http://www.springerlink.com/content/buvw2tq081013210/

It has been found that: (1) Earthquakes occur frequently around the minimum years of solar activity.



We are presently in a solar minimum but this is being covered up by counting features as sunspots which would not have been counted in the past - here is a video from youtube which explains the situation and I have copied the info.
link to image:



I'm sick and tired of the blatant manipulation of Sunspot data . And the cover is quickly getting blown off from those responsible for hiding the true condition of this Modern Minimum .The fact is if you remove the aggravated pores this quickly becomes the the deepest solar minimum in centuries.The fact is for years we have been watching the magnetic fields wane both here on Earth and on the Sun . Since the 1990's and into the 21st century magnetic fields have dropped by about 50 gauss per year . Not a remarkable drop if it was to be reversed , However it has not and continues to lower the bar even further every year . Hathaway has continued to claim that cycle 24 would be strong, It was not until we reached 2009 he was finally forced to drop the bar and suggest that Solar Cycle 24 may be weak and not the 50% stronger he had suggested in 2006 . He also has went on to claim that Solar Cycle 25 would be even weaker .It is my thoughts he and others have misinterpreted data from the Sun's Great Conveyor Belt . What they had noted was the double peaked nature of Solar Cycle 23 .They did not consider the double minimum we are currently in that will take us into the weakest Solar Cycle in centuries .Sunspots form only when the magnetic field is stronger than 1500 gauss . Within a few years time the magnetic field will be to weak to support any Sunspots on the face of the Sun . It is so called experts such as David Hathaway that continue to ignore the facts .The longer he and other deny this new reality the more they will loose their credibility. This is not new data it is based on the works of Pieter Zeeman back in the 19th century "Zeeman splitting" .

This brings us to how Sunspots have been counted over the last few years.The counting of areas that would not have been seen much less counted in the past . It is entirely possible that these short lived mico sunspots have shown up at every Solar Minimum and they were not seen so they were not counted. It does not mean they were not there during periods such as the Maunder Minimum . The only difference is the people whom are in charge of keeping the official records . Are these people trying to minamize the extent of this modern minimum . It has been my thoughts that there needs to be an audit of their official records since about 2006 . Every single area that has been counted over the last few years needs to be reviewed and the counts need to be adjusted to give us a true picture. If this is not done then the blatant manipulation of historical data will continue and it may be years until we have an admission of the crisis we are in

The Inconvenient Sunspot

One does not have to search very far into the past to see this type of manipulation.

An example ~ The current 4th place record for total blank days was a period from July to September 2008 , at 52 days a micro sunspot appeared . Many in the science community were not at all to happy as the area did not last 24 hours and really looked like nothing more than an aggravated pore. They still counted it

Second example ~ The current 5th place record for total blank days was a period from July to August 2009 , at 51 days

Both of these blank periods have occurred in the current solar cycle and both were only days away from taking 3rd place in all time spotless sun days since modern records dating back to 1850 . They were conveniently stopped by counting areas that prior to the 21st century would have not been counted as true sunspots .

Now here is the kicker some of you may or may not know. In early July we had the best defined Sunspot of this cycle to date # 1024. But did you realize there was a second area that formed that month . It Lasted less than one day and it was catalogued # 15 on July 23rd 2009 . I have been told the reason they did not count it was because they were expecting more Sunspot activity and because the fact this area belonged to Solar Cycle 23 . Now fast forward to August 31st 2009 and facing the fact that we were now only days from taking out the 3rd place in all time blank periods . A micro sunspot appears and also last less than 24 hours . It got numbered right away but before September 1st was finished the spot was gone lasting less than 24 hours .

It is well passed time that we demmand the truth , It is well past time that we demmand those whom are responsible of keeping the modern records quit skewing data .
I have said it before and will say it again. In the future Solar Scientist will look back on this period just as we now look back at the Persecution of Galileo.Some

Independent Solar Research @ http://solarimg.org

Images - MSLO/HAO/PICS , Stereo B EUVI 195 , Big Bear Observatory , SOHO MDI Continuum NASA / ESA
Spot Data - Catania Observatory
Category: Science & Technology
Tags: solar cycle 24

Yeah something has changed with the sun indeed ...

No doubt the entire solar system plays a role in EQs.