SpacedX

Except it doesn't. The Arctic circle located at 66.5°N. Meanwhile, the mainland of Argentina is not within the Antarctic Circle either, as it lies much further north. However, Argentina claims a sector of Antarctica as part of its national territory, and this claimed region does extend deep into the Antarctic Circle. You'll find that they don't play football there either. Argentina is a massive country remember with regions of extremely humid subtropical climates in the northeast. Also, as pointed out, the Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta Georgia is air conditioned. When the stadium's retractable roof is closed, its advanced climate-control systems maintain a interior temperature in the region of 20°C to 22°C. They previously faced Democratic Republic of Congo there on the 1st of this month.

Cobi Jones was the obvious first thought, but it's already been posted. Roque Junior at Leeds was a disaster, Rojo was dreadful and Manchester United then there was Diouf at Liverpool which again, has already been mentioned. I recall Daniel Amokachi initially having a complete nightmare at Everton, but I think he eventually came good. Also after US 1994, Alexis Lalas failed to impress in Series A whilst he is now being dismissed in America as the worst pundit in sporting history.

That's right and the 1987 storm served as the primary case study for meteorologists to first discover and formally define the phenomenon.

My sister's house is about 2 miles north of the Los Gallardos fire, in Bédar. They haven't been allowed back.

The truth is actually more nuanced and involved that the popular myth that he "discounted" it. He didn't. On the lunchtime BBC weather forecast that day he famously said: "Earlier on today, apparently, a woman rang the BBC and said she'd heard there was a hurricane on the way. Well, if you're watching, don't worry, there isn't." Those words have often been interpreted as him dismissing the storm that later that night. Actually, he was correct since a hurricane is impossible given our latitude and sea temperatures. There were hurricane force winds, and he certainly didn't predict the severity of it, anticipating that the brunt of it would be in France. Modern meteorologists generally regard the episode as an understandable forecasting failure given the limitations of weather models and observations available in the eighties, rather than simply a flagrant or flippant dismissal.

@winteriscoming

Danny Ings is renowned for his infectious positivity and motivation wherever he goes. If nothing else, he will bring leadership, vitality and actually, everything that you would expect from a senior pro in terms of professionalism. Something that we have been sorely lacking for years.

I once watched a side score twice in stoppage time, the final 80 seconds, to win 2-3 away, from being 2-1 down to the home side. Can't recall who or where though.

Well no shit Michael Owen

Cloud seeding is actually a reality although it is of questionable efficacy. Chemtrail believers lump this in with a hypothetical area of geoengineering called Stratospheric Aerosol Injection to explain the aircraft contrails that they don't understand. Remember though, you can only "seed" existing clouds, conducive to rainfall, it does not create them. There was a BBC programme, a Top Gear spin off called 'Extreme Machines' I think, in which host Jeremy Clarkson visited an R-68 rocket test at John C. Stennis Space Center in Mississippi. He then said that in about an hour “someone in Mississippi is going to get wet.” The video then shows Clarkson in the rain. “NASA is playing god,” Clarkson says. “It’s making its own weather.” But of course NASA never intended to create rain. The engines run on liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen propellants, which create a steam cloud when mixed together in the combustion chamber and ignited. When the steam cloud cools, it turns into water and can create rain depending on the temperature and humidity at the time of the test. This localised rainfall is a purely accidental byproduct of the engineering required to test specific types of heavy rocket engines, rather than an intentional weather-control system. Hilariously this has been appropriated by largely American conspiracy theorists, quote mined and selectively edited with all context removed and deceptively titled to suggest NASA has constructed rain making machines and can control the weather.

You mean they made up a complete load of bollocks. Except they aren't asking questions because none of them are remotely interested in hearing the answers. And in the case of moon landing conspiracy theory believers, and the grifters that tell them what to think, such as Bart Sibrel and the frankly vile, Massimo Mazzucco, they are never right. Problem with populist conspiracy theories is that contrary to what their adherents may claim, they don't promote independent or critical thinking and simply thrive upon gullibility and suggestibility. They are also sold to those that have zero knowledge or understanding of the subject in question whatsoever and inevitably lead to increasingly wild and fantastical interpretations of the world around them. It's rare to encounter a so called "9/11 truther" that doesn't also believe in chemtrails, fake moon landings, or anti-vax.

