T minus 10 seconds until "HOAX" accusation...

definitely a hoax

Ok, the "it's a hoax" joke (and corresponding meta jokes) in response to remaindered links stops here, okay guys? It was maybe funny the first couple of times, but I don't want it developing into a "thing" that we do here because there's nothing else to say about a link. Legitimate "it's a hoax" wonderings are still OK.

And, FWIW, the pic is not a hoax...it was taken by a friend of a friend of mine.

I dont know why, but I had a gut feeling before I even read the comments that someone was gonna play the Hoax card. Its gotten quite old indeed.

Wow. Amazing.

It does seem more likely (well, to me) that the variations in lighting you see in the picture would be because of variations in the density of the smoke and corresponding amounts of sunlight allowed through, rather than because of the solar activity, though.

Hey, FOAF is credible enough for me. I linked to it...

I'm in San Diego and saw them with my own eyes.

I'm in San Diego and saw them with my own eyes.

matt: FWIW, In the last two bushfire seasons here in OZ, I've seen the same red orb sun, but without anything that looks like those spots. Bushfire smoke at these distances is relatively evently spread. Your hypothesis calls for extremely localised density changes.

So I'm gunning for real sun spots.

Here's another shot of the sun (avec sunspots) through the smoke.

Compelling....