All of the norths are about to align over Britain UK map lords at the Ordnance Survey have some big news for people with obsessive compulsive personality disorder or otherwise like everything to be neatly lined up. Yes, for the "first time in history," the OS says, magnetic north, true north, and grid north are about to align over Britain. OK, what does this mean? How many …
Oh absolutely, rah! My family had two gravel butlers you know, used little silver sledge hammers to break the harder pieces up. I think one of them had learned their craft at Dartmoor, or some such place. Real expert. Dya know we had to get white gloves specially made to fit his enormous calloused hands? All gone now of course, after father's unforunate and illegal smuggling of powdered chaulk finally caught up with him.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
The UK is in for some potential trouble when all Norths align. It has been known from ancient historic and even older pre-historic texts that the meridian of alignment becomes very slippery and causes everything to slide. You should all make sure to hold on to something when the alignment happens because you might find yourself sliding towards the equatorial plane faster than you might like. Research even suggests that parts of the UK landmass may slide south at the time of alignment.
The OS says: These predictions are likely to change...
Real scientists freely admitting they actually don't know everything and can't necessarily predict what's to come in the future due to the fact that nature is inherently a bit chaotic - bravo! Maybe the environmentalists could learn a thing or two...
All scientists acknowledge the fact that our understanding of the world is imperfect; trying to understand things just a bit better is what they do for a living. But in many fields we are not talking about *if*, we are talking about the *details*. We know that biological systems are more or less complex, more or less chaotic. But the general patterns, the big picture? They are to a large extent known.
We know that humans evolved from other species, we know quite a bit about the mechanisms and have surprisingly good data for a lot of the steps. All of them? Of course not. We know that the being bitten by a timber rattlesnake is dangerous, but no one can say for certain ahead of time if a certain victim will live or die, or experience exactly which sequelae. But you should probably still try to avoid being bit by one. It is the same thing with climate change. We know that it is going to happen, that it is happening now as a matter of fact. But there is no way to fully predict the details, at least not with our current understanding of climate. It is the same thing with the ecological effects of pesticides dramatically reducing the number of bees. We know it going to have serious detrimental consequences for a number of important crops, even if no one can tell you an exact percentage point on how the yield for a certain crop will change.
Real scientists freely admitting they can't predict exactly where it's going to be at any given date - but with complete consensus amongst all real scientists that it's happening because of really hot stuff that's definitely there and is definitely hot.
Maybe the anti-environmentalists could learn from that, because there is equal scientific consensus on the existence of volcanos and the existence of climate change...
Climate scientists *do* admit that. That's why they project future temperatures not as exact numbers, but rather as ranges, which grow wider the further into the future they go.
Of course, then the wilfully ignorant asshats claim that that very uncertainty is reason to ignore the projections. "See? They don't even know! Wake me when you have an exact number." Which of course *can't* happen until we get there.
Feh!
Of course, then the wilfully ignorant asshats claim that that very uncertainty is reason to ignore the projections. "See? They don't even know! Wake me when you have an exact number." Which of course *can't* happen until we get there.
So I make a prediction that the Sun won't rise tomorrow. Easily disproved. Wilfully ignorant asshats like this asshat-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen#US_Senate_committee_testimony
made some predictions using his simple, but very expensive climate model to a bunch of other wilfully ignorant asshats in 1988. Simple time series, time on on axis, temperature on the other. It's now 2022 and other wilfully ignorant asshats (SkS or 'Skeptical Science') refuse to accept that reality diverged from the model, ergo the model was wrong, ergo the assumptions behind the model were wrong.
This is normal for climate 'science'. There is a reanalysis project that compares model results to reality, and there is generally divergence with the models predicting more warming that can actually be observed. Some wilfully ignorant asshats claim that even though reality is cooler than the predictions, there's some unknown/undiscovered relationship that either allows heat to be stored, or the energy trapped somehow, somewhere. Or there's some mythical 'tipping point' where exceeding 350ppmv means we're all doomed, doomed I tell you. So confident and widely promoted predictions showing that the ice caps have already melted etc.
