dropped calls for some cell phone users across wide areastwice per week. The problem is caused when radio waves associated with thebursts hit cell phone towers, creating static that overwhelms the signal at thetower, where calls are relayed.

    T

    --
    If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur. --Red Adair
    1. Re:Remember Galaxy 4? by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

      OK, well I have never owned a pager and Didn't loose any TV. I'll rephrase:

      How often do "I" hear about solar flares or storms affecting communications and satellites...etc... I don't remember ever loosing my cell phone or TV or Internet or anything do to this.

      I guess my whole point is kind of moot.

      "Never-mind" (ala Gilda Radner)

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
  70. +5 Redundant by dunc78 · · Score: 1

    At least you are ahead of the +1 Insightful remark above that I replied to, in which I presented my idea for a binary autoresponder. He started out at +4 though, so the ride can be bumpy. As the body of your remark is an exact replica of his (except for the pandering to moderators), you should get a +5 Redundant. Maybe +4 since your heading differs.

    1. Re:+5 Redundant by Vexorian · · Score: 1

      Hey it finally got modded down a bit, seriously it was +4 insightful I had an urge to do something. I had the karma to spare so I've shown them how lame of a +4 insightful it was.

      --

      Copyright infringement is "piracy" in the same way DRM is "consumer rape"
    2. Re:+5 Redundant by dunc78 · · Score: 1

      So how do people know if they have "karma to spare"? I believe mine is "Good", but is there a way for me to know how far into the "Good" I am? Just curious because I hear it a lot and am wondering if I am missing something.

  71. Solar Storm of 1859 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_mond ay_031027.html

    To the naysayers:

    These solar storms could very well disrupt communications. Do a little research and understand that if certain conditions are met:

    -intesity and speed of particles from sun
    -the way they actually hit the Earth's magnetic poles

    We could really be in for some trouble! If you think that there is no possible way for a solar storm to screw up our entire way of life, think again.

    In 1859 there was a massive solar storm like no other which caused telegraph lines to ignite!

    Imagine that one! You wake up, No TV, No Internets, no power, and everything is on fire from the fried telephone wires.

  72. Giant Rabbits by vwjeff · · Score: 1

    First its Y2K then killer asteroids, Unix timestamp running out in 2038 now this. Whats next?

    My money is on the Giant Rabbits.

    You'll see. They will kill us all.

  73. Yes, the cat did get my tongue, actually. by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    > `Dikpati's forecast puts Solar Max at 2012. Hathaway believes it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011.`

    Man, I love Hathaway! She's so hot with that long black hair, creamy white skin, and big red lips.

    > Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"

    Dilbert: Watch out! The year 2000 is coming! People think bad things are gonna happen. What do we learn from this?

    Dogbert: That God uses a base 10 counting system and hates big round numbers?

    Dilbert: It sounds stupid when you say it.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  74. Edit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NASA has not confirmed a storm in the future. They have forecast a future storm. They might, in the future, confirm that the storm occurred. But they will not be able to confirm it until after it occurs.

    As the summary states, there is still disagreement about when it will occur. In the future. Some years from now. After which people can work to confirm who had the closest forecast.

  75. Al Gore fires himself into Sun! by wsanders · · Score: 1

    Although lately it sounds like the Dems are more likely to launch Hilary Clinton on this mission.

    2012 bumper sticker? "Don't blame me, I voted for Obama ..."

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Al Gore fires himself into Sun! by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Algor and mrs. bill clinton and a few others control the dem party. If someone they believed told them that the sun was cooler than earth was going to be next year, they'd claw each other's faces off to be first for the 'sun mission'. That probably not being the case, they'd probably reinstitute the draft to get 'volunteers' like you or me to go instead.

  76. Oh cool! by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    This means the E layer will get a lot more charged particles. Skip land here I come. The HF bands will be hoppin'. Time to get my WAC.

  77. Ding! Ding! by AoT · · Score: 1

    You win. The Mayan calender ends at Venus' "final" transit of the sun. The return of Quetzalcoatl, or second coming, if you will.

  78. Dr. Hathaway? by gaiageek · · Score: 1

    `Dikpati's forecast puts Solar Max at 2012. Hathaway believes it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011.` Dr. Hathaway? Are you wearing makeup? (The second Real Genius reference, for those counting.)
  79. Yes... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Yes, and we just finished the worst hurricane season on record. How can NASA "confirm" anything? Confirming a prediction means it's still just a prediction.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  80. Not really. by ScentCone · · Score: 1

    Still, it's interesting to see a psychic's claim being backed by scientific observations.

