Rainbows above the Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle at the Moment of the Queen's Death

deirdre

Senior Member.
It's not reasonable to consider the rainbows divine because the Queen's passing has nothing to do with what God said about Rainbows. and God doesnt make rainbows.

Article:
I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be cut off by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth."
12
And God said, "This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come:
13
I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth.
14
Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds,
15
I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life
.
16
Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth."
17
So God said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth."




happy?
it's also not reasonable to quote two fluff websites and decide people are thinking the rainbows are divine.

That said, everytime a rainbow appears God is reminded not to annihilate us for our bad behaviors. ie the rainbow is a symbol that instills a feeling of "peace" ie. the Queen's passing is heartbreaking but at least God isn't going to annihilate us, ie. try to look on the bright side of life.

It doesnt really matter how many times double rainbows appeared over Buckingham Palace. What matters is it appeared when people needed an extra shot of Peace Juice.


that said
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Va87qt0VZ2M
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
It's not reasonable to consider the rainbows divine because the Queen's passing has nothing to do with what God said about Rainbows. and God doesnt make rainbows.

Your supposed counter-point thumping my fluffy and cute head with the Good Book misses the mark on so many levels I'm most happy :p to leave it writhe in its own incredulity.
 

Ann K

Senior Member.
a website called patheos (that noone has ever heard of), and one called national world (that noone has ever heard of) making that claim is a "proliferation"?

huh. learn a new thing everyday.
I used to follow a bunch of blogs on Patheos, but they kicked out all the atheists about a year ago so it could try to be an exclusively religious site. That claim sounds right up their alley.
 

Ann K

Senior Member.
@LilWabbit
An evidently silly rainbow-observer count was never proposed by yours truly, so I wonder where did such an idea pop up.
From your initial post:
Does anyone have data and footage on rainbows appearing throughout the day or for several days in multiple random locations across England or Britain as a whole?
Now explain to me why my paraphrase of a rainbow count disagrees with your description of what you were looking for.
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
@LilWabbit

I am thinking that you are missing the matter that rainbows don't occur "above" something. The rainbow phenomena is an optical (virtual) illusion where a viewer catches the reflected and refracted rays (now looking like light though a prism) coming from a particular bunch of droplets/rain and the sun. This rain can be anywhere, as long as the sun light hits it at a certain angle (42deg). This is not a point nor is it very rare. You just, as a viewer have to be "lucky" to see it.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
@LilWabbit

From your initial post:

Now explain to me why my paraphrase of a rainbow count disagrees with your description of what you were looking for.

Because you're referring to an observer count. I'm referring to physical conditions conducive to rainbow observation from various angles on the ground level at particular points in time. These time-bound observation areas could potentially be indicated on a map as geographic regions for theoretical observers. And, by extension, based on historical data, these regions could be presented as a rainbow distribution map constantly changing overtime.

You and @Ravi are misconstruing me as if I'm propounding that rainbows are observer-independent physical objects locatable on the map. And trying to educate me that they're not. Maybe there's a treasure at their end. In addition, @Ravi is repeating the already oft-repeated and flippant subjective claim that rainbows are not rare in London without objective evidence as to their actual likelihood. And more importantly, without addressing the specific question of how often in a typical September are rainbows observable at the ground level from the direction of typical Buckingham Palace observers.

When we write that a rainbow is "occurring" or "appearing" "above" or "behind" something, we're using a figure of speech to convey a point. We're not formulating a physics-textbook definition of a rainbow each time we mention their appearance. Context, usually, reveals to the discerning reader when he should read an expression literally and when not.
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
Your supposed counter-point thumping my fluffy and cute head with the Good Book misses the mark on so many levels I'm most happy :pto leave it writhe in its own incredulity.
youre the one who keeps on insisting on using the word divine. You don't debunk the divine with science. The divine can be whatever He wants it to be.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
if everyone is missing your points, then do the math.

Not as many points as in your case. Intellectual laziness is a bitch. Some things require focus and thought to comprehend. Not everything can be made into a three bullet point slide show in block letters.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
Rainbow science doesn't require that much focus or thought to comprehend.

edit for clarity

Your credentials as a rainbow scientist are insufficient for making such a statement credibly.

Ask for clarifications on the above statement if you couldn't quite focus and comprehend.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
you're the one who thinks i can't comprehend. ( i comprehend enough to know you are asking a question impossible to answer. do you?)

My quip you cited was sarcasm, not a question.

How deep a hole you wish to dig yourself into by every bumbling attempt at a clever retort? That was a question.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
My quip you cited was sarcasm, not a question.
without addressing the specific question of how often in a typical September are rainbows observable at the ground level from the direction of typical Buckingham Palace observers.
i was referring to your latest question.

note: i didnt even point out it was a double rainbow (WITH a concurrent rainbow at Windsor ).
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
i was referring to your latest question.

note: i didnt even point out it was a double rainbow (WITH a concurrent rainbow at Windsor ).

