Any "typography nerds" out there?

[Gareth Hughes]

An answer is needed:
http://caiusplinius.blogspot.com/2009/02/appropriate-message-for-day.html
I must admit, I thought it was Gill Sans too, but it isn't. And the linked story's suggestion of "Now Panic and Freak Out" has its attractions too (even though I can't see any snow where I am):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7869458.stm
Some of "Caius Plinius"'s follwers in the right-hand column have interesting thing to say too, touching on matters of conservation and the like...

 

[Cloudscape]

Odd - it's got the low horizontal stroke in the A, as has Johnson at about this weight, but Gill-like characteristics as well - the curved start to the 'tail' of the R. The weight is between Gill regular and Gill bold. It's not at all impossible that it was hand-drawn - the centreing is a tad squiffy, the D of AND looks a trifle odd, the letterspacing seems erratic. Given the jpegging has interfered (red is a bad colour for jpeg artifacting) and the source photo might not be perfect, I've enlarged the poster and there are differences between what should be identical characters. Round characters should break the top and bottom line to appear visually the same height as non-round characters. The Cs are breaking the line more at the top, the O is breaking the line more at the bottom. The Cs don't seem to be the same shape. This nerd's verdict, until I see a clearer version (I can't tell which of the versions round the 'net are more 'accurate'): Hand drawn.