|
Post by goonerboy on Oct 25, 2011 14:58:37 GMT -5
I'm still confused: in America, do you go forward in Autumn? Cos that's what you seem to be implying in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by SimSim on Oct 25, 2011 15:06:34 GMT -5
No, Fall back, Spring forward. But there have been some Southern Hemisphere people posting. Their season are the opposite of ours.
|
|
|
Post by goonerboy on Oct 25, 2011 15:09:49 GMT -5
Ahh, that makes more sense. I like the idea of always having the extra hour in the evening, never going into what's coming up.
|
|
|
Post by The_L on Oct 25, 2011 19:55:21 GMT -5
Cestle: Some people work on both Saturdays and Sundays. What do they do when DST rolls around?
Also, someone hasn't heard of "false dawn" or "twilight": it gets light about an hour BEFORE sunrise, and dark about an hour AFTER sunset. This phenomenon is painfully easy to observe. (Think about it--why would it not get light until an hour AFTER the sun was already visible in the sky? THE SUN IS THE LIGHT SOURCE, so the light should be visible for at least as long as the sun is.)
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Oct 26, 2011 2:27:55 GMT -5
Well then I suppose you are also in favor of banning trick-or-treating. If the preferred policy is to eliminate increased risk on certain calendar days due to needless variables introduced for our enjoyment, then this is the only sensible option. On DST Sunday, the variable that sets it apart from every other day of the year is that we lose one hour on this one day so we may enjoy extra sunlight for the entire spring and summer. On Halloween, the variable is that children dress up in costumes and walk around at night asking for candy. Pedestrian traffic increases enormously at night on this day, and consequently pedestrian accidents. There is no reason why we must do this; it's purely for enjoyment and a pastime that forms an integral part of American youth's (and some other countries) childhood.
Even if I concede that there is absolutely nothing one can do to off-set the lost hour on DST Sunday in the spring, the increase in accidents would be off-set if people went to bed at their normal time on Saturday the day before we gain an hour (and thus they would be better rested and less accident prone the following day). Instead, a small minority of people choose to spend the extra hour to stay out later and drink more, skewing the average.
So what is the answer to combat this slightly elevated risk? If we eliminate the variables, then DST Sunday and October 31 would be like any other day of the year, and accidents would be on average the same as any other day. Or is it preferable to take reasonable precautions (e.g. not partying an extra hour on Standard Time-Sunday in the fall, wearing reflective tape on costumes, traveling in groups, etc. on Halloween) and accept that there will always be some risk in our lives?
Sunrise times indicate the point at which the disk of the sun first appears over the line of the horizon. It indicates the start of this process, not the end, so it takes about an hour for it to get fully light. Sunset times indicate the point at which the disk of the sun has fully dipped below the horizon line, so it indicates the end of this process. In which case, it starts to get dark about an hour before.
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 26, 2011 2:54:07 GMT -5
Well then I suppose you are also in favor of banning trick-or-treating. Stick for a body Head full of straw Give me a scarecrow Ra ra ra!
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Oct 26, 2011 3:06:28 GMT -5
People love to throw the strawman moniker around but never explain how it's a strawman. If the preferred policy is to eliminate risk on calendar days with unnecessary variables by eliminating that variable, why does this logic not extend to other days with other unnecessary variables?
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 26, 2011 3:36:25 GMT -5
People love to throw the strawman moniker around but never explain how it's a strawman. If the preferred policy is to eliminate risk on calendar days with unnecessary variables by eliminating that variable, why does this logic not extend to other days with other unnecessary variables? Because Halloween has already been sanitized to the point where it barely resembles what comes to mind when you think of it. You've yet to prove how Daylight Savings Time is beneficial, mind you.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Oct 26, 2011 3:47:58 GMT -5
What does this have to do with anything? People go trick-or-treating, pedestrian traffic increases, and consequently pedestrian accidents spike in relation to calendar days with no variables ( www.snopes.com/holidays/newyears/traffic.asp). What would Halloween's origins have to do with this? I have said that it shifts the extra hour of summer sunlight from the useless early morning hours to the more enjoyable and useful evening hours. This is, to many people, a benefit. The question is whether or not this benefit is outweighed by the slight increase in accidents caused by controllable human behavior. You, and Oriet, and others are taking the position that no increase in accidents on certain calendar days is acceptable: the variable must be eliminated so that accidents on this day of the year are on average with any other day. I argue that society as a whole should not have to forgo the pleasure they receive from this variable because of the reckless actions of an irresponsible few: that we should take reasonable precautions to look out for ourselves and our friends and family, but that it is not unreasonable to accept slight risks in our lives in exchange for personal enjoyment.
|
|
|
Post by Haseen on Oct 26, 2011 5:38:30 GMT -5
I have said that it shifts the extra hour of summer sunlight from the useless early morning hours to the more enjoyable and useful evening hours. This is, to many people, a benefit. The question is whether or not this benefit is outweighed by the slight increase in accidents caused by controllable human behavior. You, and Oriet, and others are taking the position that no increase in accidents on certain calendar days is acceptable: the variable must be eliminated so that accidents on this day of the year are on average with any other day. I argue that society as a whole should not have to forgo the pleasure they receive from this variable because of the reckless actions of an irresponsible few: that we should take reasonable precautions to look out for ourselves and our friends and family, but that it is not unreasonable to accept slight risks in our lives in exchange for personal enjoyment. What benefit is there to revert back to standard time? It's the shift in time that's the problem, not the time itself. Year-round DST would have all the benefits and none of the drawbacks. That's what I'm arguing for, anyways.
|
|
|
Post by cestlefun17 on Oct 26, 2011 8:42:13 GMT -5
The sun would rise way too late in the morning in the winter if we didn't shift back.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on Oct 26, 2011 11:17:12 GMT -5
......*facepalm*
|
|
|
Post by priestling on Oct 26, 2011 12:07:33 GMT -5
*joins Ibby in the facepalm*
|
|
|
Post by Dragon Zachski on Oct 26, 2011 12:38:12 GMT -5
I argue that society as a whole should not have to forgo the pleasure they receive from this variable because of the reckless actions of an irresponsible few Which are neither few nor irresponsible, they are normal individuals exactly like you or me or anyone here. I was kept up late last night due to circumstances beyond my control (restless legs syndrome, nerves, and the sudden development of a minor but terribly itching rash on my leg). You make it sound like an hour shift back is so easy, but no, it isn't, and the fact that you think it is shows that you haven't actually done any research on this. Not even a google to attempt to find any statistics that support your case. In short, back up your arguments with facts.
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Oct 26, 2011 13:28:45 GMT -5
You really don't think you're performing straw men? You don't realize how your hyperboles are getting ever more ridiculous in defense of "an extra hour of fun in the sun"? Really?
|
|