Climate change

[Joensuu]

LOL With 3 post's in 24 hrs I'm not even going to attempt to reply to the temper tantrums on here...Man...they say the truth hurts, but this is apocaliptic.

. I think you misunderstand apocalyptic:

 

A server full of thousands of leaked emails which almost entirely confirm the reality of climate change (of which 20 or so sound strange when read out of context), nope that's not apocalyptic.

 

No attempt by humanity to reduce co2 emissions... Well according to the collective understanding of the greatest minds on the planet, that could indeed be truely apocalyptic.

 

Cheers for sounding more and more like a crank...

[Minty]

I make no apologies for reposting this, and hopefully others will understand why. Intend to keep doing so until he replies.

 

I said then, and I say now, you might be right... Maybe man made climate change is non-existant or minimal, but we cannot know for certain, so surely that, combined with the continuing depletion of natural resources and reduction of animal species due to changing habitats and climates, should lead any supposedly intelligent race to moderate their impact on the planet that supports them, to maximise it's ability to do so for future generations.

 

As I say, I might be wrong and I am more than willing to accept that. How can you be so arrogantly certain that you aren't?

[badgerx16]

I make no apologies for reposting this, and hopefully others will understand why. Intend to keep doing so until he replies.

He won't !

[dune]

I saw an interview with a local councillor from ****ermouth speaking about the flood. What cannot be disputed is that the rainfall level was a freak event, but he stated that the environment agency no longer dredged the river like in the old days.

 

River dredging used to be a standard operation throughout the UK but the leftie know it alls (who usually happen to live in cities and know jack **** about the countryside) have in their infinite wisdom lobbied against dredging because they claim it harms trout and salmon spawning grounds.

 

The lack of dredging and the building on flood plains to provide housing for our bloated population (the socialists open door policy to immigrants being a factor in the need for extra housing), is the real reason why flooding is in the news more and more.

[norwaysaint]

I saw an interview with a local councillor from ****ermouth speaking about the flood. What cannot be disputed is that the rainfall level was a freak event, but he stated that the environment agency no longer dredged the river like in the old days.

 

River dredging used to be a standard operation throughout the UK but the leftie know it alls (who usually happen to live in cities and know jack **** about the countryside) have in their infinite wisdom lobbied against dredging because they claim it harms trout and salmon spawning grounds.

 

The lack of dredging and the building on flood plains to provide housing for our bloated population (the socialists open door policy to immigrants being a factor in the need for extra housing), is the real reason why flooding is in the news more and more.

 

This is by far my favourite post on this thread. It is superb. This post has nearly everything.

[hypochondriac]

I make no apologies for reposting this, and hopefully others will understand why. Intend to keep doing so until he replies.

 

He won't reply minty. I feel the same as you and it annoys me when someone is just looking for an argument because the won't actually answer anyone with balanced views.

[badgerx16]

I saw an interview with a local councillor from ****ermouth speaking about the flood. What cannot be disputed is that the rainfall level was a freak event, but he stated that the environment agency no longer dredged the river like in the old days.

 

River dredging used to be a standard operation throughout the UK but the leftie know it alls (who usually happen to live in cities and know jack **** about the countryside) have in their infinite wisdom lobbied against dredging because they claim it harms trout and salmon spawning grounds.

 

The lack of dredging and the building on flood plains to provide housing for our bloated population (the socialists open door policy to immigrants being a factor in the need for extra housing), is the real reason why flooding is in the news more and more.

 

Do you know ANYTHING about, for instance, the geography of the Newlands Valley or the area around Co©kermouth ? The flooding in Keswick is due to 370mm of rain falling on Robinson, Knott Rigg, Hindscarth, and Causey Pike, in one day. No amount of dredging in Workington will stop Keskadale Beck or Derwent Water from overflowing when hit with that volume of water, and it's miles inland from the flood plain. And the local Cllr should realise that, but then again it makes a good sound bite.

From Keswick, the river Derwent flows north into Bassenthwaite, where it meets the runoff from Blencathra and Skiddaw, again several inches in one day, before flowing out into Co©kermouth. No building on flood plains to manage an immigrant population, no dredging, just a freak weather event. Unfortunately these 'freak' events will more and more become the norm as the climate models are proved true. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8375576.stm; "They argue that without action there will be much larger changes in the coming decades, with the UK seeing higher food prices, ill health, more flooding and rising sea levels." )

Edited 24 November, 2009 by badgerx16

[Joensuu]

Dune

 

so you're advocating that in order to allow us to build on more flood plains we should mess up more rivers?

 

Wouldn't it be more sensible simply not to build on flood plains?

