It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and
the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this
later than 2009.

jim

On Sunday, 9 February 2014 23:13:17 UTC, jbm wrote:

It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and
the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this
later than 2009.

We or they or somebody or other is having a referendumb sometime or other this year I believe.
Not sure.

What will happen to the weather charts the Scots have paid for if they succeed from the Kingdumb?
Most of them have never been used.

"jbm" wrote in message ...
It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and the
rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this later
than 2009.

jim

Don't worry. When Scotland becomes independent all we exiles will fock back
and Scotland will sink and England rise (provided you do cut back on all
those other immigrants :-)

Cheers, Alastair.

On Sun, 09 Feb 2014 23:13:17 +0000, jbm wrote:

It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and
the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this
later than 2009.

jim

From my geology days I seem to remember Devon and Cornwall are 'being
stretched' causing the land to fall, also the rail line at Dawlish is
laid on the top of an old 'raised beach' from a time when sea level
was higher. These raised beaches make good beds for Rail and roads,
so if the sea gets at them they will wash away. The rail line has
lasted many years, they will soon get it put back.

Jeff

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

On 09/02/2014 23:13, jbm wrote:
It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and
the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this
later than 2009.

jim

I've come across the same problem in the last couple of months.
The research I've done that is on the www so far is unfortunately on my
local trivia file
http://www.divdev.fsnet.co.uk/graff.htm
relating to the vectis Tavern , Cowes, IoW and the wrong official
information , so far available, relating to local flooding of 1924.
see about 2/3 down this .gov file , referring to 1924
http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environm...tish-ports.pdf

(no wonder the AGW brigade get so hot under the collar when there is
such errors [ deliberate? ] stated as fact in the official literature )
Officially is was the same degree of inundation as 1999 but from
archived 1924 newspaper reports for the Solent area it was obviously at
least 0.4m higher.
The official "record" has converted feet and inches and the change of
datum , all quite correctly but have ignored the probable error the
datum in play in 1924 was still from the First Geodetic Levelling of the
mid Victorian era . Other research terms are
1936 OSGB 36 system and the previous Airy 1830 survey system

It looks as though the error got in because the First Geodetic Levelling
was based on Liverpool and the Second and later on Newlyn and surveying
errors or something
I've not read all this , but page 16
http://www.cage.curtin.edu.au/~will/GJI_ODN_slope.pdf
at most Liverpool higher than Newlyn by an "error" of 0.15m. Could the
error/uplift have been factored in twice, once by the sea Liverpool to
Newlyn error and once by the L to N land error?
The OS went to the trouble of removing the original height references on
all their FBM including number 7435, outside what was the London Rd OS
HQ, now Southampton County Courts.
Hopefully the Soton archives would have maps with the FBM decimal feet
heights on the earliest OS maps and so the FGL and SGL heights.

www I can only find one , unofficial, such FBM height references for
those times, for one FBM in N Ireland, and local datum based on Belfast
( Donaghadee Lighthouse J5980 )
and a height difference for the 2 levellings of -2.71m converted from
feet , earlier height higher.

The 1924 Southampton 5.6m (6.0m) flood anamoly requires the 1924
reference to be based on a datum that was higher than post 1930 datum.
But, so far, in the range -0.15m to -2.71m is a very large ballpark .
I also find it suspicious that all www references, that I've seen, to
trigpoints show the second and third levelling heights results in the
1900s to be all the same value to the third decimal place, as a
scientist I just cannot believe that is possible. Even with GPS and all
the behind the scenes Einstein relativistic corrections, g-variation etc
cannot get that close over decades.

***************
If it was possible for you (jbm) to do the same where ever you are, not
necessarily near the sea) I would be very interested in hearing what you
find as I am in contact with 3 academics who have come at this historic
mis-perception, about the severity of storms historically being worse
now than earlier (making allowance for the great English Channel storm
and the Bristol Channel tsunami/great flood event), they have come at it
from a different direction, but same conclusion.
Go to a local archive where they have series 1 , c186O OS 25 inch scale
maps or pre- 1900 maps with a fundamental benchmark and decimal feet
height and compare it with a later high resolution c1930s map with the
same benchmark.

On 10/02/2014 08:28, N_Cook wrote:
Donaghadee Lighthouse J5980

correction, not the FBM number for the lighthouse mark
http://www.geograph.ie/photo/1795317

On 10/02/2014 00:08, Alastair McDonald wrote:
"jbm" wrote in message ...
It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is
rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't
accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and the
rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this later
than 2009.

jim

Don't worry. When Scotland becomes independent all we exiles will fock back
and Scotland will sink and England rise (provided you do cut back on all
those other immigrants :-)

Cheers, Alastair.



Michael Bentine demonstrated this memorably decades ago.
A model of mainland Britain surrounded by water. He moved
representastive hoards of people from outer fringes of Britain , to
where they all migrated to, the over-populated South East. At a critical
point the south of Britain sunk and Scotland rose up

On Monday, February 10, 2014 8:25:54 AM UTC, Jeff wrote:
On Sun, 09 Feb 2014 23:13:17 +0000, jbm wrote:



It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is

rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't

accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and

the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this

later than 2009.



jim



From my geology days I seem to remember Devon and Cornwall are 'being

stretched' causing the land to fall, also the rail line at Dawlish is

laid on the top of an old 'raised beach' from a time when sea level

was higher. These raised beaches make good beds for Rail and roads,

so if the sea gets at them they will wash away. The rail line has

lasted many years, they will soon get it put back.