Thank you so much. It's simply a love of the subject. You won't find me posting in the investments, stocks and shares thread, or whatever it is, because I don't have a business brain or a financially inclined cell in my body whilst others on this forum are clearly very informed. This is what shocks and irritates me so much about the Climate Change thread though - those feeling the need to post populist opinion about subjects they demonstrably have zero knowledge of whatsoever. Which in the age of social media, is reckless and frankly dangerous. I guess with space, it's attributed to a childhood fascination starting with the Apollo Programme that gripped the world. I recall my Mother telling me during Apollo 15 that if I looked closely enough at the moon I would be able to see the astronauts hopping about on the surface. My three year old impressionable, credulous brain saw no reason to doubt this and I used to haul myself up in my cot and peer through the curtains during those summer nights in a desperate bid to see if it was true. She steadfastly denies this now, I suppose it was an attempt to fire up my imagination at an early age. From then on, everything was space and space exploration. My heroes weren't just footballers, or rock stars, posters on the wall were as likely to be John Young as they were Keith Weller. I also started reading voraciously about astronomy feeding and nourishing my inner nerd - which was always present, even when I rebelled against everything, got flung out of sixth-form and became a committed hedonist for ten lost years, prior to returning to education. @leicsmac has suggested some superb online resources, particularly Kurzgesagt which maintains a dry sense of humour that appeals to me. However, although websites such as the excellent space.com are brilliant for current and up to date news and research, my main go to is my books - and I have amassed hundreds on the subject. I was inculcated into the scientific method by my Father and Carl Sagan as a kid. My Dad oddly was nonetheless a very religious man, a physicist that still managed to reconcile science and the metaphysical/God in his head without any inherent contradictions as he saw it. Resisting his continual but pointless attempts at proselytisation, as an agnostic, I have grained tremendous comfort contemplating the universe and the natural world that surrounds us. Although my overwhelming conviction is that it is completely indifferent to us a species, (we are not special - although it's interesting to think that we may be the only truly sentient beings in the entire cosmos, that doesn't mean it revolves around us...or does it?), a humanist can still feel a profound sense of wonder about the universe. In fact, removing religious/supernatural woo/metaphysical elements from the equation often amplifies that awe, grounding it in the incredible reality of our existence. That is precisely what I felt as a child - an insuppressible fascination about the universe and space exploration that has not only endured but got stronger. I now have a job in research capability and I see this expertise paradox in many of the accomplished academics I have the pleasure to work with. As you learn more, your growing awareness of a topic's vastness and complexity makes you realise just how much you don't know, creating an ever-expanding horizon of questions. Over three hundred years ago the French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal likened our knowledge to a sphere which as it grows larger inevitably increasing the area of which it comes into contact with the unknown. This is perhaps best and most succinctly summed up in Henry Miller’s The Wisdom of the Heart: “In expanding the field of knowledge we but increase the horizon of ignorance”. When listening to academics, scientists and experts in their field talking about the latest advances in their domain, I have always found it more intriguing and generally more enlightening when they get onto the subject of things they don’t know. Perhaps that's why I find theoretical physicists and their literature so engrossing. Over Christmas/New Year I received a very grave medical prognosis, which long story cut short was due to a false reading on a PET scan which they are particularly prone to, because they find everything, be that benign or malign. It was binary, I either had distant metastasis to the bone (stage 4 cancer), or I didn't - the consultant and radiographer agreed it was 50/50, I spent 35 days not knowing until the results of further scans came through. Not only did I compose a paper of positivity, - a list of nine medically evidenced and rational reasons why metastasis was unlikely, but I also went on long walks with my dog, not wishing to involve family members and friends, during which time I gained tremendous solace from her unconditional companionship and the natural world around me, but also my preoccupation with the mysteries and unknows of the universe that we live in. In addition to this, simply mulling over facts and figures, such as the Voyager Probes, or even the pre- launch sequence of the Saturn V, ten seconds before lift off (fascinating subject that...I'll maybe do a post on it), stopped me from overthinking negativities (which if unchecked I am prone to doing), and far from denial, focussed my mind upon subjects that I love, keeping it active and that was tremendously stimulating avoiding spiralling into doom and depression. In similarly trying times, some may receive reassurance from religious belief, but for me, although I do also contemplate the nature of consciousness and our place in the cosmos, without resorting to a deity, the universe itself is a wonderful place because its beauty requires no supernatural explanation. Rather than diminishing its value, the lack of a preordained design makes existence a rare, accidental masterpiece. Science becomes the "poetry of reality," revealing a cosmos that is intricate, ancient, and deeply profound. This not only gave me great strength during a very challenging period of my life, but has pervaded it since childhood. The universe is both violent and vast but in me, that cultivates calm from my personal perspective that humanity not as a fragile target of chaos, but as a crucial product of it. Throughout my life I have found that embracing "cosmic insignificance" can instantly diminish my personal anxieties, shifting focus toward everyday joys and a profound, interconnected nature.