    Or, you could say that it's not at ALL interesting to see a scam artist selling his crap based on his dramafying of something that actual scientists have regularly pointed out. They're not backing HIM up, he's scamming intellectually stunted people out of money by vaguely pointing to something on the calendar that they can properly use as a fear focus. It's the oldest trick in the book... take a scrap of truthy info, wrap a bit of hokum around it, and propose a saving solution. When clowns like this are selling DVDs for $25, but don't take up Randi on his million-dollar offer, you know they're full of crap.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Not really. by zyl0x · · Score: 1

      No, I would still say it's interesting, but I would, however, definitely agree with you if you were to say it's not at all realistic.

      --
      Blerg.
  81. You know... by Ravengbc · · Score: 1

    I guess we'll just have to wait and see. And come the morning of the next next day we can all start posting again on how wrong people were. Seriously, how many people think that mankind will be able to predict when the world is going to end? I may be wrong, but I don't expect many people on /. are Christians, and thats cool with me. God created us all with free will. We can choose to believe in him or not. As for me, I don't think God is the only one who knows when the world is going to end, and we'll all find out when it happens.

    and to answer your question about the Mayan calendar, i'd say its just a coincidence. but thats my two cents.

    "Now, brothers, about times and dates we do not need to write to you, 2for you know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3While people are saying, "Peace and safety," destruction will come on them suddenly, as labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will not escape.
      4But you, brothers, are not in darkness so that this day should surprise you like a thief. 5You are all sons of the light and sons of the day. We do not belong to the night or to the darkness. 6So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be alert and self-controlled. 7For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. 8But since we belong to the day, let us be self-controlled, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 10He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him. 11Therefore encourage one another and build each other up, just as in fact you are doing." --1 Thessalonians 5:1-11

    1. Re:You know... by Ravengbc · · Score: 1

      no, we can't. and instead of quoting a web page, why i suggest that you read the Bible, especially the the New Testament. Try to do it with an open mind, and you might even learn something.
      i love how you jump conclusions and think that i'm a lunatic. i'm not more a lunatic that you or anyone else on /.

      so i'm a geek who's a Christian. whats the big deal? i'm also a gun enthusiast. I would much rather believe in and worship God who is jealous than a god who gives a false sense of power and freedom, as in oh, satan.

      but, i'm not here to try to start an argument. i made my original post just throwing in my two cents. i didn't mean to offend or upset anyone, like Caspian, but i'm not going to apologize for it.

      y'all have a good night. God Bless.

    2. Re:You know... by Caspian · · Score: 1

      You didn't even FOLLOW my links, obviously. I linked to BibleGateway.com-- a major site (run BY CHRISTIANS) which lets you read the Bible online.

      So, in effect, I linked TO the Bible.

      Specifically, the King James Version.

      Read the links, moron.

      --
      With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  82. like NOAA hurricane forecast of 2006? by peter303 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    nuf said

  83. 2030: 2nd millennium Christ's death by peter303 · · Score: 1

    The millennialist had it off, because the counting was from the death & resurection, not the birth. Passover was on Thursday in 30CE and 33CE. The former fits age better according to most commentators.

  84. Neat more Global Warming by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 1

    :-) we did survive 1958 or is this a dream my parents had before they met and got married?

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
  85. OK, Terence... by zish · · Score: 1

    Aren't you dead, or was the rest of the world in a mushroom trip for the last 7 years? I guess we'd better get out our timewave formulas.

    --
    Spork.

    P.S. Spork.
  86. Mayan Calendar Matches Hindu Calendar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man is this idea played out - 5000+ years. Both the Hindu and Mayan calendars started at about the same time and both point to a time close to 2012 when a new cycle for the Earth begins - not the end of the world (EOTW)! http://hinduism.about.com/od/basics/a/goldenage.ht m

    Sure the power grid may be overloaded and transformers fried if this is what you mean by the EOTW then yes the current system is very fragile. "During the last maximum in 1989, a power surge triggered by solar energy damaged transformers of the Hydro-Quebec power system, leaving 6 million people in Canada and the northeast United States without power for more than nine hours. The event also knocked satellites out of orbit and disrupted radio communications." - http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/ solar_max_sidebar_000131.html

    What this actually may do is again wake people up to suppling their own basic electrical needs via wind and solar and to use the grid power less and less. "Among the innovations that could have the greatest impact in the next decade: a new generation of lightweight, quiet electric cars that can be re-fueled at home; the conversion of coal plants to efficient gas turbines; mass-produced wind and solar generators that are cost-competitive with the most advanced fossil plants; tiny fuel cells and rooftop solar panels that allow people to generate their own electricity." - http://www.worldwatch.org/node/1073

