What if the astrologers were right?

A while back I would not have believed sun spots could affect the world. That became more credible when I realised that it was not sunspots but magnetic fields associated with the “boiling” bubbles we see as sunspots. To recap: sunspots occur when the sun is active. An active sun increases the magnetic shielding of the earth preventing Cosmic rays arriving. Cosmic rays then cause nuclei which act as centres for cloud formation and so affect the clouds.
[It’s easy to see why this has problems …. Spots, rays, Cosmic … I just can’t help visualising some 1950s cigar shaped rocket with the hero “cosmic” with their ray gun and their dog: “spot”.]
Then I was reading an article on climate etc., and as I began reading about tidal forces on the sun being linked to some solar activity. Then the thought dawned on me. What if those tides also affected the solar activity that modulated cosmic rays and affected our climate? What would happen if the admitted small gravitational force of the planets was enough to literally create “tides” on the sun, which caused flows that churned up the surface bringing sunspots to the surface? That churning might also affect the magnetic activity which then affects the magnetic field that protects us from cosmic rays, hence modulating the climate on earth …. all caused by the position of the planets.
And that is the thrust of the article! Obviously, this is all very hypothetical. But Wow!
That would make a lot of scientists have to eat their words about all those derogatory remarks about astrology. Not that astrological predictions are any less bunkum than …. climate “science” bunkum, but I never ever thought there could be any way the planets could affect us.

This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to What if the astrologers were right?

  1. futureboy says:

    However there would be no reason why any such effects would have any more than random similarity to what the strologers predict (western astrologers that is – oriental astrologers say the skies have far different effects).
    This is like the argument the alarmists make – what if CO2 is having an effect, shouldn’t we spend the trillions on the off chance. It might have completely different effects, including beneficial ones. There are an infinite number of wrong guesses when you are randomly guessing.
    To be fair to the astrologers, while only 97% of those paid to support alarmism say it is genuine I believe 100% of of earning astrologers say their “science” isn’t bunk.

    • Of course the astrologists will abuse this and say it proves that all their predictions of dark haired strangers were “scientific”.
      The point is that astrology used to be the benchmark “totally ridiculous” … not a hint of real science, no possibility of a connection.

  2. TinyCO2 says:

    I think the idea comes under the barycentric theories about climate change, though they’d deny the astrology bit.
    It tends to be pooh poohed even at Watts up.
    I think there must be a connection since the rhythm of the sun must come from somewhere but there seems to be too many influences to make any one stick out. Maybe you need a thousand years of data to see a pattern?
    As for a connection to astrology, I suppose there’s a strong link with the sun since the weather, the time of year and climate has an affect on your life. I sometimes think Piers Corbyn’s weather predictions come close. The sun is in your third house and Uranus has entered Sagittarius – expect snow before the moon doth wane and a lot of wind when Saturn and Jupiter are in conjunction. Today your lucky colour is green, your lucky flower is self raising and your lucky stone is Mick Jagger.

  3. Baa Humbug says:

    What would happen if the admitted small gravitational force of the planets was enough to literally create “tides” on the sun, which caused flows that churned up the surface bringing sunspots to the surface?

    May I humbly suggest that rather than think of it as a ‘small gravitational force’, think of it as the forces on the hammer thrower at the Olympics.
    The hammer exerts a much greater influence on the thrower than it’s weight would suggest.
    Ye old sol is a hammer thrower extraordinair, juggling many hammers of different weights all at the same time.

  4. Dizzy Ringo says:

    There is an alternative theory – that it is all plasma physics and the Universe is electric. It’s just that astronomers and astrophysicists don’t understand plasma physics !
    Forget the gravity – just go electric!

    • Baa Humbug – but just look at the minuscule effect of the moon on the earth, when the moon is not that much smaller than the earth. And also no distance away. The chain of events that could mean the planets effect our climate are so bizarre that if it were in a SciFi book it would be unbelievable.
      Dizzy – And I thought you were going to say that matter is really the holes or bubbles in a sea of substance! That space is really a state that is absolutely full and that we, our matter is just the absence fullness!

