"Alastair McDonald" k
wrote in message

That is a good point, but you could argue that about the forest fires in
Spain, and the drought in the USA, and the fires and drought in Australia, and
the deaths in India last year from the record temperatures, and the flooding
in
Bangladesh this year, and ...

....and the man's a fool. Does he not know that flash floods predate the
history of mankind.


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Well the Lynmouth disaster of August the 15th 1952 took place in a pereiod
of global warming as did the Canvey Island tragedy. Only idiots and
ideologically lead brainwashed would blame this Boscastle incident on Global
warming. Go check the satellite temps, these have run since 1978 and
basically show that nowt has changed much in that period. If anything the
temp down turn with volcanoes is now in process. It won't of course mean
anything to the self-loathers of the developed world. These middle -class
hand wringers will continue to thrash themselves with birchleaves with only
the white working class elderly strapped across their back's for protection.
They will thrash them until the blood flows. Look out very soon for new
carbon taxes based on an blatant lie.







"Sunimage" wrote in message
news
I watched lasts nights special ITV program on the flood in Boscastle and
saw a meteorologist blame this flood and many other storms this summer
on global warming. Is it really possible to link isolated and localisd
events like this on global warming?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 06/08/2004

Are you really saying that we would not have heard about Bocastle, if the
tourists had not been there with their video cameras?

Neither Shaun, or me, or anybody else is saying that. It is a most
unfair exaggeration of what has been said. Obviously Boscastle would be news
even if it had happened 100 yrs ago. What would not have been news is the
various extreme events in third-world countries and their associated
devastating human effects. A monsoon flood in Bangladesh or a tropical
hurricane in the Caribbean would not have been news in the past, partly because
they are not news, and can be expected, unfortunately. The cumulative effect
of all this is to engender a false sense of doom, even if it is the lesser of
two evils, the other being censorship.
There is too much sodding news these days, too much for our own good, and
too much for us to make sense of.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.

"TudorHgh" wrote in message
...
Are you really saying that we would not have heard about Bocastle, if the
tourists had not been there with their video cameras?

Neither Shaun, or me, or anybody else is saying that. It is a most
unfair exaggeration of what has been said. Obviously Boscastle would be
news
even if it had happened 100 yrs ago. What would not have been news is the
various extreme events in third-world countries and their associated
devastating human effects. A monsoon flood in Bangladesh or a tropical
hurricane in the Caribbean would not have been news in the past, partly
because
they are not news, and can be expected, unfortunately. The cumulative
effect
of all this is to engender a false sense of doom, even if it is the lesser
of
two evils, the other being censorship.
There is too much sodding news these days, too much for our own good,
and
too much for us to make sense of.

You may not be able to make sense of it, but the climate scientists at the
Hadley Centre can. For instance see this quote from Nature; "Here we
report a systematic attempt to determine the range of climate changes
consistent with these uncertainties, based on a 53-member ensemble of
model versions constructed by varying model parameters. We estimate
a probability density function for the sensitivity of climate to a doubling of
atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, and obtain a 5-95 per cent probability
range of 2.4-5.4 °C. "

JAMES M. MURPHY1, DAVID M. H. SEXTON1, DAVID N. BARNETT1, GARETH S. JONES1,
MARK J. WEBB1, MATTHEW COLLINS1 & DAVID A. STAINFORTH2
Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate
change simulations
Nature 430, 768 - 772 (12 August 2004); doi:10.1038/nature02771
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPa...e02771_fs.html


Recent events ARE caused by anthropogenic global warming, and no amount of
sticking your head in the sand will make it go away.

Cheers, Alastair.

Angry of nextworld fulminated:


"Doris Stokes" wrote in message
...
Well the Lynmouth disaster of August the 15th 1952 took place in a pereiod
of global warming as did the Canvey Island tragedy. Only idiots and
ideologically lead brainwashed would blame this Boscastle incident on
Global
warming. Go check the satellite temps, these have run since 1978 and
basically show that nowt has changed much in that period. If anything the
temp down turn with volcanoes is now in process. It won't of course mean
anything to the self-loathers of the developed world. These middle -class
hand wringers will continue to thrash themselves with birchleaves with
only
the white working class elderly strapped across their back's for
protection.
They will thrash them until the blood flows. Look out very soon for new
carbon taxes based on an blatant lie.