  87. yes but... by deadkevin · · Score: 1

    We'll all get to be Fantastic- um 6 billion!
    What power will YOU get!

    deadkevin

  88. Metanotice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Before modding this guy up you might want to see his previous templated posts and refutations:

    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=221906&cid=179 81692
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=227015&cid=183 90093
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=225014&cid=182 30822
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=220006&cid=178 42262

    I wonder how much he's getting paid to do this...or if he's really as demented as his posts seem to imply.

    1. Re:Metanotice by zero_offset · · Score: 1

      Who the fuck would pay anyone to troll Slashdot? Seriously. Get a grip.
      It's slashdot. Nothing which happens here matters to anyone.

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

  89. The real joke by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Informative

    > Um, I think you mean "George W. Bush's impact".

    What makes this joke especially funny is that, despite the fervent belief of most of the crazy elements on the left, George W, Bush CAN'T sign the Kyoto Treaty even if he wanted to. So their carping for him to sign only reveals their ignorance.

    Huh? What can I possibly mean? Am I trolling? Nope. Shrubbie can't sign Kyoto because there is already a signature on it for the US. President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton has already signed the Kyoto Treaty. Knowing it wouldn't have a chance in the Senate of being ratified he simply tossed it in a desk drawer after the ceremony to avoid the humiliation of seeing it voted down. You see, the Senate had already passed a non-binding resolution condemning Kyoto by a 90+ overwhelming vote.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  90. Earth's magnetic field by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wasn't the earth's magnetic field dropping and going to switch poles.
    What if both occur at the same time? No magnetic field, massive solar
    storm...its all over but the crying.

  91. Coincidence by LittleGuy · · Score: 1

    Nope, just in time to knock off the invading aliens.

    --
    Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
  92. Quad Zero's! by gh0stee · · Score: 1

    Man, if you remove that 13 from the mayan date, that creates a quad zero ip.... we all know what that means.... we're DOOMEDEDED!

  93. It's when the Mayan Calender ends... by Terminus32 · · Score: 0

    ...and everything goes t*ts-up!

    --
    http://nathanlindsell.blogspot.com/
  94. Prince needs to update his song by edwardpickman · · Score: 0

    "Party like it's 2012"

  95. solar recession by Teo916 · · Score: 1

    As I understand it, the solar recession (er...did I spell that right?) ocurrs in a (roughly) 26000 year cycle, which is in keeping with the larger natural cycles also tracked by the Mayan calendar. So in a sense, this is exactly the kind of thing they were predicting. If you really want to geek out on it, check out "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock, who makes the argument that this sort of thing is why the ancients built big monuments: so that there would be long standing edifices to educate us in understanding these processes, even after their culture had gone. Also "The Mayan Factor" by Jose Arguelles, who references Carl Jung's ideas in synchronicity as well as the i-ching to make his point of what the whole Mayan calendar system means. Super fun compelling stuff. Peace.

  96. Socio-economic change by lennier · · Score: 1

    "We need to separate those whose real agenda is socio-economic change from the environmental argument. They aren't really interested in the environment, anyway."

    Um, I think you'll find the Green movement has *always* been interested in both socio-economic change *and* in the environment. It's a holistic worldview. Maybe they push the connections a little bluntly sometimes, and seize on Big Events like climat change as 'teaching tools' because they're really, really frustrated with how many people don't see what are the, to a Green, pervasive but very deep and sometimes non-obvious links between everything.

    Not that hard to understand, really.

    What I find hard to understand is why people who are opposed to Green views somehow thinking that merely saying "but you want to CHANGE our SOCIO-ECONOMIC BASE!" as if that automatically damns the cause beyond redemption.

    Well, yeah. Duh. Of course. And do you have a specific criticism *of* that change?

    --
    You are not a brain: http://books.google.com/books?id=2oV61CeDx-YC
  97. MOD PARENT UP! by thegameiam · · Score: 1

    I have never wished I had mod points more than now.

    --
    Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
  98. There is one Christian group that could explain by Starteck81 · · Score: 0

    The Church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints Thinks they did. Read the Book of Mormon sometime you might find it interesting as it relates to this topic. In a nut shell it says that a small group of Jews left Israel shortly before it was conquered and sailed to the Americas. The book is much more involved than that so I recommend the reading if you'd like the full story. P.S. It would also explain Pyramids on two separate continents because they had the record of the Jews that left Egypt.