  5. Pascvaks says:

    Ahhh yes, gravity; there does seem to be a little something to it. Newton was definitely on the right track. OK! Everyone! Back under the apple trees.

  6. orkneylad says:

    Universe’s highest electric current found:
    “For one component of this jet we obtain for the first time a direct determination of a galactic-scale electric current, and its direction away from the AGN. Our analysis strongly supports a model where the jet energy flow is mainly electromagnetic.”
    Two new reports stand out in relation to Alfvén’s predictions so that ultimately he cannot be ignored. The first concerns the birth of stars and the second the electric circuit of the Sun.
    Electric Star Birth : Alfvén’s Solar Circuit Confirmed
    Wallace Thornhill writes:
    “A science journalist dubbed me “the boundary rider of science.” And it is from that broad perspective that I see our sciences like juggernauts speeding down their blind tunnels of specialization and one can only wait for the inevitable crash. Modern science attempts to describe our reality using meaningless language (e.g. “the fabric of space-time”) and invalid metaphors with the result that ever more forces, unreal dimensions and invisible or virtual matter are invoked. It seems to me that our salvation lies with engineers who must deal with the real world. For it was an outstanding and outspoken electrical engineer and physicist, Hannes Alfvén, who gave us an electrical engineer’s practical explanation of many of the mysteries of the universe – known as plasma cosmology. But in a classic academic ‘Catch-22,’ because mainstream students are not given the opportunity to consider it at any university.
    Alfvén emphasized the influence upon him of Kristian Birkeland’s earlier research into the electrical nature of the aurora and other phenomena in the solar system. Birkeland seemed to intuitively sense the real electrical nature of space but was too far ahead of his time. The theory of electric discharges was still in a very primitive state. He wrote, “It seems to be a natural consequence of our point of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying ions of all kinds. We assume each stellar system in evolution throws off electric corpuscles into space. It is not unreasonable therefore, to think that the greater part of the material masses in the universe is found not in the solar systems or nebulae, but in ‘empty’ space.”
    Birkeland met overwhelming resistance, particularly from Sydney Chapman who was perhaps the most influential scientist in the field of geophysics in the period 1920-1960. But in 1973 satellites confirmed the existence of electric currents aligned with the magnetic field. These field-aligned currents are now called “Birkeland currents.” In 1987, reflecting his own struggle with orthodoxy, Alfvén wrote tartly, “Since Chapman considered his theory of magnetic storms and aurora to be one of his most important achievements, he was anxious to suppress any knowledge of Birkeland’s theory. Being a respected member of the proud English tradition in science, and attending – if not organizing – all important conferences in this field, it was easy for Chapman to do so. The conferences soon became ritualized. They were opened by Chapman presenting his theory of magnetic storms, followed by long lectures by his close associates who confirmed what he had said. If finally there happened to be some time left for discussion, objections were either not answered or dismissed by a reference to an article by Chapman. To mention Birkeland was like swearing in the church.” Many dissident scholars have echoed the comparison of modern institutionalized science with a religious order.”
    And a few words from Alfvén, who took the unprecedented step of predicting in his December 11, 1970 Nobel prize acceptance speech the eventual crash of astrophysics at the end of its long dark tunnel: “In conclusion, it seems that astrophysics is too important to be left in the hands of theoretical astrophysicists who have gotten their education from the listed textbooks. The multibillion dollar space data from astronomical telescopes should be treated by scientists who are familiar with laboratory and magnetospheric physics, circuit theory, and, of course, modern plasma physics. More than 99 percent of the Universe consists of plasma, and the ratio between electromagnetic and gravitational forces is 10 to-the-power-of 39.”
    – H. Alfvén, NASA Conference Publication 2469, 1986, p. 16.

Comments are closed.