[PreciousLiberty]

"Cycle 24 has started. It began in Dec. The solar flux is also gradually creeping up. Don’t get discouraged though Cycle 24 is so weak it’s re-tracing the Dalton Minimum. Woohoo, freezing, famine and a Great Recession!"

Cycle 24 has not "started". It "may have started", and I'm pretty sure from the chart I'll link in a minute that the first article I linked was wrong in saying we hit minimum 12/2008. Check out this language from the NOAA press release on their prediction:

The panel also predicted that the lowest sunspot number between cycles—or solar minimum—occurred in December 2008, marking the end of Cycle 23 and the start of Cycle 24. If the December prediction holds up, at 12 years and seven months Solar Cycle 23 will be the longest since 1823 and the third longest since 1755. Solar cycles span 11 years on average, from minimum to minimum.

Note the use of "predicted", and "if the December prediction holds up".

Now, look at this chart:

There's no uptick after December, we're still deep in the minimum. In fact, there was an article to that effect on spaceweather.com, on April 1 (and no it wasn't a joke;).

[ETL]

Cycle 24 has not "started".

Have you once provided on this thread any evidence to support your ideas of when a new solar cycle officially begins? That is, according to some reputable source on the subject. Perhaps you did, I just don't recall and/or have time at the moment to recheck.

Also important to note (again), is that 'sunspot regions' appear dark only when the magnetic fields they are associated with are sufficiently intense. The intense local magnetic fields suppresses the heat energy. Dark = 'cool' (compared to the hotter surrounding solar surface)