On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:05:28 +0100, "Alastair McDonald"
k wrote:


From a weatherman's POV the moist air rose from sea level to pass
over the Bodmin Moor, and the cooling caused the water vapour to
condense and fall as rain. The heavy rain on the moor was funneled
down by the river through a narrow gorge, which it had cut into the
cliffs. Te gorge was the site of a pretty fishing village. The flash flood
was impeded by a bridge over the river above the village. A small lake
formed upstread of the bridge which eventually gave way. When this
happend the surge of water burst the banks of the river and damaged
some of the building in the village.

` So what you're saying is that it was a combination of high
precipitation efficiency, precipitation duration and the shape/size of
the watershed the precipitation fell in. How is this different than
any heavy rain event?


From a climatologist's point of view, global warming has caused higher
sea surface temperatures which resulted in a greater frequency of hurricanes
during this season.

LOL. A demonstratable mistake, I'm afraid. There is no
research that has found any statistically significant change in
hurricane frequency. If you have one, please post a citation. I'm
interested in why you would expect to see such a trend when the
majority of the warming has been taking place at high northern
latitudes during the arctic winter and involves changes in overnight
lows. Is there some teleconnection between the overnight lows in
Inuvik and hurricane formation that the climate community is unaware
of? Keep in mind, that researchers haven't found a
trend...yet...because the ingredients necessary for hurricane
formation have not been sufficiently altered to produce such a trend.

Moeover, the warmer SST allowed a dying hurricane
to cross the Atlantic without losing its moisture. When Bonnie reached
Cornwall it deposited its remaining load, which was heavy enough to
bring down a road briidge. Basically, to put it in climatic terms, more
warming means more evaporation which means heavier rainfall.

And dying hurricanes have never found their way across the
north Atlantic before? If they have, what allowed them to do so?
Presumably, if it occurred 50 years ago, you cannot blame the result
on GW.


Ten years ago British scientists were predicting more severe weather
for Britain due to global warming. We saw it two years ago and we are
seeing it again this year, not just in southern England but also in northern
Scotland where thre have been two incidents of motorist having to be
rescued from vehicles in flash flooding.

And undoubtedly as GW extends further out of the high
latitudes we'll see changes in severe weather trends. None have been
found so far. Attempting to link every severe weather event with GW is
simply wrong.



Of course you do not accept what I have written. But I thought I should
explain it for those who can understand these things. So for you Dave,
all I have got to say is "Now **** off!"

Of course not, because you're wrong. I'm sorry you don't like
it, but facts are facts and there is nothing your strident offerings
can do to change that.