WOW What A Bow!!!

+2! Or maybe we could have a board which Seanie cant get access to :lol:

The UK Weather World admin section!

Na seaine im only joking!

I know!

Weather is about the state of the atmosphere. Although rainbows and the other optical effects fit poorly into Astronomy, they fit even more poorly into weather. They are not weather phenomena. They are optical effects caused by the interaction of light from the sun or moon and the atmosphere. What ever that is it certainly isn't weather!

Atmospheric optics is no more weather than meteors or aurorea.............

I think there is a lack of understanding here!

Without sounding bitchy...

Atmospherics concern phenomenae that occur due to the presence of an atmosphere, and interaction of from external sources, some astronomical

Weather phenomenae occur within our atmosphere, from all kinds of forces - of nature.

Aurorae and meteors can be classified as atmospheric, as their origin is purely astronomical or astrophysical, and not from within or below our atmosphere.

Now, you might say "sure the bloody sun is causing rainbows". True, but rainbows don't come from the sun. Aurorae do. The sun just happens to be in the way while it is raining (for the most part). Therefore I'd put rainbows in the same class as other weather-based phenomenae, not atmospheric.

And Noctilucent Clouds have some rather strong evidence that their formation is, for the greater part, attributed to meteoroid dust in the highest levels of our atmosphere. If it wasn't for shooting stars, chances are we wouldn't have NLC's. Atmospheric.

Sun Pillars, Moon Halos, NLCs, even aurorae - Atmospheric

Rainbows, Clouds, Crepescular Rays, and even Sundogs - Weather.

Thats something I have often understood between the two - and its not made up.

So, I'll let Martin and Conor bash me up now!

Seanie.

Rite i will get the bat lol I didnt want to mention a 'weather section' but i think it would solve alot of problems

Although rainbows and the other optical effects fit poorly into Astronomy, they fit even more poorly into weather.

Rainbows and "normal" clouds are not regular astronomy as far as I'm concerned, no offence is meant here lads, posts about them need to be placed in the correct forum.
PLEASE GIVE US A WEATHER SECTION so we can avoid this from happening again..

I didnt want to mention a 'weather section' but i think it would solve alot of problems

That could still be an issue.

Idea:
It was mentioned before by someone to me, to mention to you guys that you should start a blog of your photographic endeavours. There are many free blog sites on the web (for those that don't know, its basically an online diary for 'everything'). There's nothing wrong, at all, with showing off! But, while you could post to your blogs to your hearts content, that would be the more relevant place (and other weather-based sites, as I have seen you both frequent) to put in the weather-related pictures, not here, per say.

We would then get to see more of your astronomy-based ones, and not have these bitching sessions over rainbows and clouds!

I know you guys like photography, as many others here do, but a line does have to be drawn as to what can be truly astronomical and what is not. It doesn't have to be taken as cencorship either, so please cut me some slack! These are an open boards, for everybody, but there is a specific theme going on in here!

Seanie.

I hope the outrageous dickie-bow gives me some brownie points for what I'm about to say ...

Now, I'm only expressing a personal opinion here and I'm not going to judge anyone or cast tacit dispertions... Bear with me...

You all know that I've taken a few images of asteroids and stitched them together as animations. I have probably four or five times the number that I posted. I figured that after about the fourth animation most folks had seen enough and I didn't want to get to the stage where folks became immune to the 'wonder' of how visibly mobile our solar system is. After all, you only need to see a white dot move across a star field 3 or 4 times before you get the picture. After that, there's a danger of the audience switching off.

Of course, there is a situation where I would post an animation that showed, say, an interesting asteroid animation. Perhaps one named after an Irish astronomer (Corvan, McConnel, Mckenna) etc becasue they have a further intrinsic local interest. Or perhaps the asteroid that will hit Athlone next Thursday tea-time.

But unless there is an intrinsic value, I won't post the usual suspects. By doing so, I also leave 'room' for others to post asteroid animations without fear of being ignored because folks had 'tuned out' of that topic. I would gladly view lots of asteroids animations from others but I would be happy to accept that some on the boards have no interest. Fair enough - its give and take, a free world, each to his own etc.

I'm not making a judgement here just telling you the decisions I made on posting my own brand of image. Take from it what you will - except critisism, because that it ain't.

As far as weather, atmospherics etc goes, personally I have no objection to them being posted in a relevent forum. Not because I don't want to see them but because I can empathise with those who might not want to see them.

Anhow, I'm off to trawl the net to see if I can find an image of a Leprauchaun dickie-bow

Dave