    --
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
    1. Re:There is one Christian group that could explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't you be tithing, or on a Mission, or something?

  99. Bullshit alert. by SETIGuy · · Score: 4, Informative

    1.) Apparently, the Earth magnetic field has decreased by 10% in the last 150 years (source: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/earth_magnet ic_031212.html). I'm an electrical engineer and during my studies in particle physics, I learned that a particles velocity can be affected by magnetic fields. I believe it's possible that more of the Sun's radiation is penetrating the Earth's magnetosphere ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth's_magnetic_fiel d ) due to it being weaker. If more radiation hits the Earth, shouldn't that also increase the overall temperature of the Earth and can global warming be attributed to this?

    No. The total energy of charged particles impacting the upper atmosphere is tiny compared with the solar light energy Compare for example, the intensity of the aurora with the intensity of sunlight. Now add in the fact that the aurora covers a tiny fraction of the earths surface while sunlight blankets half of the earth at any time.

    Even if it were a significant amount of energy, this energy is entirely absorbed by the atmosphere at altitudes above 60km. You would need to come up with a plausible mechanism for transporting this radiation down into the lower atmosphere without increasing the temperature of the stratosphere.

    2.) Jupitor is experiencing the same climate change that Earth is.

    No, it isn't. The change on Jupiter is regional, not global. There is no indication that it is related to any solar phenomenon.

    3.) Mars is experiencing the same climate change that Earth is.
    No, it isn't. Mars is losing CO2 ice near its South Pole. The most likely explanation is that large dust storms from recent years dumped some dust on the ice causing it to absorb sunlight and sublime. This sublimation may cause warming by increasing the CO2 and H2O content of the Martian atmosphere. This might feedback into causing more ice to evaporate. Since there isn't an active carbonate silicate cycle on Mars due to lack of liquid water, there is nothing to prevent this from occurring. So it's likely that the Martian climate experiences warming of this type in a cyclical manner, and that the warming will continue until something else stops it. For example the reduction in the temperature difference between the poles and the equatorial regions might slow the winds enough that the dust storms stop allowing increased precipitaion of CO2 onto the poles. There is no equivalent mechanism at work on Earth.

    4.) The United Nations found that there is more Methane produced from livestock, which raises global temperature greater than CO2 by a factor of approx. 20
    However the residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is more than 20 times longer than the residence time of methane.

    [5.) What about the ice ages. We didn't cause them!]
    But wait officer, there were forest fires before there were people. Therefore it couldn't have been my campfire that started it.

    But wait officer, people can die without being murdered. Therefore it doesn't matter whether my fingerprints are on the gun.

    [A pile of other pointless crap designed to confuse the issues deleted.]
    Point 1 you could have gotten wrong just because you don't know anything about atmospheric science. The rest just puts you in the denial camp. Drop the political agenda for a while and see reality.
    1. Re:Bullshit alert. by cbacba · · Score: 1

      Thanks for warning us of the nature of your post.

      1) the cosmic ray particles are involved in cloud formation which is a massive blocking agent for total radiant solar energy. Their contribution as energy is not relevent to the discussion. Actually, cosmic radiation is readily measurable on the ground and you would stroke out if you ever saw the signal level from a human sized detector. The effects are quite significant in cloud formation for lower atmospheric clouds.

      2) the southern hemisphere of jupiter is regional?

      3) I believe NASA has just reported finding enough water ice to flood the planet to an average depth of 10 to 20 meters down there in the southern regions using subsurface radar.

      4) residence time is shorter eh? Didn't realize plants and plankton preferred breathing in methane to co2.

      5) So now you're blaming ancient ice ages on modern people! Must be some sort of reverse causality thing going on here.

      Hate to mention this to a SETI true believer but reality sucks. Earth's climate changes and it's influenced by many factors outside of earth. Most of these factors are extremely violent and I'd say this planet has been extremely lucky of it's lifetime to have been able to continue to support life at all. There are climate cycles that appear to be associated with star formation bursts, our location within the galactic disk and its variances above and below the center of the disk (due to orbit), local conditions like is the sun feeling ok or did it just 'burp'. Never mind worrying about the kuiper belt objects or Oort cloud unknowns or for that matter some accidental billiard table event over in the asteroid belt - after all the shoemaker levy comet created several splashes on jupiter bigger than the earth with virtually no time from discovery to impact other than to reserve time on telescopes to watch the event. Of course no amount of sky surveys are going to detect that outer object coming here from the direction of the sun - until it hits the atmosphere.