The real wilfully ignorant asshats just take this garbage on faith, and superglue themselves to oil paintings and tarmac, because oil is evil. Reality is that the 'climate' is far less sensitive to CO2 than originally claimed by climate industrial complex. Thousands of those will be jetting off to Egypt for their annual jolly where they'll demand we give the UN $100bn+ a year to spend.
And here I thought the climate doomsayers were calling it settled science, meaning no debate, they're right and it's reality that's wrong.
Now for the actual reality - the earth is warming up because of the sun. Other planets are heating up at the same rate as earth. The sun's output fluctuates in cycles, and we are near the top of a 700ish year cycle. At the bottom of that cycle it was so cold that the Thames would freeze solid in winter. The peak is around 2050, after which the sun's output is expected to decrease for 350 years. By 2500, the Thames will be freezing solid again.
The world governments know this, and they know that once we roll past the peak everyone will know anthropomorphic global warming is a bunch of hooey. Long before the peak they hope to get a global GDP passed to "fight global warming.". They even stated that the actual goal is wealth transfer to a world government, not fixing any environmental problems.
Cleaning the environment is important, but it's not affecting temperatures one bit. CO2 is currently sitting at 0.4 percent of 1 percent of the atmosphere. Increasing to 0.5 percent of 1 percent isn't going to make a bit of difference.
And here I thought the climate doomsayers were calling it settled science, meaning no debate, they're right and it's reality that's wrong.
Obviously because Teh Science is now settled, we can cut funding.
Now for the actual reality - the earth is warming up because of the sun. Other planets are heating up at the same rate as earth. The sun's output fluctuates in cycles, and we are near the top of a 700ish year cycle.
That's challenging to claim. Mainly because it's one of those 'effect exceeds cause' problems. Yes, solar output varies, but perhaps not enough. Or in reality, it's spectral shifts that might be the culprit rather than raw irradiance figures. We know the atmosphere is more sensitive to variations in UV output than visible light, and we know UV output varies with sunspot activity. We also know that solar minima do also seem to correlate with changes in climate, especially when they're the 'Grand' versions.
But it's also why I'm fascinated by the SAA. Henrik Svensmark proposed a theory that cosmic rays could affect cloud cover. This was swiftly and vigorously denied-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrik_Svensmark#Debate_and_controversy
Although it did also lead to some real science-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_experiment
On 24 August 2011, preliminary research published in the journal Nature showed there was a connection between Cosmic Rays and aerosol nucleation. Kirkby went on to say in the definitive CERN press Release "Ion-enhancement is particularly pronounced in the cool temperatures of the mid-troposphere and above, where CLOUD has found that sulphuric acid and water vapour can nucleate without the need for additional vapours.
Which also got denied by the climate cult. They'll tell you that 'There is no variation in cosmic ray activity!', despite ample evidence that there is, and there's a proposed mechanism by which it can affect cloud cover. Which we know affects weather, and we know climate models can't model. Plus we know the Earth's magnetic field is declining, which may amplify the effect. Which is one of the reasons why I find the SAA so fascinating given that's an area where our magnetic field is already low, so any cosmic (or solar) ray and CCN (Cloud Condensation Nuclei) effects might be easier to observe.
But because Teh Science is settled, climate 'scientists' wedded to CO2 dogma do not want any inconvenient data that may disrupt their funding. Hence why they're fixated on thermometers and their 'adjustments' rather than energy. Because there are instruments that do a better job of collecting data there, such as-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrgeometer
These instruments generally have no spectral (frequency/wavelength) measurement capabilities – they use a single (non-frequency resolved) resistance/voltage measurement. They are constructed to be sensitive to the infra-red radiation spectrum that extends approximately from 4.5 μm to 100 μm, thus excluding the main shortwave (solar) spectrum.
And there are cheap(ish) spectrum monitors that could also measure wider spectral variations. One of the great tragedies of climate science is that when the fuss started, and the money started pouring in, more weather stations weren't fitted with instruments that could actually collect useful data. If the problem is a postulated IR energy imbalance, why not install devices that can measure this, and variations over time?
At the bottom of that cycle it was so cold that the Thames would freeze solid in winter.