 

[NB, I don't understand what this has got to do with 'lefties'. Are these the same 'lefties' like George Osborne who proposed tax breaks for recycling yesterday? Never saw George as a leftie! ACC is a serious issue right across the political spectrum. Try dropping the political chip on your shoulder if you want you're argument to be taken seriously...]

 

PS - St George, why not answer Minty's question? I know it won't be easy, as you'd need to read what someone else has written, then think for yourself (gulp, a post without being able to rely on cutting and pasting nonsense... Scary huh?)

[saintfully]

This is by far my favourite post on this thread. It is superb. This post has nearly everything.

 

 

Its genius isn't it - I think Dune should win £5.

[Minty]

No amount of dredging in Workington will stop Keskadale Beck or Derwent Water from overflowing when hit with that volume of water, and it's miles inland from the flood plain. And the local Cllr should realise that, but then again it makes a good sound bite.

I could be way off the mark, but I wonder if that particular councillor happened to be on a planning committee that would've ignored Environment Agency advice and approved plans to build some of the flooded houses on the flood plain... hence the attempt to deflect blame elsewhere before it comes flying back his way.

 

Cynical? Me? Never.

 

I could be wrong*, I don't know when the affected houses and buildings were built, but the scenario wouldn't surprise me.

 

(* - See what I did there St George!?)

[TopGun]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/environment/climate-change-emails-stop-glaciers-from-melting-200911252254/

 

"More than half the world's journalists who have read Nigel Lawson's book now accept that the atmosphere could not possibly have been affected by setting fire to millions of tons of coal, oil and gas every single day for 150 years while at the same time chopping down most of the really big trees."

 

"Can we all please now return to some kind of sanity and tie George Monbiot to the back of a Range Rover?"

[Joensuu]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/environment/climate-change-emails-stop-glaciers-from-melting-200911252254/

 

"More than half the world's journalists who have read Nigel Lawson's book now accept that the atmosphere could not possibly have been affected by setting fire to millions of tons of coal, oil and gas every single day for 150 years while at the same time chopping down most of the really big trees."

 

"Can we all please now return to some kind of sanity and tie George Monbiot to the back of a Range Rover?"

 

Love this quote:

 

"This is the smoking iceberg that fires a polar bear of truth between the eyes of hysteria and communism."

 

I'm sure St George or Dune or someone said that on an earlier of this thread

[Minty]

Very funny article, like that a lot.

 

(Good morning George... have an answer for me yet?)

[badgerx16]

(Good morning George... have an answer for me yet?)

 

He's still trying to work out the Maggie Thatcher conundrum

 

George reminds me of the Happy Days episode where Fonzy tries to say the word 'wrong', and just can't manage it.

[Saint George]

Looks like the kiddies here need a bit of cheering up. Must be tough for you guys at the moment....What with the whole world laughing at y'all....Your world will never be the same again.

man, i forget how many times i tried to warn ya's

 

What is it they say....."The opposite to skeptic is"......yup......"Gullibal"

 

So a little Watch with mother

 

Hide the decline

 

And a little quiz (down at mo, but maybe back up)

 

http://us.asiancorrespondent.com/gavin-atkins-shadowlands/climate-science-the-quiz.htm

 

I got 12 out of 12...I'll be back tomorrow to check on your answers....Be good, children

[Joensuu]

Are you going to answer Minty's post?

[Saint George]

Are you going to answer Minty's post?

 

No...If Minty wasn't such a cabbage he'd see i already answered several times over in this thread. About time he dropped his comfy blanket and did a Little thinking for himself.

 

Minty is happy for the World to spend Trillions of $$$ to solve a problem that may or may not be exist..and as we now know it was 'may not'.......This is a clear demonstration as to why blanket clutching liberals should not be allowed anywhere near any kind of decision making process....Let them stick to the Arts and and the World will be a better place.

 

Oh, and as I'm here....THE CODE!....yup the code and data ......Well we've all seen and read the emails (hide the decline lol) now for the ....CODE and DATA! LOL...This is ****ing hilarious....yup peeps who hung their hearts on this crap truly were .....yup....."Dim and Gullible"

 

For those that Downloaded the FOI2009.zip file. you'll find the code along with programmer comments in FOI2009>documents>HARRY_READ_ME

 

Heres a bit of a summary LOL

 

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/11/23/the-code.html

 

http://www.devilskitchen.me.uk/2009/11/data-horribilis-harryreadmetxt-file.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A TheDevilsKitchen %28The Devil%27s Kitchen%29

 

Yup this **** really did appear in the IPCC's "document for policymakers".....scary scary stuff...even scarier than the fact we still seem to have so many 'believers' on here

 

Have a nice day y'all

[View From The Top]

Are you going to answer Minty's post?

