Saying we’re “heading for a Dalton minimum” is like saying we’re heading for a World War II. It’s a specific, named event in the past. We may very well be heading toward a solar minimum, but heading for a “Dalton” minimum is nonsensical.
posted on 10/07/2013 7:54:58 PM PDT
(Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
Saying were heading for a Dalton minimum is like saying were heading for a World War II. Its a specific, named event in the past.
Fine. Call it the Algore Minimum if you like. I think that would be perfect, don't you?
posted on 10/07/2013 8:05:47 PM PDT
(To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
There is nothing nonsensical about making reference to a comparative event in the past when you have no existing event in the future to which the comparison can be made.
posted on 10/07/2013 8:11:22 PM PDT
( provides a system for registering complaints about unfair broadcasters and the ability to request a)
From what little I understand about the various minimums, They use the names of the most well-known to describe the severity of upcoming minimums. So a “Dalton” is less severe than a “Maunder”.
posted on 10/07/2013 8:14:04 PM PDT
by Little Pig
(Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici.)
We just need a name to blame it on. Dalton is a good one!
posted on 10/07/2013 8:48:07 PM PDT
by Jack Hydrazine
(Im not a Republican, I'm a Conservative! Pubbies haven't been conservative since before T.R.)
>> but heading for a Dalton minimum is nonsensical.
You can’t single out “Dalton”. You must quote both terms “Dalton Minimum” given the independent meaning of Dalton’s law.
posted on 10/07/2013 11:15:35 PM PDT
by Gene Eric
(Don't be a statist!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson