"Paul C" wrote in message
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of salt.
We have heard this crap before.

--
************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.

website updated regularly
www.gavinstaples.com

For the latest lecture in the Darwin Lecture Series in Cambridge, please
click on my site, and then click on the Darwin Lecture series link.


"Neither philosophy, nor religion, nor morality, nor wisdom, nor
interest will ever govern nations or parties against their vanity,
their pride, their resentment or revenge, or their avarice or
ambition. Nothing but force and power and strength can restrain them." --
John Adams.


All outgoing emails are checked for viruses by Norton Internet Security
Professional 2004.
************************************************** **************************
************************************************** **

On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:54:36 -0000, "Gavin Staples"
wrote:



"Paul C" wrote in message
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of salt.
We have heard this crap before.

That's what Dubya said.


--
Paul

In message , Gavin
Staples writes

Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer

Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of
salt. We have heard this crap before.

Hysteria it may be; but please explain what's "left wing" about it - or
indeed about "influential Pentagon defence adviser Andrew Marshall"
--
Andy Mabbett
"The Internet is a reflection of our society[ ...]. If we do not like what we
see in that mirror the problem is not to fix the mirror, we have to fix
society." Vint Cerf

"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
...


"Paul C" wrote in message
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of
salt.
We have heard this crap before.

--

************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.



I remember in 1979, just as I started work after University, reading exactly
the same 'doomsday' senario for 25 years time, ie now. The "threat" then
though was not GW but severely dwindling oil supplies as we were by now,
exhausting all the Worlds reserves. All about how the US was getting worked
up about the "very real" threat of the USSR invading the Middle East as it's
own oilwells dried up etc etc!

Says it all I think

--
Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Pete B" wrote in message
news:4039c74f$0$917$9b0f33e3@clyde...
"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
...


"Paul C" wrote in message
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of
salt.
We have heard this crap before.

--

************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.



I remember in 1979, just as I started work after University, reading exactly
the same 'doomsday' senario for 25 years time, ie now. The "threat" then
though was not GW but severely dwindling oil supplies as we were by now,
exhausting all the Worlds reserves. All about how the US was getting worked
up about the "very real" threat of the USSR invading the Middle East as it's
own oilwells dried up etc etc!

Says it all I think


I remember, even before 1979, being told a story about a little boy who
cried "Wolf!" When the wolf did arrive no one believed him. The flock
of sheep he was guarding were destroyed.
http://www.ezschool.com/stories/boy_wolf.html

It seems as though that is what is happening now. Because "Danger!"
has been shouted before and nothing happened, when a real danger
is approaching people just don't believe it. But you only have to look
at the trivial amounts of publicity there were for the previous scares and
compare it with the international efforts being made to warn about this
one, to see that there is no comparison.

Cheers, Alastair.


Cheers, Alastair.

On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:24:03 -0000, "Pete B"
wrote:

"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
...


"Paul C" wrote in message
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of
salt.
We have heard this crap before.

--

************************************************* ***************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.



I remember in 1979, just as I started work after University, reading exactly
the same 'doomsday' senario for 25 years time, ie now. The "threat" then
though was not GW but severely dwindling oil supplies as we were by now,
exhausting all the Worlds reserves. All about how the US was getting worked
up about the "very real" threat of the USSR invading the Middle East as it's
own oilwells dried up etc etc!

Says it all I think

It certainly does. It was the US that invaded the Middle East to
secure its oil supplies..


--
Paul

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in message ...

"Pete B" wrote in message
news:4039c74f$0$917$9b0f33e3@clyde...
"Gavin Staples" wrote in message
...


"Paul C" wrote in message
...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...153530,00.html


Now the Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us

· Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war
· Britain will be 'Siberian' in less than 20 years
· Threat to the world is greater than terrorism

Mark Townsend and Paul Harris in New York
Sunday February 22, 2004
The Observer




Typical left wing hysteria. It should be treated with a large pinch of
salt.
We have heard this crap before.

--


************************************************** **************************
************************************************** *
Gavin Staples.



I remember in 1979, just as I started work after University, reading
exactly
the same 'doomsday' senario for 25 years time, ie now. The "threat" then
though was not GW but severely dwindling oil supplies as we were by now,
exhausting all the Worlds reserves. All about how the US was getting
worked
up about the "very real" threat of the USSR invading the Middle East as
it's
own oilwells dried up etc etc!