Jeff

This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.

http://www.avast.com

Not on a raised beach, Jeff. The railway's foundations are on solid permian sandstone, in parts a breccia and in other parts, dune deposits, of which you can see a wave-cut platform under the beach, often exposed in easterlies. Brunel hoped this would not happen and groynes would cause accumulation of beach material. It never happened and the railway cut the beach off from its sediment supply from the cliffs behind. The cross-bedding is a superb example of its type. It's textbook stuff! However, to raise it above the sea, Brunel constructed the wall, then infilled with material. Once the wall was breached, there was no defence against the infill being washed away by the waves, back to the cliff-line. It's happened on numerous occasions since the line's construction, but is becoming more regular recently. The stretch between Teignmouth and Dawlish is the single most expensive 3-mile stretch of railway in the country to maintain and there is now a permanent repair depot at Holcombe beach.

This link is an excellent summary; the predictions as to what was always likely to happen to the line are happening now. NO matter what they do, this line will go - the final demise is only a meter of time until the next 1 in 1000 - year storm, which could happen at any time in the future, including, even, this winter (of which there is 21 days left). It is a very interesting read:

http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~imw/Teignmouth-Dawlish

On Monday, 10 February 2014 20:15:19 UTC, Dawlish wrote:

Once the wall was breached, there was no defence against the infill being washed away by the waves.

Can you put a sock in it?

On Monday, 10 February 2014 08:28:54 UTC, N_Cook wrote:
On 09/02/2014 23:13, jbm wrote:

It has been widely publicised that England is sinking whilst Scotland is

rising. Has anyone done a recent study to ensure that this effect hasn't

accelerated, adding to the problems being experienced in Somerset and

the rest of the south of England? I can't find anything official on this

later than 2009.



jim



I've come across the same problem in the last couple of months.

The research I've done that is on the www so far is unfortunately on my

local trivia file

http://www.divdev.fsnet.co.uk/graff.htm

relating to the vectis Tavern , Cowes, IoW and the wrong official

information , so far available, relating to local flooding of 1924.

see about 2/3 down this .gov file , referring to 1924

http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environm...tish-ports.pdf



(no wonder the AGW brigade get so hot under the collar when there is

such errors [ deliberate? ] stated as fact in the official literature )

Officially is was the same degree of inundation as 1999 but from

archived 1924 newspaper reports for the Solent area it was obviously at

least 0.4m higher.

The official "record" has converted feet and inches and the change of

datum , all quite correctly but have ignored the probable error the

datum in play in 1924 was still from the First Geodetic Levelling of the

mid Victorian era . Other research terms are

1936 OSGB 36 system and the previous Airy 1830 survey system



It looks as though the error got in because the First Geodetic Levelling

was based on Liverpool and the Second and later on Newlyn and surveying

errors or something

I've not read all this , but page 16

http://www.cage.curtin.edu.au/~will/GJI_ODN_slope.pdf

at most Liverpool higher than Newlyn by an "error" of 0.15m. Could the

error/uplift have been factored in twice, once by the sea Liverpool to

Newlyn error and once by the L to N land error?

The OS went to the trouble of removing the original height references on

all their FBM including number 7435, outside what was the London Rd OS

HQ, now Southampton County Courts.

Hopefully the Soton archives would have maps with the FBM decimal feet

heights on the earliest OS maps and so the FGL and SGL heights.



www I can only find one , unofficial, such FBM height references for

those times, for one FBM in N Ireland, and local datum based on Belfast

( Donaghadee Lighthouse J5980 )

and a height difference for the 2 levellings of -2.71m converted from

feet , earlier height higher.



The 1924 Southampton 5.6m (6.0m) flood anamoly requires the 1924

reference to be based on a datum that was higher than post 1930 datum.

But, so far, in the range -0.15m to -2.71m is a very large ballpark .

I also find it suspicious that all www references, that I've seen, to

trigpoints show the second and third levelling heights results in the

1900s to be all the same value to the third decimal place, as a

scientist I just cannot believe that is possible. Even with GPS and all

the behind the scenes Einstein relativistic corrections, g-variation etc

cannot get that close over decades.



***************

If it was possible for you (jbm) to do the same where ever you are, not

necessarily near the sea) I would be very interested in hearing what you

find as I am in contact with 3 academics who have come at this historic

mis-perception, about the severity of storms historically being worse

now than earlier (making allowance for the great English Channel storm

and the Bristol Channel tsunami/great flood event), they have come at it

from a different direction, but same conclusion.

Go to a local archive where they have series 1 , c186O OS 25 inch scale

maps or pre- 1900 maps with a fundamental benchmark and decimal feet

height and compare it with a later high resolution c1930s map with the

same benchmark.

TED Curator Chris Anderson opened Pandora's Box -- further details below -- when he authorised the removal of talks by myself and Rupert Sheldrake from the TEDx Youtube channel. Rupert's talk was entitled "The Science Delusion"
http://realitysandwich.com/171950/sc...d_controversy/

"The Science Delusion":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg