Folks, For more info there is astory in the Wall Street Journal, Tursday, Dec. 15, 1999, p. 1 front & center. "The Last Full Moon of the Millenium Must be Momentous - Big, Bright and Close to the Earth. It could play tricks not seen in many a moon.", by Daniel Golden. I hope that some of you have an opportunity to read this. Richard Clifford *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
I'm late on this thread but I got this e- from my cousin that refers to the next moon. Sounds worth checking out! Peter Gengler Amazing Full Moon - December 22, For the first time in the life of anyone around today, we'll see a full moon occur on the winter solstice, Dec. 22nd, commonly called the first day of winter. Since a full moon on the winter solstice occurs in conjunction with a lunar perigee (point in the moon's orbit that is closest to Earth), the moon will appear about 14% larger than it does at apogee (the point in its elliptical orbit that is farthest from the Earth). Since the Earth is also several million miles closer to the sun at this time of the year than in the summer, sunlight striking the moon is about 7% stronger making it brighter. Also, this will be the closest perigee of the Moon of the year since the moon's orbit is constantly deforming. If the weather is clear and there is a snow cover where you live, it is believed that even car headlights will be superfluous. On December 21st, 1866 the Lakota Sioux took advantage of this combination of occurrences and staged a devastating retaliatory ambush on soldiers in Wyoming Territory. In layman's terms: It will be a super bright full moon, much more than the usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years! Our ancestors 133 years ago saw this. Our descendants 100 or so years from now will see this again *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
| For more info there is astory in the Wall Street Journal, Tursday, |Dec. 15, 1999, p. 1 front & center. "The Last Full Moon of the Millenium |Must be Momentous - Big, Bright and Close to the Earth. It could play |tricks not seen in many a moon.", by Daniel Golden. I hope that some of |you have an opportunity to read this. Richard Clifford Are you sure it was in the 15th paper? I just saw it in todays, the 16th, issue. It was an interesting article regardless of which day it appeared. But, notice that Paddlewise broke the story! 8-) If you did get the issue on the 15th and I got it on the 16th that would be interesting..... Later... Dan McCarty *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Chuck Holst wrote: >In reply to Matt Broze, I doubt that the moon's gravitational attraction >will set a 133-year record, since the moon reaches perigee once a month, >though it is true that perigee is not usually aligned with the sun. >(There would be a bigger pull on the earth if perigee coincided with the >new moon.) The spring tide will probably be a little bigger than usual, >but again, I doubt it will be a once in a century tide. I was working from info Ralph quoted (below) and I don't know its accuracy and this was the first I heard about this event. However, contrary to what Chuck said, it would seem to me that there would be more distortion of the earth itself during a full moon than a new moon because the sun and moon would be pulling from opposite directions in a sort of tug of war stretching it rather than acting together as during a new moon and just pulling it a little closer. Both ways will create big tides but I think the full moon is will deform the earth more, possibly setting off an earthquake that was nearly ready to let go anyway. In other words, the full moon just may be the last straw in the earthquake process. Like all predictions you will remember I said it if it even comes close to happening on the 22nd and (hopefully) will quickly forget I predicted it if nothing happens. So called "Psychics" get great mileage out of this quirk in human memory by making a lot of nebulous predictions and letting (or helping) us fill in the blanks with later reality of those few that could be even close. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com > I got this from a friend at UC/Davis who wrote: > > START QUOTED STUFF---------------------- > This comes from a fairly reliable source on campus. I'm not sure that > this > full moon will be so much brighter than other December full moons near > perigee, but still, it sounds like a record-setter and a remarkable > sight. > > This year will be the first full moon to occur on the winter solstice, > Dec > 22, commonly called the first day of winter. Since a full moon on the > winter solstice occurred in conjunction with a lunar perigee (point in > the > moon's orbit that is closest to Earth) The moon will appear about 14% > larger than it does at apogee (the point in its elliptical orbit that > is > farthest from the Earth) since the Earth is also several million miles > closer to the sun at this time of the year than in the summer, sunlight > striking the moon is about 7% stronger making it brighter. Also, this > will > be the closest perigee of the Moon of the year. On December 21st. 1866 > the > Lakota Sioux took advantage of this combination of occurrences and > staged a > devastating retaliatory ambush on soldiers in the Wyoming Territory. > > In laymen's terms it will be a super bright full moon, much more than > the > usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years! > > Our ancestors 133 years ago saw this. Our descendants 100 or so years > from > now will see this again. I hope someone else might find this > interesting! > Remember this will happen December 22, 