Sunrise/Sunset is off by 16 minutes since 1861 Farmer's Almanac Published

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Let's look at the month of February in 1861 first from the Farmer's Almanac in Boston:

books.google.com...'s%20almanac%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=K__aUfy6L4nM9ATiy4GgDA&ved=0CFIQ6AEwBw#v= onepage&q=%22farmer's%20almanac%22&f=false

It shows on 1 Feb 1861 that:
Sunrise 714
Sunset 515

Now take a look at this site:

aa.usno.navy.mil...

Put in the year 1861, then Massachusetts then Boston. Then hit Compute Table.

You'll see this:

1 Feb 1861

Sunrise 658
Sunset 1659

That's a difference of 16 minutes.

Fragile Earth? You betcha.




posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   
don,t see what that proves,how we do things then to what we do now is like light years so mistakes are easily made,means nothing.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by CircleOfDust
 


Already 16 minutes since this thread was made and no debunkers yet. That's even more remarkable.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Actually it is already proven that massive earthquakes do slightly move the Earth's axis, so yes the days do grow shorter.

An example is the Japanese Earthquake:

www.jpl.nasa.gov...



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sparky31
don,t see what that proves,how we do things then to what we do now is like light years so mistakes are easily made,means nothing.


You write too fast, calling this a mistake and not showing support to your post.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Actually it is already proven that massive earthquakes do slightly move the Earth's axis, so yes the days do grow shorter.

An example is the Japanese Earthquake:

www.jpl.nasa.gov...


Also the earthquake in Chile had the same effect.

I think what the op is pointing is totaly natural, we just didn't noticed before.

Actually, a fixed Earth axis seems to be a dumb idea.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Trueman
 


I purposefully left off my own conclusions in the OP, but I think it has to do more with our core of our earth heating up, destabilizing our continents and our very rotation.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by CircleOfDust
 


Would be a good idea to post your own hypothesis in your OP to direct conversation.



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:09 PM
link   
The sun rises and sets at different times depending on where you are in the timezone. Or where the writer of the almanac is in the timezone.

The sun rises at a different time in Cleveland then it does in New York although both cities are in the same timezone. This is because the sun rises as the earth rotates and this takes time.
edit on 8-7-2013 by IndieA because: addition



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Leap seconds would have made some of that difference...


Since 1972, a total of 24 seconds have been added.

www.timeanddate.com...



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   
An 1861 farmers almanac is not the most reliable source of scientific data. As for the Japan quake shortening the day, that is correct however it only changed it by 0.0000018 seconds. 16 minuets is so large that it would take 533 million japan quakes to make that difference.

I think it's just error in the almanac.

edit on 8/7/13 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Fragile earth? By the difference in rotation over it's entire life span?

More like ROBUST MOTHER !

Takes a kicking and keeps on ticking.

So, I just know this is not in any way some how related to humans.. It is not even possible. Which is why I am not raging in anger at the facts. You know, pollution, waste of resources, depletion of nature, extinction, climate change, they're things we affect.

Not how fast or slow the earth turns though... Or how many tummy aches she gets. Or when a big fat whopping zit pops and oozes molten puss all over some poor Vesuvians.

I wonder, how accurate the clocks were too, back in old horse'n'buggy land...



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Until 1884 the time of day was not standardized in the US or the rest of the world. Different localities figured their time of day differently.



In 1884 that changed when, among other things, it was established that Greenwich would be the starting point for time zones.
wwp.greenwichmeantime.com...

edit on 7/8/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
The difference between 0658 and 1659 is 10 hours, 1 minute.
The difference between 714a (0714) and 515p (1715) is 10 hours, 1 minute.

Therefore the speed of rotation hasn't changed appreciably since then.
What has changed is as mentioned- standardizing time measurements.

edit on 7/8/2013 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


So looking at your image there was a 24 minute time difference between Boston and DC.

Is this what you mean?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Would like to point this out:

If you look at the 1861 Almanac table, you'll see that the difference between sunrise on the 1st of Feb to the 8th of Feb is 8 minutes.

Now use the the US Naval Ob link you provided and look at Feb 1st this year and then the 8th. You'll see the difference is: still 8 minutes.

Also: at the US Naval Ob site, look at the times listed for 1861. You'll find that they match up with 2013, but not the book published by hand in 1861 (and which, as mentioned, time measured has changed, and where you are in the time zone).

For example, using the US Naval Ob site, if I punch in Boston, Mass. I get the time for sunrise for 1 Feb, 2013 at 0658 or 6:58 am, however, if I punch in Springfield, Mass, which is in the same time zone, but located further west from Boston, I get 0703 or 7:03 am.....and if I punch in Chatham, Mass, which is further east of Boston, I get 0652 or 6:50 am.

Last: go back and look at the old Almanac that was published in 1861 and scroll up to the cover. Note where it says this on it:

"Fitted for Boston, but will answer for all the New England states."

An almanac that was fitted for Boston, but answers for all the New England states. Was the chart specifically for Boston only? Or was it average times for sunrise and sunset across "all the New England states"?



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by CircleOfDust
 


ive noticed this change withen the past 30 years no one wants to believe me though or they just dont care. american idol and fake stream media news is more important



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CircleOfDust
Let's look at the month of February in 1861 first from the Farmer's Almanac in Boston:

It shows on 1 Feb 1861 that:
Sunrise 714
Sunset 515

Now take a look at this site: aa.usno.navy.mil...

1 Feb 1861
Sunrise 658
Sunset 1659

That's a difference of 16 minutes.


In the Unified Code for Units of Measure, the symbol a (without subscript) always refers to the Julian year aj of exactly 31557600 seconds.

But clocks are not programmed that way. They are programmed for the good ole 86400 second day, not the (leap year inclusive) 86459.17 second day.

... and now for a ton of math .... oh hell. You know what. Never mind. Here is a picture.



A nice pretty picture.


Ever since 1900 we've gotten our chit together with high accuracy calendrics. The Military site is correct. The clocks in 1861 were wrong.


Mike




Fragile Earth? You betcha.


... now where is my face-palm graphic.
edit on 8-7-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)


p.s. Star & flag none the less
edit on 8-7-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 8 2013 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Until 1884 the time of day was not standardized in the US or the rest of the world. Different localities figured their time of day differently.



In 1884 that changed when, among other things, it was established that Greenwich would be the starting point for time zones.
wwp.greenwichmeantime.com...



Yes! What Phage said. With a link to evidence no less.
Well played Phage. Well played.



Here have some bar-b-que.




At least you didn't have to reenact the entire Einstein Heisenberg debates with sock puppets.

Heisenberg sock: I don't think elevation will have any effect on absolute time...
Einstein sock with club: Unless you are in the Rocky Mountains, and your train is going very very fast. Because no one wants to stay in zee Rockies very long.
Audience: laughs.


Mike
edit on 8-7-2013 by mikegrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 9 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
I think is most likely something to do with the long cycle of earth's wobble, i believe its a 26 000 year cycle depicted by the mayans? And it could be an older record than they have at that too.





new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join