Says it all I think


I remember, even before 1979, being told a story about a little boy who
cried "Wolf!" When the wolf did arrive no one believed him. The flock
of sheep he was guarding were destroyed.
http://www.ezschool.com/stories/boy_wolf.html

In the version I heard, the boy was eaten also ;-)

It seems as though that is what is happening now. Because "Danger!"
has been shouted before and nothing happened, when a real danger
is approaching people just don't believe it. But you only have to look
at the trivial amounts of publicity there were for the previous scares and
compare it with the international efforts being made to warn about this
one, to see that there is no comparison.

Cheers, Alastair.


The oil issue was not particularly trivial at the time, that's why I
remember it 25 yrs on. It was never far from headline news or discussion in
journals such as Newsweek, Time & even New Scientist for several months.

Regarding the issue of Global Warming today, I was not disputing it as
such - the evidence (although not necessarily the particular cause(es)) is
now, in all effect, indisputable.

What I was disputing was the scaremongering aspect. The story as put in this
article just will not happen in that way. Even if the West European climate
does cool locally in a generally warmer World (something I personally still
need to be convinced of as we still have a large volume of water to our
West), this story regarding Britain becoming 'Siberian' has about as much
truth as the fact that I will be on the Moon this afternoon. We were not
'Siberian' during the Little Ice Age, nor did we have prolonged famine,
although there were bad years.

Other aspects of the stroy are political and although I have views, they do
not really form part of a discussion on a scientific newsgroup.

Incidentally, are you contributing to the CPDN:

http://www.climateprediction.net

experiments, aiming eventually to try and predict the possible GW climate
from 2050 on (and contributing to GW in the process by leaving your PC's on
all the time ;-))

--
Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------

"Pete B" wrote in message
news:403b1274$0$922$9b0f33e3@clyde...

Snip old stuff.

The oil issue was not particularly trivial at the time, that's why I
remember it 25 yrs on. It was never far from headline news or discussion in
journals such as Newsweek, Time & even New Scientist for several months.

But global warming has been in the headlines for several years if not decades.
There is no comparison.

Regarding the issue of Global Warming today, I was not disputing it as
such - the evidence (although not necessarily the particular cause(es)) is
now, in all effect, indisputable.

What I was disputing was the scaremongering aspect. The story as put in this
article just will not happen in that way. Even if the West European climate
does cool locally in a generally warmer World (something I personally still
need to be convinced of as we still have a large volume of water to our
West), this story regarding Britain becoming 'Siberian' has about as much
truth as the fact that I will be on the Moon this afternoon. We were not
'Siberian' during the Little Ice Age, nor did we have prolonged famine,
although there were bad years.

I agree with you that it will not happen that way, but it has been know since
the 1970s that when the climate changes it does not do it slowly. What will
happen is not the absurbly predicted sudden cooling but in fact a rapid
warming.

There is a link to the full Pentagon report on the following web page;
The interesting point in it is the graphic taken from Richard Alley's book
"The Two Mile Time Machine" about the Greenland ice cores where he
was the lead scientist. The graph clearly shows that the exit from the
Younger Dryas was more dramatic than the entry. It is that type of
sudden warming which we should fear, not a cooling. That graph also
shows that climate changes tend be very sudden and very severe. See
the link to the full pentagon report at;
http://www.stopesso.com/coverage/00000066.php

Other aspects of the stroy are political and although I have views, they do
not really form part of a discussion on a scientific newsgroup.

Warnings of the consequences of a rapid climate change are not political if
they are based on science, which in this case they are. Of course, the danger
can only be averted by political action, but the issue is not political one.
It is
scientific issue, but those who oppose measures being taken, either through
self interest or stupitity, try to paint it as such. They even claim that
every man
has a right to form his own opinion about it, thus equating the science of
greenhouse gasses with political freedom. It is the skeptics who are playing
politics not the scientists.

Incidentally, are you contributing to the CPDN:

http://www.climateprediction.net

experiments, aiming eventually to try and predict the possible GW climate
from 2050 on (and contributing to GW in the process by leaving your PC's on
all the time ;-))

The idea behing CPDN is that it should run in the background when your
computer is switched on. It is not meant that you should leave your computer
on overnight to run it alone. Why do you think it runs at such a low
priority?