1999. > ---------------------END QUOTED STUFF >>Matt Broze wrote: > >> Sounds like a perfect day for a big earthquake. The earth hasn't been tugged >> at this hard for 133 years. >Chuck Holst wrote: >Don't forget that 2000 will also be the year of the solar maximum, which >could affect phone service, satellites, and the power grid. So don't >throw out your old blubber lamp just yet. :-) >In reply to Matt Broze, I doubt that the moon's gravitational attraction >will set a 133-year record, since the moon reaches perigee once a month, >though it is true that perigee is not usually aligned with the sun. >(There would be a bigger pull on the earth if perigee coincided with the >new moon.) The spring tide will probably be a little bigger than usual, >but again, I doubt it will be a once in a century tide. >Chuck Holst ------------------------------ *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Matt wrote: > nothing happens. So called "Psychics" get great mileage out of this quirk in > human memory by making a lot of nebulous predictions and letting (or > helping) us fill in the blanks with later reality of those few that could be > even close. When I was in the business of international economic forecasting we had a saying in our research firm about making accurate predictions. In making a forecast give either the percentage change or the year but not both. :-) Our multinational company clients also had a saying. If looking for a range of predictions just call different people in our company. I think that rates a double :-) :-) ralph diaz -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Ralph Diaz . . . Folding Kayaker newsletter PO Box 0754, New York, NY 10024 Tel: 212-724-5069; E-mail: rdiaz_at_ix.netcom.com "Where's your sea kayak?"----"It's in the bag." ----------------------------------------------------------------------- *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Sorry for being off topic, Bob, I just threw it out as an aside (and maybe to record my just formed idea--and quite possibly uninformed prediction--in a public place) but it snowballed into a topic. I'm sorry about that I wasn't thinking. I do think I know the reason there are two tidal bulges though, at least if I remember it right from Willard Bascom's "Waves and Beaches". It is because the earth is acted on by the moon/earth force of gravity more than the more distant water on the far side of the earth and less than the water on the moon side. If I was talking about tides I would probably have been on topic but also I was speculating that gravitational forces operating from both sides will distort the earth itself more than a force operating from only one side (since the earth can move some to that side). I may well be wrong about that though as I haven't carefully though this through nor read anything that made sense to me pro or con yet. The tides are something Chuck brought up in claiming that both forces operating from the same side would be more likely to cause higher tides. I would love to have someone carefully explain why I am wrong about this but since this is off topic maybe you can do it in a personal post and we can spare the rest of paddlewise the details. But, Bob, why so hostile? There seems to be lots of uninformed suggestions floating around on paddlewise (or anywhere else for that matter) do they all bother you this much? To me one of then nice things about paddlewise is that someone is usually willing to provide the uninformed (and recently misinformed) members of this list a better explanation. Matt Broze http://www.marinerkayaks.com -----Original Message----- From: Bob Myers <bob_at_intelenet.net> To: Matt Broze <mkayaks_at_oz.net>; Paddlewise <PaddleWise_at_lists.intelenet.net> Date: Thursday, December 16, 1999 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] One bright thing pre Y2K >Matt, > >You don't understand tides in the least if you believe this. > >Consider the question: why are there 2 lunar tidal bulges, >one on each side of the Earth? If it's just simple matter of the >Moon "pulling" on one side, why the bulge on the opposite side? >Tides are usually every 12 hours, not every 24. > >Tides *always* are stretching forces, even with only one >tidal body, or with two on the same side. Elementary physics, >look it up. > >And please take your spurious earthquake prediction speculations >to some place where it is on topic. This is not the right >forum to discuss this, even if there was the slightest merit >to your uninformed suggestions. > > > > > > >On Dec 16, 16:35, "Matt Broze" wrote: >} Subject: Re: [Paddlewise] One bright thing pre Y2K >> Chuck Holst wrote: >> >In reply to Matt Broze, I doubt that the moon's gravitational attraction >> >will set a 133-year record, since the moon reaches perigee once a month, >> >though it is true that perigee is not usually aligned with the sun. >> >(There would be a bigger pull on the earth if perigee coincided with the >> >new moon.) The spring tide will probably be a little bigger than usual, >> >but again, I doubt it will be a once in a century tide. >> >> I was working from info Ralph quoted (below) and I don't know its accuracy >> and this was the first I heard about this event. However, contrary to what >> Chuck said, it would seem to me that there would be more distortion of the >> earth itself during a full moon than a new moon because the sun and moon >> would be pulling from opposite directions in a sort of tug of war stretching >> it rather than acting together as during a new moon and just pulling it a >> little closer. Both ways will create big tides but I think the full moon is >> will deform the