 

We can't so will resort to childish name calling.

 

Same as he won't say anything about Thatcher.

[Joensuu]

No...If Minty wasn't such a cabbage he'd see i already answered several times over in this thread. About time he dropped his comfy blanket and did a Little thinking for himself.

Really, we must have all collectively missed those posts. Would you be so kind as to point them out to us?

 

Minty is happy for the World to spend Trillions of $$$ to solve a problem that may or may not be exist..

Is that doubt creeping in?

 

Oh, and as I'm here....THE CODE!....yup the code and data :wink:......Well we've all seen and read the emails (hide the decline lol) now for the ....CODE and DATA! LOL...This is ****ing hilarious....yup peeps who hung their hearts on this crap truly were .....yup....."Dim and Gullible" For those that Downloaded the FOI2009.zip file. you'll find the code along with programmer comments in FOI2009>documents>HARRY_READ_ME

Are you okay? Shall we call you a doctor? You appear to be having some form of breakdown... Edited 25 November, 2009 by Joensuu

[Sheaf Saint]

Looks like the kiddies here need a bit of cheering up. Must be tough for you guys at the moment....What with the whole world laughing at y'all....Your world will never be the same again.

man, i forget how many times i tried to warn ya's

 

What is it they say....."The opposite to skeptic is"......yup......"Gullibal"

 

So a little Watch with mother

 

Hide the decline

 

And a little quiz (down at mo, but maybe back up)

 

http://us.asiancorrespondent.com/gavin-atkins-shadowlands/climate-science-the-quiz.htm

 

I got 12 out of 12...I'll be back tomorrow to check on your answers....Be good, children

 

whoop-de-****ing-doo, aren't you clever. Or not, seeing as you can't even spell the word 'gullible'. And you think that a (admittedly well produced) youtube comedy song and video made by CC skeptic proves your case? Sheesh.

 

St George, I would just like to ask you a few questions, seeing as you pointedly refuse to answer Minty's....

 

Let's all assume for one moment that you are indeed correct, and that the world isn't heating up and MMCC is a complete myth. Even taking this into account, do you still think it is sensible and practical to continue burning up the remainder of the world's fossil fuels and other natural resources, chopping down trees at an alarming rate and dumping millions of tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere?

 

Do you genuinely believe that it is OK for the world to continue doing that without the slightest fear of there being even the tiniest negative effect on our environment?

 

Do you not think that it is important for the world to invest in renewable energy sources NOW in anticipation of the time when all of the natural resources run out?

[Joensuu]

Now I don't know anything about you St George (aside from your inability to post coherently). Anyhow, I doubt for a second that I'm right, but looking at a list of New Orleans' largest employers, I was just wondering whether you might have a vested interest?

4,600 Schwegmann Bros. Supermarket

3,100 Hibernia Corp. (banking)

3,026 First Commerce Corp. of Louisiana

3,000 South Central Bell

2,700 Shell Oil Company

2,400 Martin Marietta Manned Space System

1,750 Exxon Corporation

1,150 Union Carbide Corp.

1,305 Whitney National Bank

1,300 Hilton Hotels

1,100 Ruth's Chris Steak House

[TopGun]

George gets more lunatic by the post!

 

But it is amusing to see that the more George froths at the mouth the less support he gets from other climate change sceptics on the site (excluding Dune of course, who is equally deranged).

[Minty]

No...If Minty wasn't such a cabbage he'd see i already answered several times over in this thread. About time he dropped his comfy blanket and did a Little thinking for himself.

lol, cracking start.

 

Ignoring everything else for one second, why do you feel the need to get personal with people who are simply trying to discuss this with you. Why am I a cabbage? Where is my blanket I am supposedly clutching? Even Delldays would probably have to admit that you have avoided my question *completely* thus far. Why do you feel the need to be so arrogant?

 

Minty is happy for the World to spend Trillions of $$$ to solve a problem that may or may not be exist..and as we now know it was 'may not'.......This is a clear demonstration as to why blanket clutching liberals should not be allowed anywhere near any kind of decision making process....Let them stick to the Arts and and the World will be a better place.

I am not 'happy for the World to spend Trillions of $$$', because I do not necessarily think it needs that. I do think it needs addressing, but don't tell me what I am or am not happy for the World to do, when I clearly haven't said that.

 

In fact, I can see good opportunities for progressive and forward thinking industry to generate a new economy based on renewable and sustainable technologies. Perhaps you might like to read some of the work by the New Economics Foundation?

 

Just to warn you however, it might require you to open your mind a little.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Christ, just when I thought St.G couldn't get any more of a tool. He really is a CUnextTuesday isn't he!

[badgerx16]

St G, do you condone this, I'm sure you are aware of it ? Straight yes or no if you please.

 

( Following up on something I've just watched on telly )......

 

The American Council for Clean Coal Electricity, a group of coal industry companies opposed to a bill passing through Congress to control carbon emissions, hired a PR firm to lobby Congress members to oppose the bill, which was going to be a very close vote either way. This PR firm then hired another PR firm, ( plausible deniability ? ), which then forged letters to the Congress members hoping to convince them that the particular groups whose identities had been stolen had changed their minds and were now opposed to the legislation.

 

The ACCCE found out that the fraud might be about to be exposed 2 days before the vote, but waited until after the vote had taken place, and the bill passed, before saying anything about it. Congress formed a committee to investigate this attempt to pervert the democratic process, and the ACCCE chairman lied on oath, ( allegedly ).

 

There are many links on t'Interweb, here are a few...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-nelson/at-least-3-members-of-con_b_250588.html

 

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/10/clean-coal-exec-lies-under-oath-forgery-scandal.php

 

http://globalwarming.house.gov/mediacenter/pressreleases_2008?id=0162#main_content

 

http://enviroknow.com/tag/american-coalition-for-clean-coal-electricity/

[Saint George]

heh as if the CRU leak wasnt enough....Yet more fraud found in New Zealand!

 

How do you turn this......

 

 

 

 

Into this?!?!?

 

 

 

 

You do what any self respecting AGW scientist would do......You manipulate the Data stupid!

 

http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2009/11/breaking-nzs-niwa-accused-of-cru-style-temperature-faking.html

 

Happy days

[Joensuu]

Good morning George, you sound well today. I think you should check the reasons the scientists give before dashing to an incorrect conclusion!

 

Try this: http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise

[badgerx16]

I like the poll on the side bar of http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2009/11/breaking-nzs-niwa-accused-of-cru-style-temperature-faking/comments/page/2/#comments, the link St G has posted.

 

It gives 2 choices 1) Yes, I am sure that climate change is most likely man made

2) No, climate change is mostly natural.

 

This is interesting, because all those who accept MMCC/AGW would actually select the second option - it IS mostly natural, it's just the extra bit that we add on top that screws the planet.

 

Also, try looking at this for an explanation of why the data was 'manipulated'. See G, the truth is out there, just open your eyes.

http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise/combining-temperature-data-from-multiple-sites-in-wellington

Edited 26 November, 2009 by badgerx16

[badgerx16]

Basically it's a straight choice ;

 

Option 1) All the major scientific institutions and universities in the world are colluding with the vast majority of governments, ( of all parts of the political spectrum ), to create huge quantities of fabricated or manipulated evidence which is then force fed to the public, with the willing co-operation of national and independant media organisations, with the intention of artificially controlling the world's fuel markets, and giving justification for additional taxes.

In opposition to this conspiracy, those major corporations with huge vested interests in hydrocarbon fuels, whether gas, coal, or oil, are desperately fighting a valiant, selfless, and honourable rearguard action to expose this con and save the planet from political and social disaster.

 

Option 2) Through mankinds wanton over-exploitation of the planet's natural resources, we are causing a shift in climate which exacerbates the natural cycle of heating and cooling which has gone on since life began, almost a billion years ago. The scientists and academics have evidenced this, have managed to persuade sceptical politicians that action is needed, and the fuel industries are fighting a desperate, self-interested, rearguard action against justified new processes which will have to be introduced, and as a consequence will hit their profits.

 

Option 3) I don't know, and I don't care. I don't trust politicians, the media, or scientists, they are all in it for themselves, and any possible consequences will happen long after I am dead, so it won't affect me. I'm going to enjoy life to the full while I can. "Load up the SUV, let's go burn some rainforest".

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Good morning George, you sound well today. I think you should check the reasons the scientists give before dashing to an incorrect conclusion!

 

Try this: http://www.niwa.co.nz/our-science/climate/news/all/niwa-confirms-temperature-rise

 

How dare you imply that St.G will look at real evidence from academics and then adjust his argument accordingly! Shame on you!

[Joensuu]

Option 1) All the major scientific institutions and universities in the world are colluding with the vast majority of governments, ( of all parts of the political spectrum ), to create huge quantities of fabricated or manipulated evidence which is then force fed to the public, with the willing co-operation of national and independant media organisations, with the intention of artificially controlling the world's fuel markets, and giving justification for additional taxes.

