![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Today, one of the web newspapers ran a story about how it was just discovered that Northern Norway will supposedly lose its aurora borealis over the next 20-50 years, and that it will instead move south, due to magnetic North Pole moving north and then into Siberia.
Having an unclear notion of how one thing moving north could cause a thing that trails it to move south, I googled, and found this page, from 2008, which shows the magnetic pole moving in the direction of the part of Siberia that is near Norway (and not, say, the region near Vladivostok). Thus, in moving north from its current location, the magnetic pole is moving towards Norway, which will eventually cause what the article claimed. Fair enough. But hey, looks like this is something that was a well established fact a year ago, doesn't it?
I also found this story from 2005, which is apparently when this great movement towards Siberia was actually discovered.
So much for breaking news.
(And unlike the newspaper article today, I am not puzzled as to why tourist agencies are not in a panic over this brand new information.)
Having an unclear notion of how one thing moving north could cause a thing that trails it to move south, I googled, and found this page, from 2008, which shows the magnetic pole moving in the direction of the part of Siberia that is near Norway (and not, say, the region near Vladivostok). Thus, in moving north from its current location, the magnetic pole is moving towards Norway, which will eventually cause what the article claimed. Fair enough. But hey, looks like this is something that was a well established fact a year ago, doesn't it?
I also found this story from 2005, which is apparently when this great movement towards Siberia was actually discovered.
So much for breaking news.
(And unlike the newspaper article today, I am not puzzled as to why tourist agencies are not in a panic over this brand new information.)