That's probably not a good example. One of the reasons why the Thames probably froze is it's flow rate was heavily restricted in places. However, there is plenty of historical evidence from other events like the causes of the French Revolution, or Napoleon's attempt to conquer Russia that the weather/climate was cold around those times. So basically the 'Little Ice Age' that climate pseudo-scientists desperately want to deny. Especially if you're claiming 'unprecedented warming', because if you start from an unusually cold period, you create an exagerated warming trend.
Headingley...... During the last major conflict with the Hun, my grandmother lived in that area near the Skyrack (a well-known establishment providing refreshments). Apparently the landlord had a 'stormy' relationship with his wife, once advising her to "Stick your head out of the window and we'll call it The Nag's Head".
In more recent times, only fifty years ago, we used toast their ghosts on the same premises.
Icon, apt and whynot (a fictional pub)--->
1. Point your watch's hour hand at the sun* and South then lies half way between the hour hand and noon (or 1 o' clock during BST).
2. Use the fact that Sky TV dishes point South. It used to be 22 degrees East of South if my 30 year-old memory of the time when I helped to install them is any good.
3. Use the fact that moss is usually found on the North side of trees. Is that really a thing?
*Yes, I know sun is a rare thing in the UK but I once used this trick quite a bit to help navigate whilst driving in Morocco from Fez to Tangier, all the while accompanied by a look from SWMBO that translated as "remind me again why you didn't pack the satnav".
"3. Use the fact that moss is usually found on the North side of trees. Is that really a thing?"
Years and years ago you could buy these boiled sweets which had a spy motif and inside the wrapper were handy tips for trainee eight year old spies, including moss on the north side of trees. Several years later I was on a school outward bound course where we were given maps (but no compass) and told to navigate back to the start. I think the idea was to follow roads. Of course we took the short cut off the road and got lost and it was only by using tree moss that we managed to navigate back in the right direction. So yes - it is a thing :-)
Ants (in temperate climates) like to catch the warmth from the sun. So they tend to slope towards the south (northern hemisphere). And at least here in Sweden they are not built against rocks, which are far too good heat conductors, but against trees and such objects.
The moss and lichens is a bit more complex: north is damper (good)m but less sunshine (bad). Some species are happier on the south side than the north. Tree branches will also grow differently on the north vs south side. The general tendency is long and horizontal on the south side, and shorter and more upright on the north (shade and wind affects this!).
Even with a digital watch you can imagine where the hands would be. With a bit more effort it works in the dark: if you can see the Moon you can work out where the Sun would be based on the phase and then determine where North is (actually, determining South is easier, but then you just go the other way...)
Of course, if it's too dark to see the Sun but clear enough to see the Moon, chances are you can see the relevant stars for your hemisphere...
I'm getting less good at that too, in my 60s. I tend to make mistakes, especially when I take a quick look. Sometimes my eye catches the seconds hand instead of the minute hand. Sometimes I just get it wrong if I'm not concentrating.
So why should the under 30s, growing up with digital clocks everywhere, be secure in knowing how to use a clock-with-hands?
And why would they even have one? I recall here on El Reg commentards proudly announcing that they never wear a watch, because phone.
My watches are worn more as an ornament. One is a Warner Brothers Bugs Bunny Watch that has no numbers, and convex glass that makes telling the time accurately almost impossible anyway.
I'm guessing that you mean "you can..."
And I'd agree if so, except for it to be fun it probably needs to be connected to their lives. And with so few clocks-with-hands around a lot of kids will never have seen one. It'd be like teaching kids to use sundials ( which can also be fun....).
If you're being chased by a polar bear, you've gone too far north. If a penguin's stolen your pie, you've gone too far south.
If you give a kid a map, they may ask Siri what it is. Siri.. Hello.. Siri.. It's kinda depressing that many of our feckless yoof don't understand the significance of the 3 Norths. Me, I'm still waiting for the geomagnetic reversal, cos that's going to make things really weird. Although somewhat less exciting than a true polar reversal.
(For more fun with geomagnetism, I still really want to understand the SAA. That's weirdly fascinating. Science is fun like that. See also gravity mapping and where to go to lose weight.)
Moss? You were lucky!!! Was lost once many years ago in London late at night. Could just see the big dipper in the sky - so, right, that way is north, I need to keep going in a westerly direction - I know the way home once I hit the M25......