earth more, possibly setting off an earthquake that was >> nearly ready to let go anyway. In other words, the full moon just may be the >> last straw in the earthquake process. >> Like all predictions you will remember I said it if it even comes close to >> happening on the 22nd and (hopefully) will quickly forget I predicted it if >> nothing happens. So called "Psychics" get great mileage out of this quirk in >> human memory by making a lot of nebulous predictions and letting (or >> helping) us fill in the blanks with later reality of those few that could be >> even close. >> Matt Broze >> http://www.marinerkayaks.com >> >> > I got this from a friend at UC/Davis who wrote: >> > >> > START QUOTED STUFF---------------------- >> > This comes from a fairly reliable source on campus. I'm not sure that >> > this >> > full moon will be so much brighter than other December full moons near >> > perigee, but still, it sounds like a record-setter and a remarkable >> > sight. >> > >> > This year will be the first full moon to occur on the winter solstice, >> > Dec >> > 22, commonly called the first day of winter. Since a full moon on the >> > winter solstice occurred in conjunction with a lunar perigee (point in >> > the >> > moon's orbit that is closest to Earth) The moon will appear about 14% >> > larger than it does at apogee (the point in its elliptical orbit that >> > is >> > farthest from the Earth) since the Earth is also several million miles >> > closer to the sun at this time of the year than in the summer, sunlight >> > striking the moon is about 7% stronger making it brighter. Also, this >> > will >> > be the closest perigee of the Moon of the year. On December 21st. 1866 >> > the >> > Lakota Sioux took advantage of this combination of occurrences and >> > staged a >> > devastating retaliatory ambush on soldiers in the Wyoming Territory. >> > >> > In laymen's terms it will be a super bright full moon, much more than >> > the >> > usual AND it hasn't happened this way for 133 years! >> > >> > Our ancestors 133 years ago saw this. Our descendants 100 or so years >> > from >> > now will see this again. I hope someone else might find this >> > interesting! >> > Remember this will happen December 22, 1999. >> > ---------------------END QUOTED STUFF >> >>Matt Broze wrote: >> > >> >> Sounds like a perfect day for a big earthquake. The earth hasn't been >> tugged >> >> at this hard for 133 years. >> >> >Chuck Holst wrote: >> >Don't forget that 2000 will also be the year of the solar maximum, which >> >could affect phone service, satellites, and the power grid. So don't >> >throw out your old blubber lamp just yet. :-) >> >> >In reply to Matt Broze, I doubt that the moon's gravitational attraction >> >will set a 133-year record, since the moon reaches perigee once a month, >> >though it is true that perigee is not usually aligned with the sun. >> >(There would be a bigger pull on the earth if perigee coincided with the >> >new moon.) The spring tide will probably be a little bigger than usual, >> >but again, I doubt it will be a once in a century tide. >> >> >Chuck Holst >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *************************************************************************** >> PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not >> to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission >> Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net >> Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net >> Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ >> *************************************************************************** >>-- End of excerpt from "Matt Broze" > > *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
Last week I said: >> In reply to Matt Broze, I doubt that the moon's gravitational attraction will set a 133-year record, since the moon reaches perigee once a month, though it is true that perigee is not usually aligned with the sun. (There would be a bigger pull on the earth if perigee coincided with the new moon.) The spring tide will probably be a little bigger than usual, but again, I doubt it will be a once in a century tide. >> Sunday I looked up explanations of what causes the tides in my copy of Bascomb's Waves and Beaches and at a couple of places on the Web, and I have to confess that they do not support my contention that spring tides should be higher during a new moon than during a full moon. It looks like they should be approximately equal -- at least in the middle of the ocean. As for the moon affecting the timing of some earthquakes (in the sense of being the last straw in a system ready to rip), I think it has been the subject of legitimate scientific speculation. Since the moon causes the surface of the earth to flex several inches twice a day, it does not seem to me an entirely unreasonable speculation. As Alex said, just look at the effects of gravitational flexing on Io! For some debunking of the solstice moon phenomenon, see: http://www.cnn.com/1999/TECH/space/12/17/moon.show.ap/index.html http://www.skypub.com/news/news.shtml Io news: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/galileo/ Chuck Holst *************************************************************************** PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - All postings copyright the author and not to be reproduced outside PaddleWise without author's permission Submissions: paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net Subscriptions: paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net Website: http://www.paddlewise.net/ ***************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:06 PDT