      BTW, Mr Spock is most likely to be a fungus.

    2. Re:Bullshit alert. by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

      1) the cosmic ray particles are involved in cloud formation which is a massive blocking agent for total radiant solar energy.

      Call me back when you learn some science. The earth's magnetic field does not signifcantly shield against cosmic rays. Cosmic rays do not come from the sun.

      2) the southern hemisphere of jupiter is regional?
      The upwelling zone around 37 degrees south is certainly regional.

      3) I believe NASA has just reported finding enough water ice to flood the planet to an average depth of 10 to 20 meters down there in the southern regions using subsurface radar.
      And what does this have to do with our discussion? Absolutely nothing.

      4) residence time is shorter eh? Didn't realize plants and plankton preferred breathing in methane to co2.
      Again, learn some science. Maybe you haven't noticed, but methane is very reactive in the presence of molecular oxygen. It turns into water and CO2 relatively quickly.

      5) So now you're blaming ancient ice ages on modern people! Must be some sort of reverse causality thing going on here.
      Read it again, idjit. I'm saying that the existence of ice ages does not have any bearing on whether we are altering the climate.

      Hate to mention this to a SETI true believer but reality sucks.
      I'm a scientist, asshat. I don't "believe" anything about SETI. There is a possibility that extraterrestrial intelligences exist. I think that it is worth the effort to look, even if the results are negative. Belief has nothing to do with it. You know nothing of any work I have done regarding the development of intelligence or any estimates I may have made of the number of communicating civilizations that may exist in the Galaxy.

      And I think I know a bit more about the history of the solar system than you do. Then again, so do most fifth graders.

    3. Re:Bullshit alert. by cbacba · · Score: 1



      >Call me back when you learn some science. The earth's magnetic field does not signifcantly shield against cosmic rays. Cosmic rays do not come from the sun.

      Not any cosmic rays come from the sun, eh? OH? REALLY??? Guess what, you're in TOTAL GROSS ERROR there. Cosmic rays primarily in the realm of 10kev to 100kev are sourced by the sun along with the usual 1kev solar wind - which is substantially deflected by the earth's magnetic field. It's why we haven't lost much of our atmosphere yet like Mars has. You don't think the earth's climate would be affected by losing a substantial fraction of its atmosphere????? Note that high energy cosmic rays (> 100kev up to at least 10^20 eV) generally originate from outside the solar system and come from a pantheon of sources and those of the highest energies detected don't really seem to yet have suitable theories as to what the heck generated them.

      Where'd you learn that bit of BS about the origins of cosmic rays not being from the sun? Besides, your reading comprehension is a bit low as it was mentioned that it was the variations of the SUN's magnetic field that had a serious climatic effect from cloud formation, NOT relatively short term variations in the earth's magnetic field.

      >Again, learn some science. Maybe you haven't noticed, but methane is very reactive in the presence of molecular oxygen. It turns into water and CO2 relatively quickly.

      Quick? According to wikipedia, a release of methane of 1 unit mass has 63 times that of the same mass of co2 over a twenty year period. Note too that co2 has a rather limited lifespan in the atmosphere as well. Also note that the article mentions methane levels since 1750 are up 150% (and if you were a scientist or even someone of normal intellect, you'd recognize that is concentrations not initial releases).

      So far it's you who seems to need to learn some science. It's obvious you are short on comprehension and quickly resort to adhom insults and attacks to try to bolster your argument or to attack an opposing argument.

      In reference to jupiter turbulence...
      >The upwelling zone around 37 degrees south is certainly regional.

      Then you agree that global warming couldn't possibly be the cause of increased hurricane numbers and strengths as hurricanes only happen in localized regions.

      >Read it again, idjit. I'm saying that the existence of ice ages does not have any bearing on whether we are altering the climate.

      It does indicate that massive fluctuations occur naturally and somewhat regularly. It provides an indication of just how massive an effort would be required to overcome the natural fluctuations.

      >I'm a scientist, asshat. I don't "believe" anything about SETI.

      I somehow doubt that claim. You have presented serious evidence here to the contrary about your claim of being a scientist.

      As for SETI you obviously BELIEVE it's worth including it in your nick. You evidently BELIEVE it's worth investing some of your time in. Investing your money into it doesn't seem to be suggested by the other evidence.

      >There is a possibility that extraterrestrial intelligences exist. I think that it is worth the effort to look, even if the results are negative.

