RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at ,
blathered on thus, and it became the following missive...

I got my info from:
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/

I think you find that that site only reports volcanoes that have
exhibited actrivity over and above their normal state.

So you can crawl bsack into your hole now.

--
Mike LONGWORTH, Yateley, Hampshire, UK

On Jan 14, 12:07 pm, "Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:55:25 -0000, RCO wrote:
Soufriere Hills, United Kingdom

Where is that then?

Ah Montserrat, a British Overseas Territory, not really "United
Kingdom"...

Define kingdom.

For that matter, define united.

In fact it might be an idea to define overseas.
Maybe you could explain what the Irish flag is doing on the British
one, whilst you are at it?

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at ,
blathered on thus, and it became the following missive...

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at ,
blathered on thus, and it became the following missive...

I got my info from:
http://www.volcano.si.edu/reports/usgs/

I think you find that that site only reports volcanoes that have
exhibited actrivity over and above their normal state.

So you can crawl bsack into your hole now.


Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should explain
yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose to do.
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull

RCO wrote:

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at
,
blathered on thus, and it became the following missive...

Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should
explain
yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose to do.


Read your own message above and be a bit more civil and you'd understand.

Mike LONGWORTH wrote:
RCO wrote:

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at
, blathered on thus, and it became the
following missive...

Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should
explain yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose
to do.


Read your own message above and be a bit more civil and you'd
understand.

To stick up for Rob, I can only see one example of uncivil behaviour in this
thread and it's not from him....

In article ,
says...
Mike LONGWORTH wrote:
RCO wrote:

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at
, blathered on thus, and it became the
following missive...

Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should
explain yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose
to do.


Read your own message above and be a bit more civil and you'd
understand.

To stick up for Rob, I can only see one example of uncivil behaviour in this
thread and it's not from him....




I can see how some people would be offended by having their post
responded to by "Squelching through the mud,...blathered on thus...."

Harold
--
Harold Brooks

Harold Brooks wrote:
In article ,
says...
Mike LONGWORTH wrote:
RCO wrote:

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at
, blathered on thus, and it became the
following missive...

Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should
explain yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose
to do.


Read your own message above and be a bit more civil and you'd
understand.

To stick up for Rob, I can only see one example of uncivil behaviour
in this thread and it's not from him....




I can see how some people would be offended by having their post
responded to by "Squelching through the mud,...blathered on thus...."

If someone takes offence at an obvious 'xxxx wrote' macro that Rob appears
to use on all his emails then I'd suggest Usenet isn't where they ought to
be.... (if you think that's bad then don't, whatever you do, click on any of
the .local groups)

TBH I didn't even see it.

"jim beam" sputnick wrote in message
...
Anyone know or have data sets with ----the average tonnage of all world
volcanic co2 emmisions per year ,graphed against total human co2
emmisions.For the last 100 years say.
I just thought it may make interesting reading.
Jim

Thanks to you all for trying to answer my serious question ,only Alastaire
has attempted an answer everyone else has skirted round the question.

Anymore relevant answers would be appreciated ,as my son is doing an A
level geology module and he is also stuck trying to obtain relevant data in
answer to this question.(as above) he realises any data will have to be
intelligent guestimations .
Nows your chance uk.sci.weather group to participate in this years A
levels.....

On Jan 14, 7:02*pm, "jim beam" sputnick wrote:
"jim beam" sputnick wrote in ...

Anyone know or have data sets with ----the average tonnage of all world
volcanic co2 emmisions per year ,graphed against total human co2
emmisions.For the last 100 years say.
I just thought it may make interesting reading.
Jim

Thanks to you all for trying to answer my serious question ,only Alastaire
has attempted an answer everyone else has skirted round the question.

* Anymore relevant answers would be appreciated ,as my son is doing an A
level geology module and he is also stuck trying to obtain relevant data in
answer to this question.(as above) he realises any data will have to be
intelligent guestimations .

It should be fairly easy to find some of the secondary summary data.
Suitable keywords "CO2 volcanic IPCC" into Google or Google Scholar or
ADS should get some results from the remote sensing folk.

Nows your chance uk.sci.weather group to participate in this years A
levels.....

Here is a quick one that at least gives some estimates and a rough
description of how they were obtained.

http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/b.../1/04-0937.pdf

You have to draw your own graphs. I suspect if you go to the IPCC site
there is a suitable dataset.

BTW A level students should be doing their own project work.

Regards,
Martin Brown

Squelching through the mud, cupra at , blathered on
thus, and it became the following missive...

Harold Brooks wrote:
In article ,
says...
Mike LONGWORTH wrote:
RCO wrote:

RCO wrote:

Squelching through the mud, Mike LONGWORTH at
, blathered on thus, and it became the
following missive...

Excuse me...????? What are you insinuating...? I think you should
explain yourself or apologise, I really don't care which you choose
to do.


Read your own message above and be a bit more civil and you'd
understand.

To stick up for Rob, I can only see one example of uncivil behaviour
in this thread and it's not from him....




I can see how some people would be offended by having their post
responded to by "Squelching through the mud,...blathered on thus...."

If someone takes offence at an obvious 'xxxx wrote' macro that Rob appears
to use on all his emails then I'd suggest Usenet isn't where they ought to
be.... (if you think that's bad then don't, whatever you do, click on any of
the .local groups)

Indeed, every group to which Ibelong has the same introduction to the reply. If
people have a problem with that then I suggest they check their sense of humour
quotient at the minute. If you were to go back over my posts for at least 6
months you will see it is the same every time. No-one has been offended before,
and I don't suppose anyone else will.
--
Rob C. Overfield
Hull