As I replied to @Ann K, a timelapse rainbow distribution map for past Septembers could be made in answer to the question I posed. By mappable rainbows I am referring to physical conditions conducive to rainbow observation from various angles on the ground level at particular points in time. These time-bound observation areas could potentially be indicated on a map as geographic regions for theoretical observers. And, by extension, based on historical data, these regions could be presented as a rainbow distribution map constantly changing overtime.

This way we could get a decent indication of 'how often rainbows appear above the Buckingham Palace' (WARNING to some readers: Figurative language was used, do NOT read the last bit literally).
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
ok. if you say so. i'll watch you accomplish that feat.

I was hoping for help from others with better expertise on physics and geographic data modelling. Ever since the OP. Or at least to point to similar data already existing somewhere.

Pending such empirical evidence, we'd be better off on this thread not making too bold subjective claims on such rainbows being common in September above the Buckingham Palace (figurative speech warning repeated). Not that you have made such claims.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I was hoping for help from others with better expertise on physics and geographic data modelling.
That's fine. I didnt mean you personally, since you haven't even yet looked up to see how specific the historical data is that the Met office keeps.

And i do know that is what you are asking, because despite your off base ad hominem attacks, i have been following along. Just because i choose to focus on different bits of your ramblings, (vs bits others are already addressing) doesnt mean i am not comprehending your other bits.
 

Ann K

Senior Member.
@LilWabbit
A combination of woo and numbers, found by googling "average rainbows in England". It might have been wise to start the discussion with this.


Not only have Brits been creating their own rainbows, but there have also been over 200 news articles sharing spectacular sightings of them during lockdown with people taking photos from their homes and gardens as a reminder that good things are on the horizon.

To form, rainbows require two essential elements: rain or mist in the air and sunlight. As well as this, places near altitude often experience rainbows as the air cools down coming from height and turning into rain.

To find where Brits can most often sight a rainbow from their homes, The French Bedroom Company researched into where the most reported rainbow sightings have been over the past few months, and combined sunshine hours, rainfall amount and landscape height to determine rainbow hotspots. As well as this, social activity was analysed tracking rainbow hashtags of over 1,000 posts.

At most, the UK gets on average 80 millimetres of rainfall a month and 197 hours of sunshine, but some areas exceed this and are situated in places with heightened land which makes the perfect combination for rainbows.
Content from External Source
https://thedailybrit.co.uk/where-to-find-the-best-rainbows-in-the-uk-and-how-their-symbol-of-hope-is-inspiring-a-nation/#:~:text=As well as this, social activity was analysed,land which makes the perfect combination for rainbows.
 
Last edited:

LilWabbit

Senior Member
@LilWabbit
A combination of woo and numbers, found by googling "average rainbows in England". It might have been wise to start the discussion with this.


Not only have Brits been creating their own rainbows, but there have also been over 200 news articles sharing spectacular sightings of them during lockdown with people taking photos from their homes and gardens as a reminder that good things are on the horizon.

To form, rainbows require two essential elements: rain or mist in the air and sunlight. As well as this, places near altitude often experience rainbows as the air cools down coming from height and turning into rain.

To find where Brits can most often sight a rainbow from their homes, The French Bedroom Company researched into where the most reported rainbow sightings have been over the past few months, and combined sunshine hours, rainfall amount and landscape height to determine rainbow hotspots. As well as this, social activity was analysed tracking rainbow hashtags of over 1,000 posts.

At most, the UK gets on average 80 millimetres of rainfall a month and 197 hours of sunshine, but some areas exceed this and are situated in places with heightened land which makes the perfect combination for rainbows.
Content from External Source
https://thedailybrit.co.uk/where-to-find-the-best-rainbows-in-the-uk-and-how-their-symbol-of-hope-is-inspiring-a-nation/#:~:text=As well as this, social activity was analysed,land which makes the perfect combination for rainbows.

Thanks for sharing. It amuses me how quintessentially British it is to love small marvels of nature from the sweet comfort of one's home and yard.

Hobbits.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
My personal opinion is that this is very unnecessary and hurts this forum's image while accomplishing nothing.

How does it hurt the forum's image?

Thus far the discussion, including your comment, has demonstrated that the topic is more uncomfortable to many regulars than the UFOs without people being sufficiently open about the reasons of their discomfort. That's accomplishing something.

Volunteering vague opinions and feelings accomplishes less.
 

Stingray

New Member
Not if you saw that the thread is actually about not trivializing people seeing rare rainbows at the queen's residences as profound signs of respect for the late queen.
I'm new here and what I said is just my personal perception as an "outsider" and it stands. Thank you.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
I'm new here and what I said is just my personal perception as an "outsider" and it stands. Thank you.

Well, the vulture analogy demonstrates a misperception to me. But I admit the OP could be misconstrued that way owing to some choices of wording.

In any case, you are entitled to your opinions and welcome to MB.
 

captancourgette

Active Member
It has been widely reported that a rainbow appeared both at the Buckingham Palace and the Windsor Castle very close to the moment of the passing of Queen Elizabeth II yesterday on 8 September 2022. Obviously, this seems significant and meaningful to many people subscribing to the idea of the divine. It's claimed that these rainbows are an honorary sign.
Was it though?
Do we know what time she died, the UK PM got told at 4:30pm (she may of died even earlier), the public got told at 6:31pm.
What time did the rainbow/s appear?
 

