Obviously depends upon the weather!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6411991.stm

Might be problems in latter stages across much of southern Britain, and
NI & parts of Scotland might also be problematical, depending upon how
much high/medium cloud gets thrown forward across the upper ridge axis.

--
Martin Rowley
Bracknell

"Martin Rowley" m wrote in
message ...
Obviously depends upon the weather!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6411991.stm

Might be problems in latter stages across much of southern Britain, and NI
& parts of Scotland might also be problematical, depending upon how much
high/medium cloud gets thrown forward across the upper ridge axis.


I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this bit:

"He added that it was totally safe to observe and no protective filters
were needed because the Moon would actually be less bright than
during a normal full moon."
--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

Col wrote:
"Martin Rowley" m wrote in
message ...
Obviously depends upon the weather!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6411991.stm

Might be problems in latter stages across much of southern Britain, and NI
& parts of Scotland might also be problematical, depending upon how much
high/medium cloud gets thrown forward across the upper ridge axis.


I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this bit:

"He added that it was totally safe to observe and no protective filters
were needed because the Moon would actually be less bright than
during a normal full moon."

In fairness, my 8 year old son was a little concerned because he had
been warned about looking directly at the sun during last years (?)
partial eclipse. He assumed that any eclipse was dangerous to look at.

"Martin Rowley" m
wrote in message ...
Obviously depends upon the weather!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6411991.stm

Might be problems in latter stages across much of southern Britain,
and NI & parts of Scotland might also be problematical, depending
upon how much high/medium cloud gets thrown forward across the upper
ridge axis.

.... looking a lot better than it did earlier: Ci coming up into the SW
Approaches, but it looks a bit slower than on previous ideas - might be
only the far SW of Britain & Ireland that have problems with irregular
CuSc melting away for many elsewhere - probably persisting in the NW.

Martin.

"Neil" wrote in message
...


Col wrote:


I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this bit:

"He added that it was totally safe to observe and no protective filters
were needed because the Moon would actually be less bright than
during a normal full moon."

In fairness, my 8 year old son was a little concerned because he had been
warned about looking directly at the sun during last years (?) partial
eclipse. He assumed that any eclipse was dangerous to look at.

But your son is 8 years old and still learning about the world.
The BBC article is surely aimed at adults who must surely know
that the moon can never be too bright to look at safely.

--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 17:22:59 -0000, "Col"
wrote:

The BBC article is surely aimed at adults who must surely know
that the moon can never be too bright to look at safely.

Not these days...

[OT] Is any one else irritated by the phrase (or similar) 'Scientists
say...' as though scientists were something strange and alien? This
seems to be happening more and more.

--
Alan White
Mozilla Firefox and Forte Agent.
Twenty-eight miles NW of Glasgow, overlooking Lochs Long and Goil in Argyll, Scotland.
Webcam and weather:- http://windycroft.gt-britain.co.uk/weather

Alan White wrote:
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007 17:22:59 -0000, "Col"
wrote:

The BBC article is surely aimed at adults who must surely know
that the moon can never be too bright to look at safely.

Not these days...

[OT] Is any one else irritated by the phrase (or similar) 'Scientists
say...' as though scientists were something strange and alien? This
seems to be happening more and more.


It could be because scientists are seen as untrustworthy again ... that happens
from time to time ... the sixties ... mad cows ... etc. etc.

This does not mean that I hold that opinion, merely that it may be a reason.

--
Gianna

http://www.buchan-meteo.org.uk
* * * * * * *

Neil wrote:


Col wrote:
"Martin Rowley" m
wrote in message ...
Obviously depends upon the weather!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6411991.stm

Might be problems in latter stages across much of southern Britain,
and NI & parts of Scotland might also be problematical, depending
upon how much high/medium cloud gets thrown forward across the upper
ridge axis.


I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at this bit:

"He added that it was totally safe to observe and no protective filters
were needed because the Moon would actually be less bright than
during a normal full moon."

In fairness, my 8 year old son was a little concerned because he had
been warned about looking directly at the sun during last years (?)
partial eclipse. He assumed that any eclipse was dangerous to look at.


Comparison of visual magnitudes with the sun indicate that
the sun is some 465000 times brighter.


MH




" You're crap if you're not like Chris Tarrant! "

" You needed doing anway! "

" You haven't got enough power if you're not abusing it "

" But you're a gay icon! "

" This question is for 50 MILLION POUNDS! No pressure! "

" Laziness is intelligence "

" Christ is almost as real as Harry Potter "

" I suppose there's no chance of a bit of ... "

" You're not in control of the controls! "

" Yer all puffs, fast asleep a-bed while I'm still here drinking super
strength cider and still f***ing posting"
Paul "Arthur Thacker" Graham

In uk.sci.weather on Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Martin Rowley
m wrote :

Obviously depends upon the weather!

What, you mean it won't happen if it rains?
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham (change 'invalid83261' to 'blueyonder' to email me)

Clear skies here in Teignmouth at 18:30, although there is high cloud
in the skies to the South West of me.