"Sunimage" wrote in message
news
I watched lasts nights special ITV program on the flood in Boscastle and
saw a meteorologist blame this flood and many other storms this summer
on global warming. Is it really possible to link isolated and localisd
events like this on global warming?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.735 / Virus Database: 489 - Release Date: 06/08/2004

In article , "James" writes:

Either way, if global warming is the real cause, no one is tackling
population increase as a problem...


I can assure you, James, that population increase is considered the prime
cause of global warming, combined, of course, with the economic activity of
that population.


The amount of anthropomorhic greenhouse gases being emitted each year is
a result of the size of the human population and what that human population
is doing.

You are right to imply that *politically* there is only a modest amount of
activity on population control, however.

That needs to change.


Cheers,

keith



---
Iraq: 5 thousand million pounds, 60 lives, and counting...
The Politicians will now seek to blame the Spooks.

In article , "Doris Stokes"
writes:

Go check the satellite temps, these have run since 1978 and basically show
that nowt has changed much in that period.


I have been responsible for retrieving, recording and validating remotely
sensed data for many years, working for NERC and ESA with my colleagues
at NASA. I have direct input to the UARS, ERS1, ERS2 and ENVISAT missions,
although I currently command MARS EXPRESS (about to return to ENIVSAT).

So I know what I am talking about, whereas I suspect that you do not.

I would like to know of your involvement with developing and operating
space-based radiometers, which may lend credence to you statement?

I say this because you are presenting a "fact" in a way which no reputable
scientist would, unlike a politically motivated politician...


The truth of the matter is that remotely sensed temperature data is
NOWHERE NEAR accurate enough to discern a signature of global warming
from background noise, over the short period in which such data exists.


Such a temperture signature does exist however, from ground-based records
based over a much longer period of time.


Second point: unlike the temperture record, the signature for global
warming in the CO2 record is HUGE. It cannot be mistaken, and is easily
verified.


Cheers,

keith







---
Iraq: 5 thousand million pounds, 60 lives, and counting...
The Politicians will now seek to blame the Spooks.

"Keith Dancey" wrote in message
...
In article , "James"
writes:

Either way, if global warming is the real cause, no one is tackling
population increase as a problem...


I can assure you, James, that population increase is considered the prime
cause of global warming, combined, of course, with the economic activity of
that population.


The amount of anthropomorhic greenhouse gases being emitted each year is
a result of the size of the human population and what that human population
is doing.

You are right to imply that *politically* there is only a modest amount of
activity on population control, however.

That needs to change.

Well, we can solve the problem by reducing the amount of CO2 we emit or
by reducing the world population. I much prefer the second option so long
as the cull does not include me!

Cheers, Alastair.

"Keith Dancey" wrote in message
...
In article , "Doris Stokes"

writes:

Go check the satellite temps, these have run since 1978 and basically
show
that nowt has changed much in that period.


I have been responsible for retrieving, recording and validating remotely
sensed data for many years, working for NERC and ESA with my colleagues
at NASA. I have direct input to the UARS, ERS1, ERS2 and ENVISAT
missions,
although I currently command MARS EXPRESS (about to return to ENIVSAT).

So I know what I am talking about, whereas I suspect that you do not.

I would like to know of your involvement with developing and operating
space-based radiometers, which may lend credence to you statement?

I say this because you are presenting a "fact" in a way which no reputable
scientist would, unlike a politically motivated politician...


The truth of the matter is that remotely sensed temperature data is
NOWHERE NEAR accurate enough to discern a signature of global warming
from background noise, over the short period in which such data exists.


Such a temperture signature does exist however, from ground-based records
based over a much longer period of time.


Second point: unlike the temperture record, the signature for global
warming in the CO2 record is HUGE. It cannot be mistaken, and is easily
verified.


Cheers,

keith
---
Iraq: 5 thousand million pounds, 60 lives, and counting...
The Politicians will now seek to blame the Spooks.


Keith,

Is this the resolution of the sensors being no better than .2C thing, or
something else?

What should the error bars of the various interpretations of the raw sat
data be?

Typical, I was waiting for this


"Sunimage" wrote in message
news
I watched lasts nights special ITV program on the flood in Boscastle and
saw a meteorologist blame this flood and many other storms this summer
on global warming. Is it really possible to link isolated and localisd
events like this on global warming?