JPG wrote in message . ..
A remarkable series of 3 photographs, each taken a year apart,
graphically demonstrate the increased melting of the Greenland ice
cap.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/New...3?img_id=15341

http://tinyurl.co.uk/sagn

JPG

On to every global warmer a little sun must shine. Wouldn't it be
terrible to find that this has been going on for decades but NASA # up
the data again. Anyone found something similar about the Sahel?

So with the new potential for farmland in the region, what moves are
afoot to spoil the ecosystem the normal way?

"Michael McNeil" wrote in message
om...
JPG wrote in message
. ..
A remarkable series of 3 photographs, each taken a year apart,
graphically demonstrate the increased melting of the Greenland ice
cap.


http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/New...3?img_id=15341

http://tinyurl.co.uk/sagn

JPG

On to every global warmer a little sun must shine. Wouldn't it be
terrible to find that this has been going on for decades but NASA # up
the data again. Anyone found something similar about the Sahel?

Yes, all the ice in the Sahel has melted too!

So with the new potential for farmland in the region, what moves are
afoot to spoil the ecosystem the normal way?

Haven't you noticed, the UK farming industry is being closed down. It
is cheaper to buy GM grain from the US, because they can produce it
more efficiently with their greater mechanisation and irrigation
schemes powered through lower fuel prices.

Of course this ignores the fact that GW has already brought drought
to the mid-west, and soon Britain will be one of the few parts of the
world where agriculture is feasible!

Cheers, Alastair.

Cheers, Alastair.

wrote in message
...
In article you write:
Haven't you noticed, the UK farming industry is being closed down. It
is cheaper to buy GM grain from the US, because they can produce it
more efficiently with their greater mechanisation and irrigation
schemes powered through lower fuel prices.

This is so OT I took it to private email, but I am interested in this
statement. I thought farmers paid the market price for their fuel - i.e.
they don't pay tax. That should make it a level playing field.

I am not sure about OT, it may be OTT!

You are probably correct about farmers getting tax free diesel for
their tractors, but wheras we pay £4 a gallon for petrol, in the US
they pay only $1 a gallon. This reduces the US farmers costs for
everything except tractor fuel. Basically it is a waste of time us
trying to stop global warming with high fuel taxes. What is needed
is world wide agreement on fuel taxes so that no one country can
take advantage.

I had heard that the US government subsidises fuel. I don't know if this
is true or not, but if so we should put an extra tax on their imports to
compensate for this. Unfortunately that's probably not politically
realistic.

To be honest, I do not know all the details of the British and US
tax ploys. What I am aware of is the double standards that are
employed by accountants/economists to justify the staus quo. I'll
only give one for instance, but here it is.

If taxpayer's money is given to keep open a railway line in North
Wales, that is described as a subsidy, but if money is given to a train
company to provide a commuter service into London, that is called
a franchise! IRONY ON Of course the London commuters are
providing a vital service to the community by collecting and spending
our taxes, whereas the Welsh are only providing us with food. IRONY
OFF Does the London commuter work harder than a Welsh farmer? I
doubt it, yet his salary is two or three times as much as the Welsh farmer's
income, and his transport is subsidised by the Welsh farmers tax. This is
not a new discovery made by me. The exploitation of the rural populations
by the urban was pointed out by Adam Smith in his book "An Enquiry
into the Wealth of Nations" written in 1780.

In the 1960s the nationalised coal board found that it cost more to
extract coal in Scotland, so the price there was raised. When oil
was found in the North Sea, the benefits were spent equally
throughout Britain. The system is very much what's mine is
mine, and what's yours is ours! This sort of thinking is universal,
so the same principle is applied by the US when it comes to
free trade. If the UK had a monopoly of computer software, the
US would be the first to complain, but they are loath to break up
Microsoft because it is such an important dollar earner for their
economy.

Because capitalism won the Cold War against socialism, everyone
thinks that it is the perfect system. Free trade, as it is now called
has major problems, not least "The tragedy of the commons."
This is where the fishing fleet increases in size because of the
profits that can be made, until the stocks are destroyed. There
is nothing to prevent the oil companies from extracting fossil fuels
and promoting their buring. Only when the climate changes
catastrophically will it end.

Have I got back OT? Have I gone OTT?

Cheers, Alastair.

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote in message ...

I am not sure about OT, it may be OTT!

To be honest, I do not know all the details of the British and US
tax ploys. What I am aware of is the double standards that are
employed by accountants/economists to justify the staus quo. I'll
only give one for instance, but here it is.

1. If taxpayer's money is given to keep open a railway line in North
Wales, that is described as a subsidy, but if money is given to a train
company to provide a commuter service into London, that is called
a franchise! IRONY ON Of course the London commuters are
providing a vital service to the community by collecting and spending
our taxes, whereas the Welsh are only providing us with food. IRONY
OFF Does the London commuter work harder than a Welsh farmer? I
doubt it, yet his salary is two or three times as much as the Welsh farmer's
income, and his transport is subsidised by the Welsh farmers tax. This is
not a new discovery made by me. The exploitation of the rural populations
by the urban was pointed out by Adam Smith in his book "An Enquiry
into the Wealth of Nations" written in 1780.

