"TudorHgh" wrote in message
...
The trouble with you, Lawrence, is that your good ideas, and there
are
many, are buried under an avalanche of frivolity. Cut it out, man!
I read the piece this morning in the Guardian and it irritated the
poo
out of me. To say that if Antarctica melted the sea level would rise 110
m and
we'd all be doomed, as if this were likely to happen, is just an
unbelievably
silly thing for a man in the position of Sir David King to say. Of
course, he
shouldn't be in that position, knowing, quite obviously, very little about
meteorolgy, let alone climate change. The points made by Alastair and
Shaun
show this to be the case. Furthermore, King says that the concentration
of C02
is increasing at 3 ppm/yr, whereas I'd thought the true figure at present
is
less than half this.
To end on a Lawrencian frivolous note, the disappearance under the
waves
of New Orleans would be no great loss, if the reports of some of my
jazz-fan
friends are anything to go by.

Tudor Hughes, Warlingham, Surrey.



Tudor. Surely your band must have played ?

"way down under in New orleans,
that undersea world in Alastairs dreams"

"TudorHgh" wrote in message
...
The trouble with you, Lawrence, is that your good ideas, and there are
many, are buried under an avalanche of frivolity. Cut it out, man!

I read the piece this morning in the Guardian and it irritated the poo
out of me. To say that if Antarctica melted the sea level would rise 110 m
and
we'd all be doomed, as if this were likely to happen, is just an
unbelievably
silly thing for a man in the position of Sir David King to say. Of course,
he
shouldn't be in that position, knowing, quite obviously, very little about
meteorolgy, let alone climate change.

What has melting ice sheets got to do with weather? Of course one storm
or a hot summer is not going to alter an ice sheet. Adding CO2 to the
atmosphere is a different matter altogether. That is changing the climate.
It affects the temperature of the bottom of the ice through the ice lapse
rate and the increase in surface temperature. More warmth at the base,
which is already being heated geothermally, means more melting there
which will allow the ice sheets to slide into the ocean.

The points made by Alastair and Shaun show this to be the case.

I would say the points made by me back up King against a prejudiced
Shaun (and Tudor.) If the snow line on Kilimanjaro is rising, then the
ice is melting whether the temperature at the summit stays the same
or not. Everyone knows that global warming is happening. The figures
show 0.8C over the last 100 years. To argue that it is not happening,
because you do not want to believe it is caused by carbon dioxide, is
stupid or dishonest. Even more stupid is to blame those who warn
about it of only doing so to have an excuse to raise taxes. I, John
Gummer, Michael Meacher, and Sir John King have no such power.
Where is out motive? How would we benefit if taxes were raised?

Furthermore, King says that the concentration of C02
is increasing at 3 ppm/yr, whereas I'd thought the true figure at present is
less than half this.

An inspection of the CO2 record from Manua Loa shows that
CO2 is increasing at twice the rate it was in 1960s. Then
it was 0.8 ppm per year, now it is 1.6 ppm per year.
http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/ftp/maunaloa-co2/maunaloa.co2
The increase from 2002 to 2003 was 2.54 ppm. If that rate
is maintained CO2 will have doubled by 2070.

The following GIF compares temperature against CO2 levels.
http://calspace.ucsd.edu/virtualmuse...C_Fig4_3_2.jpg
Note that the temperature seems to follow the CO2 and that
with today's CO2 at 380 ppm, if the temperature follows it upwards,
then it is quite likely that the Antarctic ice will melt. BTW the
Greenland ice, which is at a much lower latitude, is already
melting. 8 m will be enough to sink New Orleans and much of
London.

For the full story from King see;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...260825,00.html

Cheers, Alastair.

I live near New Orleans and I love the city as much as any Londoner or
New Yorker would theirs.
New Orleans, despite its drawbacks, is perhaps the most unique city in
America.
Its not really a good place for a city, hemmed in by water and
marshes, but its precariousness is part of its own character.

A lot of what makes New Orleans vulnerable right now to floods has
little to do with global warming or rising sea levels, although these
occurences certainly wouldn't help it.

New Orleans is one of the wettest cities in the US and subject to
considerable precipitation events, particularly with tropical storms.
Despite a massive pumping system, sometimes rainfalls can still be
overwhelming.

Most of the city is almost like a bowl, lying just below sea level
with a huge brackish Lake just to its north and otherwise surrounded
by wetlands. An impressive high storm surge could occur if a strong
hurricane passed just to its east, which is why the city built high
lakefront levees.

Ever since The Mississippi River ceased building a delta and far
worse, since Man began leveeing The Big Muddy, southeast Louisiana has
experienced considerable subsidence and accompanying coastal erosion.
Hastening the problem is the hatchet job that industry has done with
dredging and building countless access canals all across the
surrounding marshes.
90% of all coastal erosion in the US occurs in Louisiana alone, which
loses about a square mile every 12 days.
This has made the N.O. metropilitan area even more vulnerable since a
natural buffer of land and shore has been detriorated.

"Lawrence" wrote in message
...


Alastair I'm beginning to detect a signal coming from the Blair project.

Alastair Campbell
Alastair Darling
Alastair McDonald !!!!!!!!!!

Lawrence, I can assure you that any connections between me and Alastair
Campbell were quickly terminated after the Glencoe Massacre.

OTOH my distant ancestor Flora Macdonald was responsible for the escape, from
the clutches of the Redcoats, of Bonnie Prince Charlie. Whether Alastair
Darling is connected to him via the song "Charlie is my Darling" I have no way
of knowing. Such a connection would in any case be spurious, therefore I have
to disappoint you by stating unequivocally that the signal you detected is
false. Sorry :-(

Cheers, Alastair.

"Alastair McDonald" k wrote
in message ...

"Lawrence" wrote in message
...

Snip..........

Look I'm talking like babbling idiot now. Those that bother to read this
will think I'm plain mad or simply ignorant, ah - that reminds me David
King, that's where I went off the rails.

Come back Michael Meecher El Nino beseecher


Your wish is my command! Here he is writing to the Guardian
along with your other old chum Jihn Gummer. Enjoy;

Time to tackle industrial emissions

Wednesday July 7, 2004
The Guardian

We write as former environment ministers to call upon the government to
take
tough measures to tackle the increasing threat of global climate change.
The
alarm bells are ringing loud and clear, and cannot be ignored.
Over recent months a panel of leading international scientists have
predicted
that climate change may lead to extinction of a quarter of the world's
species
by 2050; the World Health Organisation has warned that the health of
millions
of people will be damaged if world temperatures continue to rise; and the
government's chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, says that climate
change is a far greater threat to the world than international terrorism.

The prime minister says climate change is the most important environmental
issue facing the world, but he must back his words with firm action. One
important area is industrial emissions. The government's proposals under
the
EU emissions trading regime could result in an increase in
climate-changing
emissions from industry. This is unacceptable, and sets a dangerous
precedent.

Failure to tackle industrial emissions will require much bigger cuts from
other sectors to meet our climate targets. This will include transport and
domestic sectors, both of which have seen carbon dioxide emissions rise
over
the past 10 years.

We applaud the prime minister for continuing the UK's leading
international
role on climate change, but a failure to take decisive action at home will
undermine the UK's credibility. The EU emissions trading scheme is his big
test - and he must not fail it.
Michael Meacher MP
Labour environment minister 1997-2003
John Gummer MP
Conservative environment minister 1993-97


http://www.oneworld.net/external/?ur...5691%2C00.html

Cheers, Alastair.




Alastair. The same John Gummer who publicly ate the the Beef Burgers during
the first BSE scare? Blimey I didn't realise Meacher ate one as well!
Your honour I rest my case.