      I guess over 30 years of negative results doesn't qualify as negative results.

      >Belief has nothing to do with it.

      BELIEFS have everything to do with it. See above. Faith is as much a part of science as it is in religions. If you were a scientist, you'd know that.

      >You know nothing of any work I have done regarding the development of intelligence or any estimates I may have made of the number of communicating civilizations that may exist in the Galaxy.

      You're right about something! I only know about that which you have written. That it seems self contradictory in places and indicative of you not being what you claim just makes me know even less about you (in most ways - but very telling in others).

      ASSUMING there is in

  100. Save us Mulder! by tcc3 · · Score: 1

    Same year as the forthcoming alien invasion. Coincidence? I think not.

  101. Predictico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    `Dikpati's forecast puts Solar Max at 2012. Hathaway believes it will arrive sooner, in 2010 or 2011.`

    Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"

    No. Clearly the Mayans were fully aware that there'd be a slightly-more-powerful-than-normal solar maximum in the year 2012! The implications of this are, well, quite trivial actually.

    Also, I've noticed that Nostradamus and many of the popular television 'psychics' are quite good at predicting things after they've already happened! Coincidence? I think not.
  102. Instant Tan by fatcop · · Score: 1

    no seriously .... instant tan :) oooor maybe its the big guy taking a picture of us all ... say cheeeeeeeeeese !!! We should all wear our Sunday best for those years juuust in case :)

  103. Any calendar experts out there? by seandiggity · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Obviously it's a coincidence, if it's accurate. But it'd be nice to kill such a rumor with historical information anyway. Seems like it would be difficult to accurately compare our current calendar with the Mayan one and pinpoint down to the day.

    Anybody know if that measurement is wrong given the disparity between the Julian/Gregorian calendars in the West (or the history of our current calendar system in general)? Maybe that date is really November 24th (or whatever) in the earliest "modern" European calendar system. I remember reading somewhere that there's only been a unified calendar in Europe/the British colonies for about 250 years.

    I'm not interested enough to research, but maybe there are slashdotters out there who know a lot about this subject...

    --
    Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
  104. 2012 jesus ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    12 21 2012 / 13 baktun marks an alignment involved in the 26,000 year precession of the equinoxes "a platonic year" or world age, aeon, etc...

    its possible jesus and his fellow essene initiates were aware of this as the egyptians were (and well his people were "out of egypt")

          that is where Plato learned it from the priests themselves

    http://exodus2006.com/plato.htm

          From Timaeus by Plato - the text records a conversation that took place between a Greek named Solon and an Egyptian priest possibly named Sonchis. The Egyptian tells how the movement of bodies in the heavens leads to the destruction of the earth at long intervals and how all knowledge is lost at these times.

                "Phaethon, son of Helios, yoked his father's chariot and, because he was unable to drive it along the course taken by his father burnt up all that was upon the earth, and himself perished by a thunderbolt - that story, as it is told, has the fashion of a legend, but the truth of it lies in the occurrence of a shift of the bodies in the heavens which move round the earth and a destruction of the things on the earth by fierce fire, which recurs at long intervals. "

          and also the hindus knew of the yugas cycles of time

    where is JOHN MAJOR JENKINS? lol he has two books on the topic...

    no one has even mentioned this... so i had to post something

    THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
    ST MATTHEW
    CHAPTER 24
          3 And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the asign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

        37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
        38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark,
        39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

  105. Being paid to post to SLASH DOT? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm listening, Go on...

  106. Re: Mormonism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adam morphing into God, aprons with green fig leaves, Book of Abraham, caffeine aversion, callings, Cumorrah, cumoms, curloms, dead baptisms, DNA denial, FARMS, fast offerings, fear of facial hair, fonts on gold oxbutts, gush my guts, horn-tootin' Moroni, Hosannah Shout hanky-panky, Kinderhook, kingdoms with residents missing their genitalia, Kolob, Lamanites, lying for the Lard, Moon Quakers, masturbaphobia, Native Americans being Israelis, Pay Lay Ale, P-Day, points of contact jumping through sheets, Reformed Egyptians, salamanders, seer stones, secret handshakes, names and underwear with stonemason tools stitched on each breast, Half-Fast (they don't fast all day) Sundays, stovepipe hats full of gold plates, Three Musketeer Nephites wandering around like Johhny Appleseeds, thummims, tithing, urims, white slippers and baker's hats, whitesome and delightsome, Zelf and ziff.

    Whacko cults are fun to mock, but Mormons just make it too freaking easy.

