ADKO

solmin

3 min read

This paper by Steven Oostdijk compares the predictions for solar cycle 25 made by an individual named Miles with those of the “mainstream” scientific community, including organizations like NOAA and NASA. Oostdijk argues that Miles’s predictions, based on a charge field model involving planetary influences and galactic core charge flow, have been significantly more accurate than mainstream predictions, which rely on the “classic solar dynamo” theory.

The paper critiques the mainstream model for its lack of detailed mechanics and reliance on unproven assumptions, citing issues with data smoothing and alleged manipulation of solar minimum dates. Oostdijk highlights that Miles predicted solar minimum in 2018, supported by polarity reversals, while mainstream sources placed it in late 2019, allegedly finessing data to fit their narrative.

A key point of contention and evidence presented is the Saturn conjunction in December 2020. Miles predicted this event would cause a significant peak in solar activity, a prediction that Oostdijk claims is being borne out by recent data, contradicting the mainstream’s dismissal of planetary alignments as relevant to solar cycles. Miles’s model posits that planets channel charge from the galactic core, influencing solar activity, while the mainstream dynamo theory struggles to explain short-term solar changes.

The paper concludes that Miles’s model offers a more accurate and useful framework for understanding solar cycles, contrasting it with what Oostdijk describes as the outdated and “infantile” nature of the classic solar dynamo theory, even referencing critiques of the Earth’s dynamo theory. The author expresses confidence that the mainstream will eventually have to adjust their predictions upward to align with the observed solar activity, which is already exceeding their forecasts.

List of Subjects, Names, References, Locations, Companies, etc.:

Graph View