posted on January 03, 2008 07:51
This is the first press release for 2008 from the Space and Science Research Center, (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida. Judge for yourself whether you put credence in their comments.
Changes in the Sun’s Surface to Bring Next Climate Change
January 2, 2008
Today, the Space and Science Research Center, (SSRC) in Orlando, Florida announces that it has confirmed the recent web announcement of NASA solar physicists that there are substantial changes occurring in the sun’s surface. The SSRC has further researched these changes and has concluded they will bring about the next climate change to one of a long lasting cold era.
Today, Director of the SSRC, John Casey has reaffirmed earlier research he led that independently discovered the sun’s changes are the result of a family of cycles that bring about climate shifts from cold climate to warm and back again.
“We today confirm the recent announcement by NASA that there are historic and important changes taking place on the sun’s surface. This will have only one outcome - a new climate change is coming that will bring an extended period of deep cold to the planet. This is not however a unique event for the planet although it is critically important news to this and the next generations. It is but the normal sequence of alternating climate changes that has been going on for thousands of years. Further according to our research, this series of solar cycles are so predictable that they can be used to roughly forecast the next series of climate changes many decades in advance. I have verified the accuracy of these cycles’ behavior over the last 1,100 years relative to temperatures on Earth, to well over 90%.”
As to what these changes are Casey says, “The sun’s surface flows have slowed dramatically as NASA has indicated. This process of surface movement, what NASA calls the “conveyor belt” essentially sweeps up old sunspots and deposits new ones. NASA’s studies have found that when the surface movement slows down, sunspot counts drop significantly. All records of sunspot counts and other proxies of solar activity going back 6,000 years clearly validates our own findings that when we have sunspot counts lower then 50 it means only one thing - an intense cold climate, globally. NASA says the solar cycle 25, the one after the next that starts this spring will be at 50 or lower. The general opinion of the SSRC scientists is that it could begin even sooner within 3 years with the next solar cycle 24. What we are saying today is that my own research and that of the other scientists at the SSRC verifies that NASA is right about one thing – a solar cycle of 50 or lower is headed our way. With this next solar minimum predicted by NASA, what I call a “solar hibernation,” the SSRC forecasts a much colder Earth just as it has transpired before for thousands of years. If NASA is the more accurate on the schedule, then we may see even warmer temperatures before the bottom falls out. If the SSRC and other scientists around the world are correct then we have only a few years to prepare before 20-30 years of lasting and possibly dangerous cold arrive.”
When asked about what this will mean to the average person on the street, Casey was firm. “The last time this particular cycle regenerated was over 200 years ago. I call it the “Bi-Centennial Cycle” solar cycle. It took place between 1793 and 1830, the so-called Dalton Minimum, a period of extreme cold that resulted in what historian John D. Post called the ‘last great subsistence crisis.’ With that cold came massive crops losses, food riots, famine and disease. I believe this next climate change will be much stronger and has the potential to once more cause widespread crop losses globally with the resultant ill effects. The key difference for this next Bi-Centennial Cycle’s impact versus the last is that we will have over 8 billion mouths to feed in the next coldest years where as we had only 1 billion the last time. Among other effects like social and economic disruption, we are facing the real prospect of the ‘perfect storm of global food shortages’ in the next climate change. In answer to the question, everyone on the street will be affected.”
Given the importance of the next climate change Casey was asked whether the government has been notified. “Yes, as soon as my research revealed these solar cycles and the prediction of the coming cold era with the next climate change, I notified all the key offices in the Bush administration including both parties in the Senate and House science committees as well as most of the nation’s media outlets. Unfortunately, because of the intensity of coverage of the UN IPCC and man made global warming during 2007, the full story about climate change is very slow in getting told. These changes in the sun have begun. They are unstoppable. With the word finally starting to get out about the next climate change, hopefully we will have time to prepare. Right now, the newly organized SSRC is the leading independent research center in the US and possibly worldwide, that is focused on the next climate change. Some of the world’s brightest scientists, also experts in solar physics and the next climate change have joined with me. In the meantime we will do our best to spread the word along with NASA and others who can see what is about to take place for the Earth’s climate. Soon, I believe this will be recognized as the most important climate story of this century.”
Sunday, January 6, 2008 4:26 AM
Interesting, but I wouldn't buy extra down parka's just yet. Something about this just doesn't smell right. A few things I noticed right away:
1. John L. Casey isn't a scientist. Nor are there scientists listed as staff members. In fact, the only staff member listed is John L. Casey.
2. They have a picture of a big building as the headquarters of SSRC. But it's suite number 175. A google search of that address shows:
4700 Millenia Blvd Ste 175
Orlando, Florida 32839
Is a prestigious scientific association sharing office space with a real estate firm? Looks like it, especially since the real estate site is current.
3. Other denizens of the same building include Apple One, various attorneys, Better Business Bureau, ;Escrow title companies, management firms for various apartments, Chamber of Commerce, a barbershop, Debt consolidation company, more real estate agencies, a radio station, and other stuff typical of mixed use office buildings. Nothing to do with science though at all.
