So what will now happen in Scotland at the general election? – politicalbetting.com

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Shows the difference between a landmass where a range of mountains faces the oceanic west coast and the seawater is relatively cold, and one where a huge low lying plain allows oceanic air from an unusually warm sea to permeate thousands of miles into the interior.

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

Emerald said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Amazingly Lima is on the same latitude as Bangkok yet couldnt have a more different climate. It is more like a grey and depressing Los Angeles.

Lima also has a massive crime problem, and a lot of ugly slums. Not a great place

You can see why the Incas chose Cusco for their capital: 2335 hours of annual sun, 1000 more than Lima

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdw_OCvy0WY

Slightly surprised by how sunny Switzerland seems though.

Big contrasts in Switzerland because of the Alps and Jura. North of the mountains - e.g. in Zurich - the sunshine hours are terrible, worse than London. In the Ticino on the rain shadow of the full range, and even more so in the upper Rhone Valley (Sion) which is shadowed on both sides by the Bernese Oberland and Pennine Alps, it's very sunny.

Amazing contrast if you're driving from Interlaken on the North slopes to say Brig in the upper Rhone. Dark looming forests, lush green pastures, often grey skies, then over the top and it's parched yellow grassland, steep vineyards and the humming of crickets.

Nigelb said:

First graders at a Wisconsin school have been banned from singing “Rainbowland” by Miley Cyrus and Dolly Parton at a concert after school officials said the song “could be deemed controversial”
https://mobile.twitter.com/WSJ/status/1641055139543883776

I remember the glory days of the early 2000’s when Americans defined themselves by how different they were to the Taliban.

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Better beer? Though I'm looking out of my Stopfordian window at blue skies atm.

Agree on Lima; it's a grim old scene there.

Cookie said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdw_OCvy0WY

It's largely a function of being on the west coast, with hills behind. Prevailing damp winds lead to cloud.

Slightly surprised by how sunny Switzerland seems though.

If I could choose a climate, it would probably be Yorkshire's. Specifically, the Yorkshire Dales. It's quite instructive to travel from North Lancashire to North Yorkshire; you can tell when you cross the county boundary (near enough) because the tone of green changes from North Lancashire's deep dark green to North Yorkshire's more subtley beige hues - largely due to the difference in rainfall.
But hey, NW England is pretty damn good too. When I was a child we used to fly often to the south coast of Spain. My favourite bit of the holiday would be descending through the clouds above Manchester Airport and the vivid lushness of everywhere after a week in Spain. Made you feel good to be home.

Just to blow Stockport's trumpet again, the media over the past year have been full of articles about how brilliant it is. Everyone's moving there. @Leon will be trading Bloomsbury for Heaton Moor within 12 months, I'm sure.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stockport-lancashire-best-place-to-live-uk-2023-dx5c3vk20

(Though the 'Lancashire' in that URL rankles slightly.)

Not sure is whoever wrote that has been down the Chestergate on a Friday night. Stocky is still rum.

TimS said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdw_OCvy0WY

Slightly surprised by how sunny Switzerland seems though.

Big contrasts in Switzerland because of the Alps and Jura. North of the mountains - e.g. in Zurich - the sunshine hours are terrible, worse than London. In the Ticino on the rain shadow of the full range, and even more so in the upper Rhone Valley (Sion) which is shadowed on both sides by the Bernese Oberland and Pennine Alps, it's very sunny.

Amazing contrast if you're driving from Interlaken on the North slopes to say Brig in the upper Rhone. Dark looming forests, lush green pastures, often grey skies, then over the top and it's parched yellow grassland, steep vineyards and the humming of crickets.

I know that contrast well. It's especially vivid if you go via the newish train tunnel from Zurich to Ticino. You enter the tunnel in that dark grey greenness, like a slightly warmer Yorkshire or Cumbria, you exit the tunnel into Mediterranean light. I know which I prefer

Cookie said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Indeed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdw_OCvy0WY

It's largely a function of being on the west coast, with hills behind. Prevailing damp winds lead to cloud.

Slightly surprised by how sunny Switzerland seems though.

