The best indication of credibility in the debate on man-made global warming or any other aspect of global climate science is a comparison of the climate prediction hypothesis with the actual record.

Of course, when talking about long term global climate change, the climate data needed to test the man-made global warming argument is lacking. That is why it is interesting to look at the accuracy of recent scientific predictions concerning an object of observed study for 400 years, the cycle of the sun.

Certainly, after four centuries of data collection and observation, the cycle of the sun should be predictable and well understood. However, the record shows that many of the predictions for the current solar cycle (24) were wrong and few predicted that the current solar minimum would continue for so long.

Just look back to the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco in December 2006. The NASA headline on December 21, 2006 from that meeting read: "Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one".

That headline was based on a presentation by NASA solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. He said: " Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 "looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago."

According to that analysis, the next Solar Maximum should have peaked around 2010 with a sunspot number of 160 plus or minus 25 making it one of the strongest solar cycles of the past fifty years and among the strongest in recorded history. The actual record is turning out to be much different from the initial predictions. Cycle 24 is turning out to be a weak solar cycle with a long minimum and new cycle 24 predictions of  solar activity from NASA have been falling to reflect that reality as well.

As of this writing its been nearly a month since the last spot was seen on the surface of the sun. In fact, the number of sunspots for the first three months in 2009 has even dropped from last year incredibly blank sun. So far the sunspot count for 2009 shows there were no sunspots in 78 of this year's first 90 days or 87% of the time.

Last year there were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days. As a result seventy three percent of the year had no observed sunspots on the face of the sun. The prior year was also notable for a lack of sunspot activity since the year finished among the last centuries top 10 years of blank suns.

But a lack of sunspot activity is not the only thing indicating a lack of activity on the sun. Measurements by the Ulysses spacecraft reveal a 20% drop in solar wind pressure since the mid-1990s. Its the lowest point since such measurements began in the 1960s.

Careful measurements by several NASA spacecraft show that the sun's brightness has dropped by 0.02% at visible wavelengths and 6% at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996.

In addition, radio telescopes are now recording the dimmest "radio sun" since 1955. Some researchers believe that the lessening of radio emissions is an indication of weakness in the sun's global magnetic field

Meanwhile, models by dozens of the world's top solar physicists disagree, sometimes sharply, on when this solar minimum will end and how big the next solar maximum will be.

So, after 400 years of studying solar activity , scientists still do not know what will happen next. Its the same in the field of Oceanography where after 100 years or so of study we do not know when the next El Nino event will occur. Its amazing that the proponents of man-made global warming can promote their environmental agenda in terms of scientific consensus and fact.

It just shows that anyone that thinks that man-made global warming is a fact does not understand all the things about our solar system that science can not yet begin to understand.  Its a lesson that becomes apparent as this solar cycle minimum continues into its third year with a blank sun.

http://www.eworldvu.com