Also, Voyager 1 and 2 have about 3 million times less memory than a modern mobile phone and transmit data at a glacial pace compared to modern connections. Incredibly, NASA engineers were able to send software patches and troubleshoot these 1970s machines from over 13 and 15 billion miles away. The Voyager Probes rely on decaying plutonium in their Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators. Because they lose about 4 watts of power every year, mission controllers continually shut down non-essential systems and instruments to keep the spacecraft flying and communicating. The Voyager's radio transmitters broadcast with about 20 to 23 watts of power, which is almost exactly the same amount of electricity required to illuminate the bulb in your refrigerator. By the time that signal crosses the solar system to reach Earth and is received by the Deep Space Network, it arrives at a fraction of a billion-trillionth of a watt. Currently, Voyager 1 is over 15 billion miles from Earth while Voyager 2 is around 13 billion miles away. Signals weaken significantly over vast cosmic distances (inverse square law). but our radio telescopes are nonetheless capable of detecting emissions from distant pulsars. The furthest individual pulsar from which we have received a signal is NGC 5907 X-1, located about 50 million light-years from Earth in the galaxy NGC 5907. It will take the Voyager probes approximately 300 years to reach the inner edge of the Oort Cloud and about 30,000 years to fly completely beyond it. Only then, having cleared this massive icy shell will they leave the Sun’s gravitational dominance behind and enter the true void between star systems, interstellar space. In 1 million years, they will be roughly 45 to 50 light-years away from Earth, but only a fraction of the way across our galaxy, In about 40,000 years, Voyager 1 will pass within 1.6 light-years of the red dwarf star Gliese 445. It would take roughly 500 million to 2.5 billion years to complete a full orbit around the Milky Way which they can never leave since they don't have the energy to overcome the gravitational influence. This is a really good demonstration of the scale involved just to depart the solar system: What I find so fascinating is that although they are in their dying ebbs of life, they are still making discoveries. hey both hit the "wall of fire" - the heliopause, at the boundaries of our home system, measuring temperatures of 30,000-50,000 kelvin (54,000-90,000 degrees Fahrenheit) on their passage through it. This "firewall" isn't a solid physical barrier it is a superheated, dense sea of highly energetic particles created by the compression of the solar wind slamming into interstellar space - obviously too sparse to transfer that heat and damage the probes due to the vacuum of space. Apparently, the probes discovered that the magnetic fields just outside the solar system run almost parallel to the ones inside the heliosphere. This challenges previous models and suggests a much smoother blending of solar and galactic environments than scientists originally expected. Think about that...two probes, designed and launched in the 1970s now tell us this. That's wonderful.

I wouldn't have thought it possible that after posting the utterly ludicrous "American Moon" you could find something equally absurd. Congratulations.