If I could choose a climate, it would probably be Yorkshire's. Specifically, the Yorkshire Dales. It's quite instructive to travel from North Lancashire to North Yorkshire; you can tell when you cross the county boundary (near enough) because the tone of green changes from North Lancashire's deep dark green to North Yorkshire's more subtley beige hues - largely due to the difference in rainfall.
But hey, NW England is pretty damn good too. When I was a child we used to fly often to the south coast of Spain. My favourite bit of the holiday would be descending through the clouds above Manchester Airport and the vivid lushness of everywhere after a week in Spain. Made you feel good to be home.

Just to blow Stockport's trumpet again, the media over the past year have been full of articles about how brilliant it is. Everyone's moving there. @Leon will be trading Bloomsbury for Heaton Moor within 12 months, I'm sure.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stockport-lancashire-best-place-to-live-uk-2023-dx5c3vk20

(Though the 'Lancashire' in that URL rankles slightly.)

Most Stopfordians I know would object more to the headline than to the URL.

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

Certainly shows why when "Minnie" decided she wanted to move to the coast I insisted on the south coast...

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It makes a bit more sense when you realise Lisbon is on the same latitude as New York but even allowing for this there is still a big difference, caused almost entirely by 2 factors: the lack of a West coast mountain range in Europe and the North Atlantic Drift.

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

A couple of weeks ago I started getting up early to go for a walk before work, because I wasn't getting enough time to do it at lunchtime and never felt like it in the evening. Hopefully it helps.

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

Most people wouldnt realise NE USA is as sunny as Italy.

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

I don't think we've moved inside to quite that extent! Young people in my experience still like the opportunity to get outside and enjoy a sunny day. Even in cities. Visit any urban park on a sunny day and see.

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

Driver said:

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

A couple of weeks ago I started getting up early to go for a walk before work, because I wasn't getting enough time to do it at lunchtime and never felt like it in the evening. Hopefully it helps.

I was briefly doing that.
However, the hour change has completely wiped me out! Really struggling to wake up much before new 7.30.
This happens every year. Takes me weeks to get over the clocks going forward.

That said, the clock in my car is now right. My indolence has paid off!

CarlottaVance said:

New First Minister Humza Yousaf has turned the Health Secretary role (his job until this week) into the NHS Recovery and Health Secretary role

Not sure that's a great reflection on his legacy

https://twitter.com/chrismusson/status/1641073954608627714

Angela Constance, who has been Minister for Drug policy since 2020, is the new Justice Minister. Yet another case of falling upwards given the catastrophic position Scotland remains in with drug deaths. That said, almost anyone would be an improvement on Keith Brown.

Leon said:

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

There was actually a window of opportunity to fly abroad in December.

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Surely you realise the whole thing is an infantile hoax by now? Why on earth would aliens have travelled light years to earth to annoy the US Navy with some light blobs? Complete cringe.

Leon said:

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

I have a light box though I haven't used it much recently. Natural light is a great benefit to people with depression and there is of course a distinct lack of it in the winter.

Leon said:

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

There are disadvantages too, though. I was in LA once talking to someone who had just moved from Washington DC. He said that he found LA's weather incredibly demotivating as he had an office job, and, when he woke up every morning, went out to his balcony and felt the gorgeous California sunshine on his face, he had to force himself to waste eight hours in a strip-lit cave.

I can empathise - I have to force myself to work on sunny days, and often put as much as possible off until the evening.

On the other hand, another friend from sunnier climes usually walked on the shady side of the street, and thought nothing about wasting a whole week of sunny days when we travelled together, and always made sure every room he got was as dark as possible.

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

This map does not show you how brutal the winters can be in parts of the US though. My cousin is a talented chemist and got a job out in Fargo. He lasted one winter. And he is from St Helens.

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

It's because he doesn't want to be upstaged.

How else explain a comment like this: "People are saying they’re seeing UFOs. Do I believe it? Not particularly."

But I won't be surprised if he reverse ferrets, and whatever he was saying before he says it was actually Biden who was saying it.

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

NickPalmer said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Is there a generational change in how much people care whether it's sunny or not? As young people become more and more urban and more and more online, do they care much what it's like out there, apart from merely keeping warm enough not to need to switch the heating on? I know we all say it's very important to have long walks and lots of fresh air etc., but how many actually do it?

