Originally posted by KillerQueen
I hate Day Light Savings time - beginning or ending, whichever. It's antiquated and stupid. Hell, at least if we have to spring forward, let's do it
on a Monday and get that beast over with sooner.
Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
The other thing that pops into my head when considering this subject is the quote from Matthew 24:22 concerning the "end times" -
"And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be
edit on 11-3-2012 by KillerQueen because: (no reason given)
No, not seriously. Some other completely different and unrelated quote popped into my head but I chose instead to post Matthew 24:22 in it's place.
..noticed Sunrise 7:16am... Sunset 7:16pm.. days of equal sunrise/set are called "equiluxes" (from
Making today, Mar 16th 2012, the "Spring Equilux"..?.. yes?
"...there are two distinct identifiable days per year when the length of day and night are closest to being equal; those days are referred to as the
Based on what the net tells me, this years Spring Equilux was supposed to be in 4 days, 3-20-12, to wit:
"The Spring Equinox, also known as the Vernal Equinox, conventionally marks the official first day of spring in the United States. This year the
Spring Equinox occurs on Thursday, March 20 at 1:48 a.m."
Just a reminder that originally (in 1966) the time change one hour forward would have happened over the last weekend, two days ago on April 28th. It
now happens at the beginning of March. Why that's 49 days earlier. Almost two months earlier.
edit on 4/30/2013 by this_is_who_we_are because: typo
Originally posted by this_is_who_we_are
The time change used to be a month from now.
It's still Winter until the 20th.
They moved up the date to March in 2005.
7 years ago.
It used to begin on the first Sunday in April.
So... doesn't anyone suspect it was changed for some hidden, nefarious reason?
But I can't put my finger on it.
But that Sun rising 2 days early in Greenland thing comes to mind.
edit on 3/11/2012 by this_is_who_we_are because: typo
The time change is an arbitrary decision made for energy conservation reasons. It does not mean the actual position of the sun or moon shifted by
several weeks. Astronomers predict and measure the positions of the sun and moon according to Greenwich Mean Time, which does not fall under daylight
The whole premature sunrise in Greenland a couple of years ago indicates an abnormally high amount of atmospheric refraction. This is nothing new;
historically this same phenomenon has been seen as early as 400 years ago to make the sun rise prematurely at polar locations by as much as two weeks,
and do so consistently on multiple days prior to when sunrise should have occurred.
In the next place, Gerrit de Veer states explicitly that he and two of his companions "saw the edge of the sun" on the 24th of January, and that
on the 27th of that month they "all went forth and saw the sunne in his full round-nesse a little above the horizon"; and again, that on 31st they
"went out and saw the sunne shine cleare"; and lastly, on the 8th of February, they "saw the sun rise south-east, and went down south south-west."
On the intervening days, the weather being cloudy or otherwise unfavorable, they had no opportunity of observing the sun.
page cliii of "The three voyages of William Barentz to the Arctic regions"
At de Veer's location, 75 degrees 45 minutes north latitude, the sun's upper edge wasn't even supposed to be seen until February 9th.
As for the "horizontal" or "cheshire" moon, that is not an exclusively equatorial phenomenon. It is perfectly normal to see it occur even at
latitudes beyond the tropics. It's an effect of the position-angle of the moon's bright limb combined with field rotation. You can use tables of
the moon published in books decades ago to predict the moon's position and thereby predict its appearance for any given location.
And on that note, I'm currently working on expanding the above spreadsheet to calculate the sun's apparent position as well using data derived from
Simon Newcomb's tables of the sun, which were published in the late 19th century. I've already got a first order approximation of Newcomb's tables
correctly calculating the sun's geocentric coordinates to within about 2 arcseconds or so (far beyond the limit of human vision) and I've verified
that ephemeris generated directly from his tables agree with modern ephemeris to within about half an arcsecond (the effective limit of most
telescopes' resolution due to atmospheric seeing).
The bottom line is that I will be making another video soon with this updated version validating the position of the sun as well, as soon as the
weather permits me to do so. I guarantee that it will show the same thing my lunar calculations showed; that things are where they're supposed to
be. If it didn't, then you would have something to worry about, but the change in the DST dates has nothing to do with this.
During Solar max, the fields of the earth expand, this way it seems like we see longer sunrises when in fact the sun hasn't risen yet and we see the
sun way after it sets. It also makes the sunrise and sunset appear farther north sometimes, the arc looks longer. It is just an illusion as the sun
appears to be where it is not. I suppose we could even see two suns or a sun within a sun like the flame of a lighter. Nothing to worry about. The
more crystals in our upper atmosphere the more it will be noticeable. This has more to do with a weakening of the magnetic field than climate
edit on 2-5-2013 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)
The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.
All content copyright 2015, The Above Network, LLC.