How it Works1 min ago
Should Cameron put England first?
http://www.dailymail....tml?ito=feeds-newsxml
Why should the Scots need convincing? If the reason is because of the worry about schoolchildren coming home in the dark why don't they start lessons 1 hour earlier? If its because of the Scottish farmers ploughing the fields in the dark why don't they get up 1 hour earlier.
Surely they are such feeble excuses not to have genuine progress?
Why should the Scots need convincing? If the reason is because of the worry about schoolchildren coming home in the dark why don't they start lessons 1 hour earlier? If its because of the Scottish farmers ploughing the fields in the dark why don't they get up 1 hour earlier.
Surely they are such feeble excuses not to have genuine progress?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by rov1200. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
There was competition at the time over whose time would rule the world. The French wanted the world's clocks based on Paris mean time. But Britain won, and world time was based in Greenwich.
So Cameron wants to throw that all away, does he? Another great British tradition to be thrown on the scrap heap, to underscore Britain's loss of power. They'll have to rename GMT as Gambia Mean Time - at least they still use it in Banjul.
So Cameron wants to throw that all away, does he? Another great British tradition to be thrown on the scrap heap, to underscore Britain's loss of power. They'll have to rename GMT as Gambia Mean Time - at least they still use it in Banjul.
-- answer removed --
I'm sure the energy companies will be delighted (no pun inteded) as they are facing huge problems meeting current and expected power demands. The advantages of having GMT +1 throughout the year will provide an extra hour of normal business with USA and Europe. Significant saving on home energy bills and increased opportunity for leisure activity during a lighter evening period. Businesses like construction and farming who need daylight will not lose out, they just need to adjust start/finish time by 1 hour.
I do not see any reason to change the clocks twice a year. Everybody seems to agree that there is enough daylight in the months March-October so that it does not matter whether one is at GMT or GMT+1. The issue is about the winter months, and that being so it is necessary to agree whether UK time is to be GMT or GMT+1 permanently. Switching back and forth is a bit of a silly game, a fudge. Those whose schedules are connected to other time zones (Central European, Asian, North American, etc.) simply have to either get up early or stay up late as the case may be. For me none of this has to do with a puffed up notion of national pride, just practicality. GMT will remain the international standard basis, for example in aviation ("Zulu").
I cannot understand the validity of or even the need for this argument.
It makes no difference what time you call sunrise and sunset. The events will still occur at the same intervals. Whether the sun sets at “4pm” or “5pm” on 21st December is irrelevant.
Various bodies have produced arguments and counter arguments for this idea over the years. None of them holds any water for the simple fact that we cannot change the number of hours of daylight we are granted.
Those people unhappy with what time we say it is when sunrise or sunset occurs can simply arrange for their activities to take place at a different time. I would suggest that tourists are completely disinterested in what time sunset is when booking their holidays here. They know it gets light in the morning and dark in the evening. I cannot imagine any of them suddenly becoming wildly enthusiastic about coming here because we say the sun sets at 5pm and not 4pm in mid winter.
Organisations that do business with people in different time zones already adjust their working hours to align with their business contacts. In much the same way organisations here can do so if the time we say it is when the sun rises or sets does not suit them.
It is a complete non-argument and how you can interpret it as “progress”, rov, is beyond me. Mr Cameron and his colleagues have more pressing matters with which to exercise their minds.
It makes no difference what time you call sunrise and sunset. The events will still occur at the same intervals. Whether the sun sets at “4pm” or “5pm” on 21st December is irrelevant.
Various bodies have produced arguments and counter arguments for this idea over the years. None of them holds any water for the simple fact that we cannot change the number of hours of daylight we are granted.
Those people unhappy with what time we say it is when sunrise or sunset occurs can simply arrange for their activities to take place at a different time. I would suggest that tourists are completely disinterested in what time sunset is when booking their holidays here. They know it gets light in the morning and dark in the evening. I cannot imagine any of them suddenly becoming wildly enthusiastic about coming here because we say the sun sets at 5pm and not 4pm in mid winter.
Organisations that do business with people in different time zones already adjust their working hours to align with their business contacts. In much the same way organisations here can do so if the time we say it is when the sun rises or sets does not suit them.
It is a complete non-argument and how you can interpret it as “progress”, rov, is beyond me. Mr Cameron and his colleagues have more pressing matters with which to exercise their minds.
I remember the first time this was tried (1968 - 1971). It was a strange feeling to be sitting in an office at 9.00 a.m. whle it was still pitch dark outside (this was in Wiltshire, not the North). I agree with the judge that the time on the clock makes no difference to the amount of daylight at any particular time, but instead of GMT + 1 let's just stick to GMT all year. Incidentally, although it is before my time, I believe that during the last war clocks were put forward two hours in springtime, instead of one.
No need to worry soon, Islam will be in charge of time.
http://tinyurl.com/26orcmt
/// For the past 125 years, the international community has accepted that the start of each day should be measured from the prime meridian, representing 0 degrees longitude, which passes through the Greenwich Observatory.///
/// A standard time by which other clocks were set was needed to organise global travel and communications, but in the Islamic world the idea that it should be centred on a part of London is seen as a colonial anachronism. ///
http://tinyurl.com/26orcmt
/// For the past 125 years, the international community has accepted that the start of each day should be measured from the prime meridian, representing 0 degrees longitude, which passes through the Greenwich Observatory.///
/// A standard time by which other clocks were set was needed to organise global travel and communications, but in the Islamic world the idea that it should be centred on a part of London is seen as a colonial anachronism. ///
Getting up or starting lessons one hour earlier will not solve the problem I'm afraid. We are bound by geography and its just a fact that in winter the Scots get less daylight hours than the south. In the central belt its about 1 hour less, in Shetland about 2 hours less. Changing the time would have a significant impact.
Sorry, Romaz, but I’m confused.
In your first answer you start by saying the change will not solve the problem. I don’t actually know what the problem is, but whatever it is I agree that changing the clocks will realise no particular benefit. But you finish by saying:
“Changing the time would have a significant impact.”
So I asked why this would be so.
You reply by saying
“As there would be no benefit from the change”
Are you saying that, apart from not solving the problem, the change would also have an adverse effect? I think we are in agreement that changing the clocks will have little impact of significance in curing whatever problems there might be (and I’m not at all sure that there are any of any significance).But I’m a little confused about your last answer..
In your first answer you start by saying the change will not solve the problem. I don’t actually know what the problem is, but whatever it is I agree that changing the clocks will realise no particular benefit. But you finish by saying:
“Changing the time would have a significant impact.”
So I asked why this would be so.
You reply by saying
“As there would be no benefit from the change”
Are you saying that, apart from not solving the problem, the change would also have an adverse effect? I think we are in agreement that changing the clocks will have little impact of significance in curing whatever problems there might be (and I’m not at all sure that there are any of any significance).But I’m a little confused about your last answer..
I thought the problem stemmed from latitude rather than longitude so whether we use GMT seems unimportant as its just a base line whereas the amount of daylight hours available is determined by latitude or how far you are away from the equator.
Therefore our clocks should mirror those of Europe if we want to keep in step with things like working hours, train timetables, etc. Thats assuming they have got it sussed, we certainly haven't.
Therefore our clocks should mirror those of Europe if we want to keep in step with things like working hours, train timetables, etc. Thats assuming they have got it sussed, we certainly haven't.
We should join the major players of Europe by abiding by CET Central European Time
http://wwp.greenwichm...entral-european-time/
http://wwp.greenwichm...entral-european-time/
Latest Posts
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.