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

My dad has this, and unfortunately isn't well enough these days to travel (otherwise he'd probably be in Gran Canaria as I type). Guess it's maybe not a heritable trait, as I'm not massively arsed either way. Or rather, I like variety in my weather. March and April can be a trying pair of months though - I genuinely don't know how I would have coped in Lockdown I had the weather not been so benign.

How would you have coped without a garden. Remember it was illegal to sit on park benches.

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

I was suggesting his own origins may lie in great void beyond the mundane, like Dennis Rodman or Michael Fabricant.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JsAQj36gCU

Luckyguy1983 said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Surely you realise the whole thing is an infantile hoax by now? Why on earth would aliens have travelled light years to earth to annoy the US Navy with some light blobs? Complete cringe.

It's a lot deeper and more complex than that. The hard evidence of visitation is minimal and pathetic, I entirely agree, but the amount of strange behaviour in the American Establishment remains bizarre

And it is still going on. This is from yesterday

"Senator Gillibrand asks Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin if he will ensure the Pentagon’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) will be fully funded during today’s Department of Defense budget request hearing.

#ufotwitter #ufo #uap h/t:
@Akam1129"

https://twitter.com/UAPJames/status/1640840261403123715?s=20

The AARO is the new agency set up specifically to look for UFOs/UAPs and explain them

If it is all a hoax (and it may well be), who are they hoaxing, and why are they doing it? And how have they organised it so cleverly, over so many years?

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc
The U.K. will be the first new nation to join the CPTPP since it was set up in 2018.
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/

Another success for Rishi, albeit a lot of the work was done under Johnson.

Dare I say it, but CP-TPP membership was Liz Truss’s flagship project as trade minister and foreign secretary. Huzzah for Liz Truss!

Fair comment and the fury from remainers on twitter is a sight to behold

Sunak taking us closer to Europe and Macron's EPC as supported by Truss, plus the announcement we are to join the CPTPP opens immense new trading possibilities and ends rejoining the EU as a practical proposition

Indeed in this weeks Deltapoll rejoin led by just 1% - 42/41

Hardly ends rejoin. We would have to end our membership of CPTPP to rejoin just like we ended our prerential trade arrangements with the Commonwealth to join the Common Market. If the benefits of being in the EU SM were bigger than those of being in CPTPP - which they probably would be by a significant margin - I would assume we would happily switch.

Unfortunately rejoining for those who want to rejoin the time is ebbing away as both the EPC and CPTPP point to the future of our trading relationships worldwide

This is not an either or argument it is the benefits of both

NickPalmer said:

Leon said:

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

Yes, I expect you're right. I'm an extreme case the other way (I like being indoors, dislike hot weather and have thick curtains to prevent being woken by early light), and my mum had inverse SAD - she loved winter, and would really feel bad in when it was hot. Perhaps there's a gene for it.

I had my biennial healthcheck a few weeks ago and the one bad thing coming out of the blood tests was a significant deficiency in Vitamin D. I wonder what proportion of Brits have that by February.

TimS said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc
The U.K. will be the first new nation to join the CPTPP since it was set up in 2018.
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/

Another success for Rishi, albeit a lot of the work was done under Johnson.

Dare I say it, but CP-TPP membership was Liz Truss’s flagship project as trade minister and foreign secretary. Huzzah for Liz Truss!

Fair comment and the fury from remainers on twitter is a sight to behold

Sunak taking us closer to Europe and Macron's EPC as supported by Truss, plus the announcement we are to join the CPTPP opens immense new trading possibilities and ends rejoining the EU as a practical proposition

Indeed in this weeks Deltapoll rejoin led by just 1% - 42/41

Hardly ends rejoin. We would have to end our membership of CPTPP to rejoin just like we ended our prerential trade arrangements with the Commonwealth to join the Common Market. If the benefits of being in the EU SM were bigger than those of being in CPTPP - which they probably would be by a significant margin - I would assume we would happily switch.

Like a lot of things it will depend on the degree of regulatory alignment between the CPTPP members and EU single market over the next few years, as well of course as regulatory divergence between the EU and UK (which I expect to be minimal).