Easy Muffin

Senior Member
Was it though?
Do we know what time she died, the UK PM got told at 4:30pm (she may of died even earlier), the public got told at 6:31pm.
What time did the rainbow/s appear?

The Guardian article linked in the OP says
The flag over Windsor Castle was slowly lowered to half mast after the death of the Queen was announced on Thursday evening. A rainbow had emerged over the late monarch’s residence minutes earlier.
Some time around half past six then.

Hmm, so if this was a sign from the heavens we can infer that whatever deity did this kindly followed royal protocol by waiting until the public announcement, any ominous pre-announcement rainbows notwithstanding.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
Was it though?
Do we know what time she died, the UK PM got told at 4:30pm (she may of died even earlier), the public got told at 6:31pm.
What time did the rainbow/s appear?

A valid query.

Indeed, the Queen passed away hours before the British public were informed.

It appears the Queen passed away sometime between 1600-1630 hrs. The Buckingham Palace shared a public announcement of her death at 1830 hrs. The rainbow at Buckingham Palace appeared shortly before this announcement. It seems the flag over Windsor Castle was lowered to half mast soon after the announcement and minutes before the lowering the rainbow appeared at Windsor.

In other words, the timing of the two rainbows didn't accurately coincide with the exact moment of the Queen's death but rather coincided uncannily accurately with the Palace's public announcement of her death. Does it really disprove the overall claim though, or rather add it further credence? The divine sign claim implicitly posits that rainbows as signs are themselves public appearances and obviously were for inspiring and consoling the mourners in honour of the Queen at the time the distressing news broke out. So essentially it's still a seemingly remarkable co-occurrence.
 
Last edited:

Easy Muffin

Senior Member
The divine sign claim implicitly posits that rainbows as signs are themselves public appearances and obviously were for inspiring and consoling the mourners in honour of the Queen at the time the distressing news broke out.
I'm not sure I'd call it an obvious sign, sounds to me like people are seeing in it what they want to see. Someone who's affected by the news might regard it as a comforting sign but some other person a couple hundred yards away going about their business might simply see a rainbow and think nothing of it, someone else might be in mourning but not make the connection with the rainbow because they have a different idea in their head of what a divine sign should look like (A flock of white doves! The palace basking in a ray of sunlight! etc). Or to turn the original argument on its head, a person that's got a bone to pick with royalty might even interpret the rainbow as a sign of joy and celebration.
I see no reason to think this is anything other than people attaching any arbitrary meaning to an otherwise unremarkable occurence.
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
@LilWabbit Why do you ignore now already for 2 pages that rainbows don't occur "above" anything? Why do you want to know "the statistics on how many times rainbows occur above such and such", when we cannot establish so?
 
Last edited:

LilWabbit

Senior Member
@LilWabbit Why do you ignore now already for 2 pages that rainbows don't occur "above" anything? Why do you want to know "the statistics on how many times rainbows occur above such and such", when we cannot establish so?

Why are you ignoring my response to your very query as if you're being wilfully ignored?
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
I'm not sure I'd call it an obvious sign, sounds to me like people are seeing in it what they want to see.

I'm sure some do. Just like adamant deniers of all things mystical refuse to see what appears an awe-inspiring coincidence to the intellectually honest observer present at the scene.

Epistemologically, I am detecting two kinds of confirmation bias at play here which pose a risk to unbiased and objective inquiry:

Article:
Confirmation bias, the tendency to process information by looking for, or interpreting, information that is consistent with one’s existing beliefs.


(1) Not acknowledging even the seeming remarkability of rainbows appearing above (sorry @Ravi the Literalist :cool:) the Queen's seats of power to observers exactly at the moment of the announcement of her death.

(2) Using these rainbow appearances in a self-serving way to support a particular emotionally rewarding and detailed theological belief-system that's either bigoted towards disbelievers or otherwise completely beyond the scientific analysis of these occurrences.

But reading the co-occurrence, at first glance, as if some powerful thing in control of physics is aware of the timing of the Queen's death and its announcement is just an intellectually honest lay person's initial reaction.

Any more detailed a speculation of that 'sentient powerful thing' is scientifically unparsimonious for the purposes of this analysis.
 

Ravi

Senior Member.
Why are you ignoring my response to your very query as if you're being wilfully ignored?
Your answer:

When we write that a rainbow is "occurring" or "appearing" "above" or "behind" something, we're using a figure of speech to convey a point. We're not formulating a physics-textbook definition of a rainbow each time we mention their appearance.

Goes against everything I learned. Figure of speech? I am lost.
 

LilWabbit

Senior Member
Your answer:



Goes against everything I learned. Figure of speech? I am lost.

That's not the full answer the careful perusal of which I'm sure will mitigate your sense of loss. And I'm not being sarcastic here.

The potentially mappable geographic regions mentioned in my response could be called Rainbow-Viewing Zones (RVZ, coining acronyms for the heck of it here). The location, changing shapes, frequency and future likelihood of RVZs can potentially be calculated.
 
Top