i never said who but their answers in previous topic identified them .Afraid I did and while there are other complications such as the sun moves as well and also planetary alignments what I posted is more than adequate,
i never said who but their answers in previous topic identified them .Afraid I did and while there are other complications such as the sun moves as well and also planetary alignments what I posted is more than adequate,
you dont know what other people do or do not knowAmazing we have people who yesterday never knew about the earths axis or 26000 year wobble are now experts on it
WRONGi never said who but their answers in previous topic identified them .
Conversely, it also means he considers himself an expert.WRONG
youve no evidence that anybody did not know
That’s your entire MO.please avoid making assumptions to boost your ego
getting an early start into thread lockdown?That’s your entire MO.
I remember being taught something about it in secondary school. I got a rerun at Uni.Amazing we have people who yesterday never knew about the earths axis or 26000 year wobble are now experts on it
Notchy can slate people but I can’t stand up for them ?getting an early start into thread lockdown?
Isn't there a passing car you can bark at instead??
Did he say that ?I remember being taught something about it in secondary school. I got a rerun at Uni.
It never ceases - forum pathetic twerp trolls suddenly find out about something, and just because they were ignorant before imagine they're on to something new.
Milankovitch etc was pre-war. Everybody vaguely informed knows about it.
I posted something yesterday which some illustrious mod deleted. I think it was this:
Why Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles Can't Explain Earth's Current Warming - NASA Science
In the last few months, a number of questions have come in asking if NASA has attributed Earth’s recent warming to changes in how Earth moves through space around the Sun: a series of orbital motions known as Milankovitch cycles. What cycles, you ask? Milankovitch cycles include the shape of...science.nasa.gov
I suppose gasser thinks he has more understanding that NASA.
It entirely depends where you are. Because the variation could be along the transit line between you, magnetic north and true north. In which case it makes no difference.I remember map reading and magnetic against true North. You had to add on about 6 to 7 degrees in the 70's. Now you aren't required to add anything to get true north. Quite a rate of change.
Surprised you have time to post between filling pip claims in and making thousands everyday on the marketsI remember being taught something about it in secondary school. I got a rerun at Uni.
It never ceases - forum pathetic twerp trolls suddenly find out about something, and just because they were ignorant before imagine they're on to something new.
Milankovitch etc was pre-war. Everybody vaguely informed knows about it.
I posted something yesterday which some illustrious mod deleted. I think it was this:
Why Milankovitch (Orbital) Cycles Can't Explain Earth's Current Warming - NASA Science
In the last few months, a number of questions have come in asking if NASA has attributed Earth’s recent warming to changes in how Earth moves through space around the Sun: a series of orbital motions known as Milankovitch cycles. What cycles, you ask? Milankovitch cycles include the shape of...science.nasa.gov
I suppose gasser thinks he has more understanding that NASA.
Thanks MBK I don't think deviation will affect me between Okehampton and Princetown to be honest.
well thats that settled then remind me to wish you a happy 26001 birthday next year
.