  107. And by the way. by Caspian · · Score: 1

    There is no "open-minded" way in which the verses I linked to are acceptable.

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    1. Re:And by the way. by Ravengbc · · Score: 1

      I had no intentions of this discussion going this deep. I am part glad and part upset about it. /. is not the place for a discussion that has gone this far to be done. I did not think that my initial post was out of line by no means. People were already talking about the 'end of times'. but, in response to Caspian's last two posts to me, i'm going to make one more response. I read your links. And there is some things your not looking at. I'm guessing that you were either raised a Christian and lost faith and remain some type of athiest, agnostic or something, or you were never raised Christian and don't have an actual education on Christianity and the Bible. Either way, you make a mistake in your posting of all of those links. Now, I am by no means saying that I am an expert on the Bible, but apparently I know more about it than you. When reading the Bible one has to take into consideration not the context of one a single passage, but the context of the versus before and after it. Thus, why I posted 11 versus in my initial posting. The other thing that one needs to take into consideration the context to whom the letters were being written, especially in the New Testament. All but one of the versus you quoted is from the Old Testament. When Christ was born, and when he died, God gave a new covenant with people. One that in some cases added on and in others rewrite anything that was in the Old Testament. For example, the O.T. speaks of an eye for an eye, but Jesus preaches to turn the other cheek. The main message of the new testament is that of love. Jesus died on the cross for all of humanity out of love. Yes, there are several places in both the O.T. and N.T. where the Bible speaks out against homosexuality. God did not create humans for that purpose. He created man and females for a reason. I personally do not believe that all homosexuals are going to go to hell. Somewhere in the N.T., I forgot exactly where, but it is there, there is a reference to the act of homosexuality being wrong, and that someone who is homosexual should resist the urges that they have. Caspian, I present a challenge to you. After reading this post, let both of us stand up and be men, and just let this line of discussion drop. While I love a good theological discussion, /. is just not the place for it. I will continue to bring up my faith in my posts, when I think it is relevant. So, this probably won't be the last time that you will have to attempt to 'make fun of the Christian' or to try to attack a Christian. I'm man enough to end this now. are you?

    2. Re:And by the way. by Caspian · · Score: 1

      1) You make the mistake of assuming I am a man.

      2) The Bible makes it quite clear that God "changeth not". God's fundamental character and his set of morals do not change from the Old Testament to the New Testament. So if God thought slavery, and slave-beating, were not fundamentally immoral in Old Testament times, he still thinks so now.

      You are welcome to contact me via email to caspiancoder (AT) gmail (DOT) com if you wish to continue this discussion.

      --
      With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
  108. Re: de-Bullshit alert. by lpq · · Score: 1

    Even if it were a significant amount of energy, this energy is entirely absorbed by the atmosphere at altitudes above 60km. You would need to come up with a plausible mechanism for transporting this radiation down into the lower atmosphere without increasing the temperature of the stratosphere.


    Um...to be clear, radiation includes "light", IR and UV components as well.

    There has been some large concern over an increasing ozone-size and the fact that it may be decades before pollutants (CFC's and such), released decades ago, decline enough to reverse the lowering ozone density.

    That lowered ozone and growing lack of ozone (ozone holes, mainly over south, but with some effects noticed over north pole (!side question, why are most pollution heavy cultures (western) in northern hemisphere and ozone hole is largest in southern hemisphere?!)) is allowing significantly larger amounts of high energy radiation (UV light is higher energy/photon than visible or Infrared spectrum) through to the surface. It isn't being filtered out in the upper atmosphere. There is some concern, beside growing skin cancer cases (especially in southern hemisphere areas of Australia and New Zealand), of it causing damage to animal and plant life, planet-wide.

    Second, related to the magnetic field decline, the earth would gradually lose its current level of shielding from the solar wind. This, in turn would appear to cause an increase of nitrogen oxide in the upper atmosphere, especially during proton-heavy coronal mass ejections. This leads to the same effect as is theorized for CRC's -- ozone depletion.

    Problem example: Outside on sunny day, clouds move over your location -- it is virtually guaranteed, that the temperature will go down. On the other hand -- on a fully overcast day, we are warned that UV radiation is nearly as intense as on a sunny day. Supposedly UV radiation is much better at penetrating cloud cover.

    Seems like decrease of magnetic field --> leads to decrease ozone layer protection --> leads to increase of higher energy photons (that tends to stunt plant growth and thereby slow down the CO2->O2 cycle) hitting the earth's surface.