BTW There are no reports from the CPDN tests of a cooling happening, so I
think we are both right to dismiss that scenario.

Cheers, Alastair.

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in message ...

"Pete B" wrote in message
news:403b1274$0$922$9b0f33e3@clyde...

Snip old stuff.

further snipping

Regarding the issue of Global Warming today, I was not disputing it as
such - the evidence (although not necessarily the particular cause(es))
is
now, in all effect, indisputable.

What I was disputing was the scaremongering aspect. The story as put in
this
article just will not happen in that way. Even if the West European
climate
does cool locally in a generally warmer World (something I personally
still
need to be convinced of as we still have a large volume of water to our
West), this story regarding Britain becoming 'Siberian' has about as
much
truth as the fact that I will be on the Moon this afternoon. We were not
'Siberian' during the Little Ice Age, nor did we have prolonged famine,
although there were bad years.

I agree with you that it will not happen that way, but it has been know
since
the 1970s that when the climate changes it does not do it slowly. What
will
happen is not the absurbly predicted sudden cooling but in fact a rapid
warming.

There is a link to the full Pentagon report on the following web page;
The interesting point in it is the graphic taken from Richard Alley's book
"The Two Mile Time Machine" about the Greenland ice cores where he
was the lead scientist. The graph clearly shows that the exit from the
Younger Dryas was more dramatic than the entry. It is that type of
sudden warming which we should fear, not a cooling. That graph also
shows that climate changes tend be very sudden and very severe. See
the link to the full pentagon report at;
http://www.stopesso.com/coverage/00000066.php

Agreed, the general acceptance, at least as I understand it, is that climate
changes do not take place slowly over many hundreds of years as once thought
but occur very quickly. We have seen this in various forms over the last 20
years i.e. the disappearence of real winter, hotter summers, rapid overall
annual global temp increase etc. It would be irresponsible at this stage to
state definitely that this *is* due to CO2 induced rather than natural cycle
GW though, although many think it is and it is not unreasonable to think
about counteractive action.

Other aspects of the stroy are political and although I have views, they
do
not really form part of a discussion on a scientific newsgroup.

Warnings of the consequences of a rapid climate change are not political
if
they are based on science, which in this case they are. Of course, the
danger
can only be averted by political action, but the issue is not political
one.
It is
scientific issue, but those who oppose measures being taken, either
through
self interest or stupitity, try to paint it as such. They even claim that
every man
has a right to form his own opinion about it, thus equating the science of
greenhouse gasses with political freedom. It is the skeptics who are
playing
politics not the scientists.

Agreed, the warnings are based on science but issues related to how it is
tackled are political. My main point though was picking up on the conflict
issue regarding food supplies (and my personal as well as wider views on how
this should be approached) and this is where I feel it goes beyond
discussion on this NG.

Incidentally, are you contributing to the CPDN:

http://www.climateprediction.net

experiments, aiming eventually to try and predict the possible GW
climate
from 2050 on (and contributing to GW in the process by leaving your PC's
on
all the time ;-))

The idea behing CPDN is that it should run in the background when your
computer is switched on. It is not meant that you should leave your
computer
on overnight to run it alone. Why do you think it runs at such a low
priority?

AFAIAA, the main objective if one is going to make a real personal
contribution to this experiment is to run ones PC 24/7 which is what I am
doing at home with a newly rebuilt to 1.4GHz machine. My other 1.0GHz
machine is running another Distributive Computing project 24/7. I don't
consider it suitable for CPDN as it is a laptop.

The CPDN model is so complex that to only use unused processor power in the
background while the machine is in normal daily use would take an extremely
long time. The CPDN technical pages go as far as to give a *.bat setup for
switching the model on at the end of a working day to run overnight and off
again at the start of the working day.

BTW There are no reports from the CPDN tests of a cooling happening, so I
think we are both right to dismiss that scenario.

Some of the models have given cold dry outlier results, while others have
given more rapid warming than the stable, normal runs when the CO2 content
of the models atmosphere is doubled:

http://www.climateprediction.net/sci...ults.php#case3

It's still early days for my first run, I only upgraded the machine to a
suitable spec 2 weeks ago.

--
Regards

Pete

Please take my dog out twice to e-mail

---------------------------------------------------------------
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer and
do not represent the views, policy or understanding of any
other person or official body.
---------------------------------------------------------------