Another time I was lost in London, alas, in the daytime I started following signs to Brighton - just because I knew it's NOT in London!! Just need to take a right turn at either the M25 or the English Channel - which either I came across first.....
by Tristan Gooley
“Nature is always making a map for us. Everything outdoors is a clue and a sign.”
> which can mean so many things
Scotland is trying to catapult itself off the end of Britain and rejoin the EU, and has been since the end of the Ice Age (the clans taking the long view on history).
The "Northern Powerhouse" is just a plan to move more heavy stuff to the NE to try and stop the Scots using that as a way of escaping from the power of London.
Wales is acting as the pivot and isn't sure how to feel about that; on the on hand, helping someone escape The English, on the other realising they are going to be left behind.
The Cornish are stockpiling buckets to bail with.
Note that the poor Southerners don't get a look in. We do exist you know - in fact we have a whole bloody continent of our own. And what do you call it? "Not the Arctic".
TRUE SOUTH ALIGNS THE SAME DAY AS YOUR SCROTTY WET-FOOTED NORTH.
I am cc-ing this to the European Court of... no, wait, Antarctica is not even in the EU - the United Nations, yes. Blatant discrimination, I say. We Antipodeans... - oh no, another "How far from us can you get?" word!
Just you wait til the icecaps melt and you have to swim for it!
1. Who uses the Ordnance Survey national grid in the southern hemisphere? It only makes sense over relatively small areas. The US doesn't use such a system for that very reason. If you want to extend ours below the equator you end up with up is down style conditions.
2. The Earth is not a bar magnet, the magnetic field is rather funkier than that. The biggest "issue" is the South Atlantic Anomaly, which affects mostly the southern hemisphere. Therefore it doesn't follow that magnetic north for us is 180° opposite of magnetic south for you.
I take the point about the SAA, but the day that your national grid aligns with true North is the same day everybody's national grid aligns with True North, for everybody who used the same reference date/position for True North. The magic is only about Magnetic North (for parts of the UK) aligning at the same time as True North passes back through the True True North position.
Nae laddie, none o' your Southern upstarts wi' such an important rising. 'Twill be the original henge at Skara Brae.
https://www.uk-gov-to-relocate-to-Skara-Brae-and-appoint-rightful-King.org.uk
(Know ye that the 's' in https stands for Scotland!)
Nae laddie, none o' your Southern upstarts wi' such an important rising. 'Twill be the original henge at Skara Brae.
Bah humbug. Some of my family are Scottish, so I amuse myself sometimes when stuff like Game of Thrones was popular by pointing out it was based on UK history. We once had a surfeit of Kings, but by a process of elimination, gradually whittled it down to 1. Scotland used to have something like 13-14 or more 'kings' from a variety of different races or cultures, with frequent consolidation attempts. Favorite example of M&A activity from this era, along with the arms race being a very old thing was this-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warwolf
Which I'd love to recreate. But if you're going to the trouble of building the world's largest trebuchet, you're going to want to see if it works. Also curious how a current tech-level trebuchet would compare. Anachronism FTW!
The Ness of Brodgar site there predates Stonehenge at around 3,000-3,500 years old. No sassenach newcomer is going to impress the immortal Gods, whatever the size of your, er ... trebuchet? Never haird it called that before, but let it pass.
Are you sure kings had been invented by then, anyway?
at some point the rotation would have to stop before it reverses....
Quite possibly not if the Dzhanibekov effect (https://rotations.berkeley.edu/a-tumbling-t-handle-in-space/) applies to the whole planet.
Mind you, we might want to hold on to something...
icon: my head after a couple of spin reversals.
"The OS divides the UK into 1km squares."
As part of The Register's Americanisation (I guess that should be "Americanization") its authors seem to have lost their awareness of UK vs GB distinctions.
The Ordnance Survey cover GB, not UK.
Northern Ireland is handled by Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland, a separate organisation.
Mapping on the island of Ireland is handled by both Ordnance Survey of Northern Ireland and Ordnance Survey Ireland working together as mapping on the island is defined via the Irish Grid:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_grid_reference_system
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