I doubt we will ever rejoin the full EU though. Even the Lib Dems have given up on that. I was in a Q&A session this morning with Sarah Olney who's now their treasury spokesperson and the most she could suggest was that long term they'd like the UK to be back in the customs union. We really need the EU to embrace a new two-speed solution, Macron style, so that there is an off the shelf arrangement that suits not just the UK but a few other countries (like Ukraine and Georgia, possibly Switzerland, Iceland and Norway).

Macron's EPC is already being embraced with the next meeting this year in Spain and next year in London

If we as a country could embrace the benefits of both the EPC and CPTPP it would be of immense value to our trading position

It is encouraging if the lib dems are following a similar route

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc
The U.K. will be the first new nation to join the CPTPP since it was set up in 2018.
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/

Another success for Rishi, albeit a lot of the work was done under Johnson.

Dare I say it, but CP-TPP membership was Liz Truss’s flagship project as trade minister and foreign secretary. Huzzah for Liz Truss!

Fair comment and the fury from remainers on twitter is a sight to behold

Sunak taking us closer to Europe and Macron's EPC as supported by Truss, plus the announcement we are to join the CPTPP opens immense new trading possibilities and ends rejoining the EU as a practical proposition

Indeed in this weeks Deltapoll rejoin led by just 1% - 42/41

Hardly ends rejoin. We would have to end our membership of CPTPP to rejoin just like we ended our prerential trade arrangements with the Commonwealth to join the Common Market. If the benefits of being in the EU SM were bigger than those of being in CPTPP - which they probably would be by a significant margin - I would assume we would happily switch.

Unfortunately rejoining for those who want to rejoin the time is ebbing away as both the EPC and CPTPP point to the future of our trading relationships worldwide

This is not an either or argument it is the benefits of both

Because as a country we are more likely to prosper by deepening service trade with our neighbours rather than trying to overcome economic gravity and comparative advantage at the same time.

I simply do not agree we have to rejoin the EU to achieve those benefits

This is the future in Europe and the CPTPP

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trusss-yes-boosts-macrons-new-european-forum-initiative-2022-10-03/

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

The Basque country is notoriously damp and mizzly though. I think the most arresting one is almost the whole of Italy, with its Mediterranean climate and dolce vita. Worse than most of the US.

Yes, the French Riviera is sunnier than almost all of Italy.

That said, the French Riviera has probably the best climate of anywhere in the world.

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

This map does not show you how brutal the winters can be in parts of the US though. My cousin is a talented chemist and got a job out in Fargo. He lasted one winter. And he is from St Helens.

Oh indeed. And the scary changes in temperature as well. I was in Chicago one April where it went from a summer like 23C with sunshine to about -10C and an ice storm in 36 hours. Horrible

I generally like the dry, warm, sunny, reliable climate of the southwest American states, and they don't have the intense humidity of the East Coast/Deep South, either

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Because, as is becoming ever clearer with recent events, there is NOTHING out there. Nothing. Just misidentified birds, starts (out of focus as triangles), balloons etc. All those posters who said we were on the brink of a big revelation have been utterly wrong.

Anabobazina said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

The Basque country is notoriously damp and mizzly though. I think the most arresting one is almost the whole of Italy, with its Mediterranean climate and dolce vita. Worse than most of the US.

Yes, the French Riviera is sunnier than almost all of Italy.

That said, the French Riviera has probably the best climate of anywhere in the world.

It's gorgeous but I'm not sure it is the absolute best. The Italian lakes, the Algarve, the Croatian coast down to Albania, much of coastal Greece, they are generally wet enough to be green but sunny enough to be mmmm

And it also depends if you want seasons, or you want to skip cold rainy winters altogether

Burgessian said:

malcolmg said:

Cicero said:

I think the SNP activists have made a choice that they prefer to be a "progressive", i.e. left wing party, rather than a national movement of both left and right. That more or less guarantees that voters who believe in liberal economics will have no reason to vote for them and businesses no reason to fund them, and equally voters who are left wing may choose to vote for an actual, "genuine", left wing party, i.e. Labour.

Independence as an issue has fallen in popularity, and the sense of the inevitability or even desirability of separation has fallen quite sharply (somewhat ironically, this seems to be a result of the negative impact of the Brexit separation).