    I don't know the full effects of increased higher-energy photon radiation hitting earth's surface would be, but it seems like most would be converted to lower-energy IR upon hitting the ground. I.e. -- it should, cause some rise in temperature. Whether or not it is significant, I can't say, but I don't believe it to be inconsequential.

    I'm sure that CO2 has some effect on global warming, but there are other factors in play here that may be as much as or of greater effect than man's CO2 output. I sometimes wonder -- with just all the *heat* output produced by "mankind" (even in summer we are running our heat pumps, to make our inside spaces cooler). Might that not have some added effect?

  109. No - Just plain ignorance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is nothing but a bad understanding of Maya calendarics to coincide

    See here http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=227469 &threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=1844040 1

  110. Why are you hiding behind the AC then? by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    People get paid for spreading IPCC man-made climate change FUD.

    If there were anybody paying for discounting and debunking
    pseudoscientific fear-mongering I'd like to know because I
    would love to be doing the right thing _and_ getting paid
    for it at the same time.

    So where he might not get paid he might get laid more often.
    Spreading lies for a salary or speaking the truth and feeling
    good about what you're doing, it's a personality thing, you know.

    e

  111. Solar Warming is Needed by pubwvj · · Score: 1

    What you people don't understand is it is damn cold up here in the north. We need solar warming to reduce our winter heating load. That in turn will cut pollution which will cut global CO2 product. It will also extend our growing season. Global warming is good. Repeat that ten times...

  112. Mayan calendar ... by gfreeman · · Score: 1

    "Anyone familiar with the Mayan Calendar? December 21, 2012 (13.0.0.0.0 in the Mayan Calendar) Coincidence?"

    The Mayan calendar runs on IPv5?

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  113. impact on storage by georgeav · · Score: 1

    What could be the impact on storage ? Should I expect restoring from DVDs (BlueRays/HDDVDs) in 2012 :-) ?

  114. Re: re-Bullshit alert. by SETIGuy · · Score: 1

    Um...to be clear, radiation includes "light", IR and UV components as well.

    I don't know the full effects of increased higher-energy photon radiation hitting earth's surface would be, but it seems like most would be converted to lower-energy IR upon hitting the ground. I.e. -- it should, cause some rise in temperature. Whether or not it is significant, I can't say, but I don't believe it to be inconsequential.
    Ok. Let me do a little math in my head. The sun emits about 1% of its radiation at wavelengths shorter than 2500 angstroms, and 16% at wavelengths above 13000 angstroms. Lets say the current UV transmission is 0, and that the average IR transmission is 50%. The visible albedo of the earth is about 0.39, so of the light hitting the earth 55.5% actually makes it to the ground.

    Lets assume that the atmosphere becomes transparent to UV and the UV albedo is zero. Now the fraction of the sunlight hitting the earth is 56.5%. So the temperature will increase by about the 1/4 power of 56.5/55.5 which is 0.45%. Multiply by the average temperature of the earth (about 275K) and you get 1.2C.

    That's definitely not inconsequential. It's also definitely not what's happening. (Sorry to get your hopes up) That's because the ozone hole only covers a small fraction of the lighted area of the earth and even under the hole the atmosphere isn't UV transparent. Looking around at some resources I see that at its worst, atmospheric transmission between 2000 and 2500 angstroms increased by 5%. So the absorbed flux didn't go from 55.5% to 56.5%, it went from 55.5% to 55.54%. Unfortunately that only translates to a mere 0.05C, which is inconsequential.

    I won't repeat the calculation for man's power usage. Let's just say 0.04% of the sunlight hitting the earth is enormous compared to how much power people use.

  115. Aurora by Chris1051 · · Score: 1

    Uh, the global warming deniers are running rampant. This might make for some nice Northern Lights. (I miss Fairbanks) Maybe we will see some Northern Lights here in TN

  116. Just how deep... by wilec · · Score: 1

    "You don't consider the cultivation of livestock a human activity? Seriously?"

    Cultivation of livestock? Just how deep does one plant a cow anyway? ;)


    Wabi-Sabi
    Matthew
  117. How about cloud formation by wilec · · Score: 1

    I am left to wonder if increases in charged particles could result in increases in cloud formation and thus affect the climate via things such as IR reflection issues.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox- a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=TLG&q=clim ate+change+and+cloud+generation+by+charged+particl es&btnG=Search

    I am not a banner waving advocate of either camp on the GW/CO2 issue at this time. This should not to be taken to mean that I am disinterested in the related issues or possible consequences.

    Wabi-Sabi
    Matthew