> luidvor said on
12-12-2009 at
09:28:
the sun did a solar pole flip in 2001. every eleventh cycle it flips, next on due.. guess when. this causes the earth to wobble a bit to re adjust. it's been doing this forever, thats y arctic circle goes around in circles in around 200 mile radius in circles. all normal shit. 2001 i remember when it happened i had a threesome. this happens ppl.
> avrashkovaruniba said on
12-05-2009 at
13:14:
Watch 2012 Movie StreamMoviezland(dot)comaqdukzdmska xsnbkw rwfrvje zduoidjxtdg jwlj llwilxpxsmqi enkolkpnd sjrcts
> PonguigPeopinn said on
11-25-2009 at
13:43:
I have heard someone who has done some calculations and they predicted that there will be a large ejection from the sun and it will hit earth.
> MrLove4ALL said on
11-23-2009 at
20:59:
Dont forget the suns 33 year cycle, i am not too sure where we stand at that particular point, probably at 2012 it will be the closest to us, thus when all the alignments happen.
> Mike2008and2008 said on
11-21-2009 at
02:40:
pretty cool!!
> ImperatorDerGalaxis said on
11-08-2009 at
02:57:
Interessantes Thema5 Sterne
> modeleagle said on
11-07-2009 at
16:20:
The Universe is friendly to us, it has a way to establish equilibrium.
> NEOagainstSystem said on
11-04-2009 at
23:04:
Solar cycle 23 still is ongoing and till now it's 13,5 years long 2.5 above average what is very uncommon and didn't happened hundreds of years. I think Day After Tommorow or 2012 movie is no longer sci-fi but rather sci-fact
> danmarino1970 said on
11-02-2009 at
21:50:
I notice that people use reverse psychology not to let the fear in their subconscious get the best of them.. its normally "human". I will prepare the best way possible. Since I like to hike, I will find a cavern and set up shop. What do I have to lose but ridicule... If something were to happen.. i'll be ready.. if not so what.
> muzziwuzzi92 said on
07-17-2009 at
16:04:
Too bad most scientists got it wrong, i think it's safe to say it will be a below average cycle, hopefully we should still get some Geoeffective halo CME's in the next few years, something we haven't seen for ages. Nothing in particular i didn't already know in the video but thought it was still worth a watch.
> apollo1268 said on
07-15-2009 at
03:18:
Hathaway is full of it. He keeps readjusting his predictions concerning cycle 24. All proxy data indicates that cycle 24 will be very weak.
> pixovilson said on
07-08-2009 at
10:29:
rekognise
> pixovilson said on
07-08-2009 at
10:28:
2012 is gonna be a (phew)
> pixovilson said on
07-08-2009 at
10:23:
REKOGNISE THE RELEVANCE OF EVERYTHING today.
> taddeusvon said on
06-24-2009 at
19:47:
no cause we are in a "minimum cycle now!!...and the next year and a half will unveil the beginning of solor "maximum" and our telescopes which in 2001 we had half as many and half as dependent off them, in other words we r fuckd!! just enjoy life for the next year and then look up we r toast!!!
> Crypt0888 said on
06-22-2009 at
16:59:
Now I am no Astrophysicist but would this cycle explain why the sun seems to much more intense than it use to be a few years ago?
> 00AgentMan said on
06-06-2009 at
16:30:
I hope it just keeps getting worse and worse
> SnookCowboy said on
05-25-2009 at
18:36:
just being a scientist confers neither necessary expertise nor sufficient knowledge. (I wish it did, sigh.) Any scientist who has not read a few serious books and articles presenting actual UFO evidence should out of intellectual honesty refrain from making scientific pronouncements. To look at the evidence and go away unconvinced is one thing. To not look at the evidence and be convinced against it nonetheless is another. That is not science. Do your homework!" Bernard Haisch, Astrophysicist.
> SnookCowboy said on
05-25-2009 at
18:35:
"The negative claims of pseudo-skeptics who offer facile explanations must themselves be subject to criticism. If a competent witness reports having seen something tens of degrees of arc in size (as happens) and the scoffer, who of course was not there, offers Venus or a high altitude weather balloon as an explanation, the requirement of extraordinary proof for an extraordinary claim falls on the proffered negative claim as well." Bernard Haisch, Astrophysicist
> SnookCowboy said on
05-24-2009 at
17:18:
Have You read jimbotheproducers Comments .and You threaten Me???!!!HAHAHAHAHAHAHA What a Joke You are.I simply stated facts not conjecture or fear.COME GET ME!!!!!