4. Searching John L. Casey didn't turn up much at all.
Conclusion: Not what he's saying he is. Fishy smell. Must be fish there.
Sunday, January 6, 2008 6:25 AM
I think, perhaps, that you are missing the point. John Casey has created a web presence for disseminating information about global warming in a non anthropogenic venue. His not being a scientist is no more relevant to his press release than whatever it is you are to your comments. In a follow-on post to this article, we present recent research out of Russia, and in the Reference Library under Environment you can find a number of articles that were written by environmental scientists or scientists otherwise qualified to write on the subject, that discuss solar driven warming and cooling cycles.
The simple fact is that four solar cycles (not two as John Casey mistakenly writes) control long-term climate on our planet. They are the 1,100-1,500-year "Bond Cycle," the 200-500-year "Suess Cycle," the 75-90-year "Gleissberg Cycle," and the well-known 11-year "Schwabe" sunspot cycle. The first three actually influence the Earth’s temperature directly, by increasing or decreasing the total amount of irradiance the planet intercepts, because our sun actually is a variable star. The Schwabe sunspot cycle varies the intensity of the solar wind, which – in turn – varies the amount of charged particles captured by our magnetic field (the so-called Van Allen belts), which controls the total amount of general cosmic radiation that impinges on the upper atmosphere, which has recently been shown to have a significant influence on the amount of cloud formation, which – obviously – influences the amount of solar irradiance reflected back to space, and so has a direct effect on atmospheric temperature.
Commencing in about 2016 and peaking in 2020, the Earth will become progressively cooler. Temperatures in 2020 will be the coolest in the past two centuries. This prediction is not subject to “discussion” in the normal sense, in that it is based only upon factual data about our sun that are generally available to anyone who takes the time to do the research. This has nothing to do with anthropogenic effects on our climate. Simply stated, everything we have observed that has hypothetically been ascribed to human activity, actually is COMPLETELY explained by these cycles.
Since you appear to be someone interested in truth, I trust you will at least look into this information and let the facts drive your opinion going forward.
Friday, January 11, 2008 5:10 AM
Dear Dr. Williscroft and Dead Hand readers,
Thanks for the opportunity to offer a few comments on my plans to set up the Space and Science Research Center, the important work we are about and to address some questions about whether I and the center are 'the real deal.'
First off I read the comments that your site posted after the first press release of the SSRC on January 2, 2008.
Where possible I took immediate corrective action where appropriate to improve the web site and better define what the SSRC is. When you start a new entity you have to take the first step. That is all we have done to date, just take that very first step at setting up an organization. I have begun several in my fortunate career and they always begin the same. You have no money, a belief that you are going to be successful, and that what you want to do is going to be of benefit to both yourself others by providing a needed product or service. There is no magic in a startup. It begins with basics; a phone and address and in this day a web site, so that you can get to the next phase. Every stage of growth has its own characteristsic and challenges.
In finding a virtual office, setting up a web site and putting out the first press release we have also planted a flag in the ground. It says what we are trying to do is not just going to fullfill the basics goals of a start-up but in this case will try to define and publicize what we think are the primary drivers for climate change on Earth. We also hope to create something very special that has the potential to help people around the world.
I believe the meager start of the SSRC nonetheless is an important start for many people. It is a start that will allow scientists who have great talent in solar physics and other areas a place to hang their hat and do important research that is independent and unfettered by political bias or requirements of conformance to the conventional thought. There is doubtless need for freedom of scientific expression in the US and elsewhere these days.
So on the point of starting the SSRC I ask for a little patience as the gears of progress move a little each day and in so doing we provide more value and benefit to your readers and of course continue our current research focus on the critical next climate change.
On the matter of whether I am real, I will tell you candidly it is a question that I have simply never had to address before. Perhaps the internet in its ability to allow everyone to make a comment and publish an opinion for world wide distribution is the source of confusion.
During the many important events that I have taken part in over the past 30 plus years, my credentials have never been questioned. They were granted full blessing in my work with then Martin Marietta where I served as a space shuttle engineer and later went on to be a trouble shooter for the compnay examining scientific and engineering problems in multi-billion dollar programs. They were not questioned when I helped in the Challenger investigation and revitalization of NASA Headquarters especially in the quality and safety arena. They were not questioned when I chaired a White House National Space Policy Committee or assisted members of Congress including key committeee leaders of important science committees. They were not questioned when after 9/11 attacks, I was asked by the leadership of the new Afghanistan to help advise their new government on reconstruction matters. They were certainly not questioned when I raised money to give starving teachers money in a war zone, and buy furniture for bombed out schools, nor when I helped stear millions in medical aid to Iraq working with the Department of Defense.
But start a single web site that runs counter to global warming (by result not intent) and suddenly people who have never met me have decided that I never existed and have used incredible terms in describing my credentials, my capabilities, and whether I and the SSRC is for real.
This is more an observation than a complaint - the internet has the capability of much good and many things that aren't good. It is just something that those like myself who are in the busines of 'planting flags' will just have to get used to.
As the SSRC develops and adds staff, receives endorsements and support from those who really do know me and believe in what the SSRC is doing I hope that your readers will begin to revise their opinions. This also may take time. I understand.
The email response to date on the otherhand, has been overwhelmingly positive and a daily joy to read. The many contributors have been from around the world and all walks of life. The overall message they have been sending is one of both frustration and relief. Frustration that they think global warming is not man made but natural and that this message has been stiffled. The relief comes as they learn that the SSRC has committed itself as a new and potentially important voice in the climate change debate. Yesterday, for example I was contacted by a leader of a group of weather forecasters serving a large section of the US, who was elated with what we were trying to do. He was elated only after he fired off some pretty tough, in your face questions about me and the SSRC and got answers he felt right about. There are many people who don't appreciate their intellect and their freedom of speech being tied down.
On the issue of the solar cycles you described, you were part correct. There are more than those you listed which are very relevant to future climate change. I did not make a mistake on how many there are. We're talking definitions here. Within the space of one or two human lifetimes which we can 'relate' to i.e. the "relational cycles," the two most significant are the 206 year and the 90-100 year cycles. The RC Theory only addresses the cycles less than 206 years in duration, not the more powerful multi- centennial or multi-millenial cycles. Since we don't live very long and with the next climate change coming in 3-14 years that is going to directly affect us and the next generation, I have decided to concentrate on these cycles for the near term.
This Monday there will be another press release from the SSRC and during the week an update to the web site with information about some of the world's best scientists in the field of solar activity and prediction of the next climate change who will be added to the site as members of the new Consulting Scientists Staff.
It is my fondest hope the you and your readers will review the site periodically and help me improve it through constructive comments.
My most important hope is that you and your readers will join me in helping this new and important entity become a success as we now take our first baby steps forward in our attempt to get the word out about the coming climate change.
Keep up the free exchange of ideas at The Dead Hand.
Space and Science Research Center
Saturday, January 12, 2008 2:53 AM
I'm sure you've had an interesting career and some engineering expertise to match; however, if you think that issuing proclamations about climate change via a web blog and a letter to the president is a good way to fund research (or make a living for that matter), you need therapy.
CEO and Senior Researcher
Fred Finklebaum Institute for Advanced Studies
Saturday, January 12, 2008 3:33 AM
I'm not sure why you use the word "Dude," and I sense that you are a bit of a wise-ass, but what really distresses me is that you have chosen to attack the messenger, instead of considering the message.
Saturday, January 12, 2008 4:57 AM
Why is it that the primary concern of the modern Stalinist is so often the mental health of his victim? Cripes. It's almost as if... pregnant pause... Finkelbaum hadn't even bothered to read the above arguments!
Then, of course, there's the bogus "Institute," doubtless an attempt at irony. Hey, Fred, we get it: ANYBODY can claim to run an institute!
But here's what else we get: apparently, ANYBODY can graduate from high school and use the Internet.
Look, Fred... we appreciate the comedic value you bring to the table. Your name makes us giggle. But if you expect us to take you seriously enough to bother arguing with you, you're going to have to make the first cut by SHOWING UP WITH AN ARGUMENT.
Then we'll be delighted to take it apart, brick by brick. Who knows? Maybe there'll be some substance under the pile.
But based on your inaugural comments, I kinda doubt it.
Saturday, January 12, 2008 5:11 AM
What makes you think we're dealing with a high school graduate here...oops, that might be considered attacking the messenger, so...what makes you think this post is at a high school level?
Let me answer that: The writer actually did not begin a sentence with the word "however," but placed it inside a compound sentence in a grammatically correct usage. The mechanics of the English is correct, but the critical thinking element appears to be absent...but then, that's not taught in school anymore, is it?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 9:09 AM
This has got to be the funniest "press release" I have ever seen. Turns out the "peer review" is two other "scientists" listed at his institute. No academic affiliation, not published in a reputable journal. For the real scoop, see comment by greenfry here:
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 9:25 AM
Did you take time to read the release and the comments? Only a born-again believer can dispute the solar evidence...so what is it, the facts or your silly beliefs?
|Cool Windows Resource Kit Utility: cleanspl.exe by Jason Williscroft (Tuesday, February 6, 2007)
|v: 44332 | c: 5
|They say things are big in Texas, but... by Robert Williscroft (Wednesday, March 7, 2007)
|v: 28258 | c: 1
|Sweet vindication – It really is climate cooling! by Robert Williscroft (Thursday, January 3, 2008)
|v: 23175 | c: 11
|E-Bomb: The Ultimate Terrorist Weapon by Robert Williscroft (Thursday, December 28, 2006)
|v: 21609 | c: 5
|Global Warming Deniers – Part 1 – Statistics needed by Robert Williscroft (Wednesday, February 7, 2007)
|v: 17161 | c: 9