Solstice Hoax?
The solstice is tonight. Kimberly came across this article in the Seattle Times stating that we will have the longest night for thousands of years. If true, this is extraordinary, but I couldn't find any other information about it anywhere on the internet. Could this be a solstice hoax?
Sorry to rain on your solstice, but it has already happened. According to NOAA, the solstice was this morning at 7:42 a.m. EST, or 4:42 a.m. on the left coast. I think that today is really the shortest day - and last night the longest night - of 2004.
What I've seen regarding the "longest night for thousands of year" (and I will confess that I haven't looked far) is that it has to do with the 41,000 year cycle of obliquity, the angle of the earth's axis relative to the sun, and that we're in the part of the cycle where that angle is becoming smaller, hence less extreme variations of day and night length at the solstices. I think it's sloppy journalism that there were no references given to back up this assertion, but it's the Seattle Times, not the one in NYC.
Posted by:Kimberly | December 21, 2004 at 09:51 PM
Oops, I got PM and AM mixed up.
I find it strange that we could have just come to the end of a 41,000 year cycle, and it was only reported in the Seattle Times. I've tried various searches in Google News and come up empty. I've also read a bit more about the 41,000-year obliquity cycle on the web, but the sites I've found (such as this one) say nothing about the cycle ending this year.
Posted by:Tvindy | December 21, 2004 at 10:10 PM
Even if it's true, they'd be measuring it in terms of a few cycles of krypton atoms, so aside from some ubergeeks at NOAA and a numerous dot.edu's having nerdgasms, nobody gon' know any different.
~Praise be to the distant sister sun,
Joyful as the silver planets run.
Seven maids move in seven time.
Sing the song the bells call, loudly chiming.
Ring out those bells.
Ring out, ring solstice bells.
Ring solstice bells.
Ring on, ring out.
Ring on, ring out.
- I. Anderson
Posted by:schmed | December 22, 2004 at 12:01 PM
So you're saying the general public should be denied nerdgasms?
Posted by:Tvindy | December 23, 2004 at 12:55 AM
Yeah. Without proper training, they wouldn't be capable of achievin' 'em and anyway, it'd be a shame to waste 'em.
I prefer having multiple sarcasms, but I get really sleepy afterwards.
Posted by:schmed | December 23, 2004 at 01:04 AM
...In nine months, Two words; Baby Boom
Posted by:WelderSteve | March 24, 2008 at 06:20 PM