2. In the 1960s the nationalised coal board found that it cost more to
extract coal in Scotland, so the price there was raised. When oil
was found in the North Sea, the benefits were spent equally
throughout Britain. The system is very much what's mine is
mine, and what's yours is ours! This sort of thinking is universal,
so the same principle is applied by the US when it comes to
free trade. If the UK had a monopoly of computer software, the
US would be the first to complain, but they are loath to break up
Microsoft because it is such an important dollar earner for their
economy.

Because capitalism won the Cold War against socialism, everyone
thinks that it is the perfect system. Free trade, as it is now called
has major problems, not least "The tragedy of the commons."
This is where the fishing fleet increases in size because of the
profits that can be made, until the stocks are destroyed. There
is nothing to prevent the oil companies from extracting fossil fuels
and promoting their buring. Only when the climate changes
catastrophically will it end.

Have I got back OT? Have I gone OTT?

It has gone HOT. But at least someon's happy about that. Where did all
that sulphur and phosphorous go and the nitrogen in all this so called
fossil fuel? Or is it called fossil fuel because like certain other
types of depositions they are full of fossils?

As far as the Welsh farmer being unhappy with his lot, what makes him
so different from his counterparts elsewhere on the globe? Whatever
the harvest, the commodities market will cut what profits the weather
spares him.

But he has a better road to market now than he had.

"Yet true it is, as cow chawes cud,
And trees at spring doe yeeld forth bud,
Except winde stands as never it stood,
It is an ill winde turnes none to good."
(From "A description of the properties on windes all the times of the
yeere" by Thomass Tusser)

As a desert, the Sahara poses not a few problems for the unwary. It's
temperature changing as it does so rapidly makes exposure the chief
cause of concern. However it was not a danger to this diurnal
behaviour to which my first post to this thread was in reference.

For years the UN and subordinate hangers on, were telling us the
Sahara is expanding and could we please give them lots of money to use
wisely on the behalf of the poor indigents.

Later when they began talking about global cooling they released data
that showed this Saharan threat was not the case at all.

The link does mention that the desert is encroaching on certain parts
of Africa, one might care to remember that the countries mentioned are
at war and have been for decades, little wonder that any natural
defences to the desert are down. (Little wonder they are at war given
their peace is in the hands of the UN.)

http://www.eden-foundation.org/project/desertif.html

What I was actually looking for was a statement that the
desertification of the Sahel was a cyclical thing and that global
warmers have recanted on their earlier stance.

I do believe the earth is in a bad shape. However it is not due to
temerature rises in the sun as such. I'm not saying it is not due to
pollution either. In fact the form of pollution affecting the planet
is deeper than any simplistic "stop burning things" point of view.

So now we have proof that Greenland is not a simple ice-cube in the
fridge equation. However there is one equation that is yet to change:

It takes a lot of heat to melt a lot of ice.

It takes a lot of a lot of heat to boil it.

Once in the atmosphere it acts as a valve stopping heat entry.

Heat is evolved as the temperature drops and the ice returns.

The quickest way for the heat to dissipate is out into the wide,
nebulous yonder. To be lost for ever -unless in its peregrinations the
vestiges of our stars light is returned in kind.

"Michael McNeil" wrote in message
om...
"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in message ...


Have I got back OT? Have I gone OTT?

It has gone HOT. But at least someon's happy about that. Where did all
that sulphur and phosphorous go and the nitrogen in all this so called
fossil fuel? Or is it called fossil fuel because like certain other
types of depositions they are full of fossils?

As far as the Welsh farmer being unhappy with his lot, what makes him
so different from his counterparts elsewhere on the globe? Whatever
the harvest, the commodities market will cut what profits the weather
spares him.

First I should apologise for the political nature my post to which you
responded. It was written as a personal reply but got posted to the
news group in error. I have cancelled that post but obviously you had
down loaded it before the cancel took effect.

The point is British farmers (not just Welsh) are being driven out of
buisness and their farms are being converted into golf courses, theme
parks, and motorways. When global warming kicks in, rapid climate
change is a distinct possibility, as is the desertification of the continental
interiors. This could lead to grave disruption to food supplies, and I
believe that British governments should follow the precautionary
principle by preserving our agricultural heritage, and not destroy it

Cheers, Alastair..





But he has a better road to market now than he had.

"Yet true it is, as cow chawes cud,
And trees at spring doe yeeld forth bud,
Except winde stands as never it stood,
It is an ill winde turnes none to good."
(From "A description of the properties on windes all the times of the
yeere" by Thomass Tusser)