The SNP was a political juggernaut, but a combination of bad judgement, an air of sleaze and real questions about the viability of independence seems set to give the party a significant knock back at the next GE, though FPTP might save several SNP MPs. Come the next Scottish Parliament elections however, the lack of funds and turmoil in the party´s organization, after the departure of Murell, not to mention growing personal and political divisions, as well as the passing of a political generation, could even see the Nats knocked out of power at Holyrood.

[cue: Ayrshire´s little ray of sunshine in total fulmination mode]

You have a high opinion of your perceptions but sadly lacking in reading of people and myself in particular. The desirability is still there but many realise it will not be the SNP that achieve it , certainly in current shape. Westminster is of no importance to Scotland, the deal is in Holyrood and likliehood is that people will bite their tongues and vote SNP / ALBA or ISP and so instead of loads of duff unionists getting the list seats , many will go to independence parties and give them a big majority. However the fly in the ointment is Useless and the old Murrells mafia who currently run the cartel. We shall see if they choose to live or die by the sword. Long time till 2026 if Useless avoids getting booted out.
The first chance to kick these lowlifes is the foreign vote for Westminster.

I think the SNP may well receive a gubbing at the next GE. But Holyrood in 2026 is a different kettle of fish. By then we'll be into a mid-term Starmer Govt which may well impact SLAB's chances and the SNP may have replaced Yousaf with someone electable. But really, who knows?

I agree and think that is the way it will go. Key at Holyrood will be if the duffers vote SNP1/2 again and allow shedloads of unionists in or the idiots get over their ego's and use 2nd vote for an independence party. That was key re sturgeon having no interest in Independence last time as she promoted people to vote for unionists to get into Holyrood by urging people to waste their second vote on SNP.

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Because, as is becoming ever clearer with recent events, there is NOTHING out there. Nothing. Just misidentified birds, starts (out of focus as triangles), balloons etc. All those posters who said we were on the brink of a big revelation have been utterly wrong.

So it was all a big psy-ops, or a hoax, or just a lot of politicians and intelligence bigwigs going a bit Cold War mad? Or what? A stunt to freak out the Chinese?

Genuine questions, btw. I have always focused on the strange behaviour of the American elite not the frankly dismal "evidence" of actual UFOs/UAPs

Just US military paranoia about stuff in their airspace they can't quite explain.
See also the balloons.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sandpit said:

DavidL said:

Nigelb said:

Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc
The U.K. will be the first new nation to join the CPTPP since it was set up in 2018.
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/

Another success for Rishi, albeit a lot of the work was done under Johnson.

Dare I say it, but CP-TPP membership was Liz Truss’s flagship project as trade minister and foreign secretary. Huzzah for Liz Truss!

Fair comment and the fury from remainers on twitter is a sight to behold

Sunak taking us closer to Europe and Macron's EPC as supported by Truss, plus the announcement we are to join the CPTPP opens immense new trading possibilities and ends rejoining the EU as a practical proposition

Indeed in this weeks Deltapoll rejoin led by just 1% - 42/41

Hardly ends rejoin. We would have to end our membership of CPTPP to rejoin just like we ended our prerential trade arrangements with the Commonwealth to join the Common Market. If the benefits of being in the EU SM were bigger than those of being in CPTPP - which they probably would be by a significant margin - I would assume we would happily switch.

Unfortunately rejoining for those who want to rejoin the time is ebbing away as both the EPC and CPTPP point to the future of our trading relationships worldwide

This is not an either or argument it is the benefits of both

Because as a country we are more likely to prosper by deepening service trade with our neighbours rather than trying to overcome economic gravity and comparative advantage at the same time.

I simply do not agree we have to rejoin the EU to achieve those benefits

This is the future in Europe and the CPTPP

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trusss-yes-boosts-macrons-new-european-forum-initiative-2022-10-03/

Long, long way to the Indo-Pacific region, though. Although membership might benefit the business of my younger son.
Elder son is fed up already with the difficulties now involved in trading with Europe.

For clarification the present members of the CPTPP are

Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam

UK will make it 12

CPTPP has a combined GDP of 9 trillion and 500 million people in 2021

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

The Basque country is notoriously damp and mizzly though. I think the most arresting one is almost the whole of Italy, with its Mediterranean climate and dolce vita. Worse than most of the US.

Yes, the French Riviera is sunnier than almost all of Italy.

That said, the French Riviera has probably the best climate of anywhere in the world.

It's gorgeous but I'm not sure it is the absolute best. The Italian lakes, the Algarve, the Croatian coast down to Albania, much of coastal Greece, they are generally wet enough to be green but sunny enough to be mmmm

And it also depends if you want seasons, or you want to skip cold rainy winters altogether

I always think that there is a benefit living somewhere shit because it makes you appreciate leaving the place even more.

Off to Austria next week.

Andy_JS said:

MattW said:

Theuniondivvie said:

MattW said:

For on Street Chargers we need to avoid this type of thing (London), which is diabolical. They need to be in the road between the parking spaces.

Lots of flattened or dented chgargers?

It needs something strong enough either side seriously to damage any car driven by a wombat who hits it. No more patience any more.

There was a weird one in Denmark Hill recently where a young mum drove her car into a cycle hangar and put her own baby in hospital in the accident. At 2:30pm in the afternoon.

Cycle hangar had replaced a parking space which would have had an SUV or similar in it. And the locals are blaming the dangerous cycle hangar.

https://southwarknews.co.uk/news/baby-hospitalised-in-collision-with-bike-hanger-that-council-was-warned-could-be-dangerous/

Tom Scott's latest video is sort of on this subject. The end of the video is the most interesting bit wrt electric vehicles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voYdl7IFZsM

That's like the car park in Thunderbirds:

https://thunderbirds.fandom.com/wiki/Parola_Sands_Automobile_Park

So - we know what we have lost from single market/customs union membership. SO what will we gain from membership of CPTPP? I want specifics please.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

For clarification the present members of the CPTPP are

Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam

UK will make it 12

CPTPP has a combined GDP of 9 trillion and 500 million people in 2021

Our exports of goods and services to the EU are 5 times our exports of goods and services to this group of countries. Our exports to just one EU country (Germany) are of the same magnitude as our exports to all of these countries.

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Because, as is becoming ever clearer with recent events, there is NOTHING out there. Nothing. Just misidentified birds, starts (out of focus as triangles), balloons etc. All those posters who said we were on the brink of a big revelation have been utterly wrong.

So it was all a big psy-ops, or a hoax, or just a lot of politicians and intelligence bigwigs going a bit Cold War mad? Or what? A stunt to freak out the Chinese?

Genuine questions, btw. I have always focused on the strange behaviour of the American elite not the frankly dismal "evidence" of actual UFOs/UAPs

Some folk involved with the Skinwalker nonsense (endless TV shows) and a few who have made a career our of bullshit (Luis Elizondo) etc and it caught the attention of a few senators who ought to know better. The military are quite happy to have 'threats' that keep the budget increasing.

The fact that people started seeing 'saucers' after Kenneth Arnold in 1947 was revealing - Arnold never said that he saw saucers, he said what he saw moved like saucers. And yet suddening people were reporting saucers.

Its a lovely idea that alien races have travelled to Earth and every now and again we catch sight of an alien space craft, sadly the evidence is damning that they haven't and we don't.

If you are ever interested in how a UFO flap can arise from nothing and be sustained for years, read 'In Alien Heat - The Warminster Mystery Revisited' by Steve Dewy and Joh n Ries.

https://amazon.co.uk/Alien-Heat-Warminster-Mystery-Revisited/dp/1933665025/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2NF35PR0TF8X7&keywords=In+alien+heat&qid=1680103272&sprefix=in+alien+heat%2Caps%2C64&sr=8-1

Its a great book about the Warminster UFO story (if you don't know - huge UFO flap in the mid 1960's through to the mid 70's). The book is really about people and how flaps start and sustain. I have a personal interest because I am hugely into the Fortean and live in Warminster...

Emerald said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

The Basque country is notoriously damp and mizzly though. I think the most arresting one is almost the whole of Italy, with its Mediterranean climate and dolce vita. Worse than most of the US.

Yes, the French Riviera is sunnier than almost all of Italy.

That said, the French Riviera has probably the best climate of anywhere in the world.

It's gorgeous but I'm not sure it is the absolute best. The Italian lakes, the Algarve, the Croatian coast down to Albania, much of coastal Greece, they are generally wet enough to be green but sunny enough to be mmmm

And it also depends if you want seasons, or you want to skip cold rainy winters altogether

Surely the canary islands have the best climate in the world. Highs around 70 in winter 80 to 85 in summer with abundant sunshine year round.

Certainly very pleasant if you pick the right spot on the right island. But a bit dry and desert like

My ideal climate would be nine months of consistent blue skies and warmth - 25-32C every day and warm enough to drink outside easily and comfortably in shirtsleeves. If it rains it is brief and usually at 4am. Then a month of a colourful wet autumn, a month of a sharp snowy winter, and a month of pretty spring

Of course this climate does not exist

Leon said:

Emerald said:

Leon said:

Anabobazina said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Emerald said:

Having said that if you lived in fort william you would certainly notice it raining a lot. West highlands are a whole different ballgame.

Yes, Manchester gets a lot of, as you say, raindays, but not actually an excessive amount of rain. It's drier than Plymouth and considerably drier than Swansea and Glasgow.
ISTR there are only around 50 days a year on which it's possible to see the top of Ben Nevis.

The problem with NW England (and most of the British Isles) is not so much the rainfall - there are many many much rainier places - it is the lack of sunshine hours. Few places in the world are as grey and sunless as northern/western Britain. The Aleutian Islands maybe. That's about it

Manchester gets 1265 hours of sun a year (and it is worse further north)

Even Greenland is sunnier, even the Falkland Islands are sunnier. Even Reykjavik

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_sunshine_duration

But IN YOUR FACE Torshavn, Bergen and Tromso.

I do like a bit of sunshine. But order that list of cities by total yearly sunshine; there is a very inverse correlation between cities I would like to live in and amount of sunshine. I don't know whether that's just a human tendency to value what one has over what one could have or whether gloom and quality of life are both influenced by a third factor, or less probably, whether gloom promotes quality of life.

Yes, who would want to live in sunny Barcelona, Rome, Lisbon or Lugano, when you can live in the year round dishcloth greyness of Stockport?

One noticeable oddity is the utter sunlessness of Lima, Peru: at 1230 hours it is even grimmer than Manchester, despite being near the equator and all that

I can vouch for this. I've spent a fair bit of time in Lima and the climate is horrifically depressing. Grey sea fogs half the year, and cloudy mild dankness the other half

Also shows just how cloudy much of North and Central Europe is: Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Frankfurt, Luxembourg, Amsterdam, Prague, Sarajevo etc - all fewer than 1,800 hours per year or roughly 5 per day.

All but 4 North American cities on that list are sunnier than any of those places.

Yes, and you REALLY notice it

On my recent trip to Colorado, Utah and Arizona - three weeks of constantly moving - I experienced 1 and a half days of cloudiness. And it wasn't high summer

The one thing that might attract me to live in America is the sunshine. It is glorious

This map is instructive:

It is incredible, the difference


Even European cities which we think of as southern and sunny - Biarritz, San Sebastian - get less sun than basically anywhere in the USA

The Basque country is notoriously damp and mizzly though. I think the most arresting one is almost the whole of Italy, with its Mediterranean climate and dolce vita. Worse than most of the US.

Yes, the French Riviera is sunnier than almost all of Italy.

That said, the French Riviera has probably the best climate of anywhere in the world.

It's gorgeous but I'm not sure it is the absolute best. The Italian lakes, the Algarve, the Croatian coast down to Albania, much of coastal Greece, they are generally wet enough to be green but sunny enough to be mmmm

And it also depends if you want seasons, or you want to skip cold rainy winters altogether

Surely the canary islands have the best climate in the world. Highs around 70 in winter 80 to 85 in summer with abundant sunshine year round.

