> Your claim was that the sun wasn't generating any sunspots. Now that you
> have been proven to be a LIAR, you attempt to change the subject.
>
> It is entirely irrelevant which cycle the sunspots will be categorized
> under. It is now self evident that you are just another LLLibertarian
> LLLiar.
"Cato" <catoni52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> I was pointing out that Cycle 24 was maybe a false start... or
> hadn't started yet or was slow getting going,
Which is entirely irrelevant to you original claim that the cold winter
(ahahahahaha) was due to a non-production of sunspots by the sun.
In the next couple of days a new sunspot that is now on the far side of
the sun, will rotate into view, and it looks pretty big.
This will add to the sunspots seen in March, February, January and
December.
"Cato" <catoni52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> You more lor less stated, " oh but look at the groups of spots" as
> if these were part of Cycle 24.....
You just can't stay on topic can you...
MMMMMMMMOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNNNNNN
"Cato" <catoni52@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote
> You a real idiot trying to grasp straws.... Of course the sun wasn't
> forming spots before....Day after dfay after day after day after day
> of a blank sun...... and it has been there on SOHO for everybody to
> see,.. In the past little while, spots formed, and I said so....
And once again you are a liar. I provided you with a dozen links to
photographs of sunspots that had developed over the previous month.
CATO = LIAR.
But then has there ever existed a Libertarian who wasn't a Perpetual
Liar?
|