Certainly very pleasant if you pick the right spot on the right island. But a bit dry and desert like

My ideal climate would be nine months of consistent blue skies and warmth - 25-32C every day and warm enough to drink outside easily and comfortably in shirtsleeves. If it rains it is brief and usually at 4am. Then a month of a colourful wet autumn, a month of a sharp snowy winter, and a month of pretty spring

Of course this climate does not exist

Northern half of Tenerife though isnt desert like at all but quite beautiful and green,

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Ghedebrav said:

Leon said:

Here's a nice paradox

Guess the identity of the one single US President, in recent history, who has been entirely dismissive about UFOs/aliens. When all the others have made suggestive remarks, hints, policy decisions, implying that something IS out there

Yes, it's Donald Trump. As far as I can tell, Trump is the only one who has said Nah, it's all bollocks

MRDA

Men's Roller Derby Association?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mandy_Rice-Davies_applies

Does she tho?

Why would Trump be the ONLY American President not to drop hefty hints that Them Aliens Are Out There. Just coz he's contrary? Because he refuses to play the psy-ops game? Or because he's so mad the FBI and NASA won't show him the evidence there IS something out there?

Because, as is becoming ever clearer with recent events, there is NOTHING out there. Nothing. Just misidentified birds, starts (out of focus as triangles), balloons etc. All those posters who said we were on the brink of a big revelation have been utterly wrong.

So it was all a big psy-ops, or a hoax, or just a lot of politicians and intelligence bigwigs going a bit Cold War mad? Or what? A stunt to freak out the Chinese?

Genuine questions, btw. I have always focused on the strange behaviour of the American elite not the frankly dismal "evidence" of actual UFOs/UAPs

Some folk involved with the Skinwalker nonsense (endless TV shows) and a few who have made a career our of bullshit (Luis Elizondo) etc and it caught the attention of a few senators who ought to know better. The military are quite happy to have 'threats' that keep the budget increasing.

The fact that people started seeing 'saucers' after Kenneth Arnold in 1947 was revealing - Arnold never said that he saw saucers, he said what he saw moved like saucers. And yet suddening people were reporting saucers.

Its a lovely idea that alien races have travelled to Earth and every now and again we catch sight of an alien space craft, sadly the evidence is damning that they haven't and we don't.

If you are ever interested in how a UFO flap can arise from nothing and be sustained for years, read 'In Alien Heat - The Warminster Mystery Revisited' by Steve Dewy and Joh n Ries.

https://amazon.co.uk/Alien-Heat-Warminster-Mystery-Revisited/dp/1933665025/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2NF35PR0TF8X7&keywords=In+alien+heat&qid=1680103272&sprefix=in+alien+heat%2Caps%2C64&sr=8-1

Its a great book about the Warminster UFO story (if you don't know - huge UFO flap in the mid 1960's through to the mid 70's). The book is really about people and how flaps start and sustain. I have a personal interest because I am hugely into the Fortean and live in Warminster...

I am certainly open to the idea of it being a big flap, though questions remain

It is noticeable that this latest flap is the biggest since the late 40s, early 50s, and there are striking similarities between the two. Both happened when Cold War rivalries were really kicking off - back then it was USA/USSR, now it is USA/China. And both happened just as we evolved game-changing, potentially apocalyptic technology - then it was nukes, now it is AI

So a similar psychology might cause similar "panics"

OldKingCole said:

Andy_JS said:

TimS said:

NickPalmer said:

Leon said:

The numbers of young Britons who eagerly flee to sunny Med resorts in the summer suggests you might be wrong? Most people prefer warmth and light to the opposite

Although I admit I an extreme case of sun-worship. Rather late in life I have realised I actually do get SAD - the disorder. It's a real thing and it is nasty. Lockdown 3 when we all had to stay home in Britain all winter (the first time I'd done that in decades) rammed it home

Yes, I expect you're right. I'm an extreme case the other way (I like being indoors, dislike hot weather and have thick curtains to prevent being woken by early light), and my mum had inverse SAD - she loved winter, and would really feel bad in when it was hot. Perhaps there's a gene for it.

I had my biennial healthcheck a few weeks ago and the one bad thing coming out of the blood tests was a significant deficiency in Vitamin D. I wonder what proportion of Brits have that by February.

Don't you take vitamin D pills in the winter?

It’s why we evolved our lighter skins, as opposed to the darker ones our remote ancestors had.

That's quite strange, posted as an answer to the question of whether TimS takes Vitamin D pills in the winter.

I can't work out whether you were saying "Yes, he does" or "No he doesn't".