In opposition to this conspiracy, those major corporations with huge vested interests in hydrocarbon fuels, whether gas, coal, or oil, are desperately fighting a valiant, selfless, and honourable rearguard action to expose this con and save the planet from political and social disaster."

 

Option 1 - a great choice for paranoid loonies e.g.

 

Option 2) Through mankinds wanton over-exploitation of the planet's natural resources, we are causing a shift in climate which exacerbates the natural cycle of heating and cooling which has gone on since life began, almost a billion years ago. The scientists and academics have evidenced this, have managed to persuade sceptical politicians that action is needed, and the fuel industries are fighting a desperate, self-interested, rearguard action against justified new processes which will have to be introduced, and as a consequence will hit their profits."

 

Option 2 - the only position to be in if you are in any way logical and caring.

 

Option 3) I don't know, and I don't care. I don't trust politicians, the media, or scientists, they are all in it for themselves, and any possible consequences will happen long after I am dead, so it won't affect me. I'm going to enjoy life to the full while I can. "Load up the SUV, let's go burn some rainforest".

 

Option 3 - Perfect choice for the self interested (e.g. Jeremy_Clarkson)

 

 

I think there might be another option though. What about somebody who is clever enough to understand that Option 2 is scientifically correct, but who has an ulterior motive (normally oil dollars) for arguing against ACC (e.g. Stephen_McIntyre, Joe_Barton etc)

[Minty]

I wonder if he'll comment on the ACCCE case? Or perhaps he's looking for web pages and graphs to use in his reply?

[Joensuu]

Thought I'd repost (and slightly adapt ) Jonny Bognor's graph from the 'Tories' thread... might help to explain the irrational position's StG and Dune have adopted:

 

[Minty]

Is the survey that led to that still available? I fancy doing it...

[trousers]

How much energy (gross) has been used in the creation of this thread thus far?

[Minty]

How much energy (gross) has been used in the creation of this thread thus far?

 

No idea, but it's good to talk...!

 

I found the political compass survey... I got:

 

Economic Left/Right: -5.62

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95

 

Which is to be expected.

[JackFrost]

I saw an interview with a local councillor from ****ermouth speaking about the flood. What cannot be disputed is that the rainfall level was a freak event, but he stated that the environment agency no longer dredged the river like in the old days.

 

River dredging used to be a standard operation throughout the UK but the leftie know it alls (who usually happen to live in cities and know jack **** about the countryside) have in their infinite wisdom lobbied against dredging because they claim it harms trout and salmon spawning grounds.

 

The lack of dredging and the building on flood plains to provide housing for our bloated population (the socialists open door policy to immigrants being a factor in the need for extra housing), is the real reason why flooding is in the news more and more.

 

I can't believe the dredging issue isn't much more of a widely spoken debate. I'm old enough to remember the times when river dredging was a widespread occupation nationally. We had as much rain back then as we do now, if not more and we never had anywhere near as much flooding as we do now. Definitely not on the scale of ****ermouth anyway.

 

Sure there's been a hell of a lot of building on flood plains since those times but I bet dredging would make a massive difference if it was done now as much as it used to

[norwaysaint]

It's 'cos of the immigrants though.

[saintfully]

No idea, but it's good to talk...!

 

I found the political compass survey... I got:

 

Economic Left/Right: -5.62

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95

 

Which is to be expected.

 

 

Are you Badger in disguise?

[Minty]

It would appear so...

[badgerx16]

Are you Badger in disguise?

It would appear so...

 

I can state quite categorically that you are most certainly not !

[Joensuu]

Just for you Minty:

 

[badgerx16]

I can't believe the dredging issue isn't much more of a widely spoken debate. I'm old enough to remember the times when river dredging was a widespread occupation nationally. We had as much rain back then as we do now, if not more and we never had anywhere near as much flooding as we do now. Definitely not on the scale of ****ermouth anyway.

 

Sure there's been a hell of a lot of building on flood plains since those times but I bet dredging would make a massive difference if it was done now as much as it used to

 

Consider that you have a funnel held over a bucket and into which you are pouring water. The water you are pouring in represents the rainfall on the hills and fells, the funnel is the streams and rivers draining down towards the sea, the funnel spout is the estuary, and the bucket is the sea. You can increase the amount of flow into the bucket by using a bigger bored spout, seemingly analagous to dredging the river mouth in your argument, but if you pour the water fast enough into the funnel, it will still overflow and wet your boots.

The flooding in the lake District occurred because over 310mm, that is over 12 inches, of rain fell in one day onto already sodden hillsides, the equivalent of emptying a bath into the funnel in the analogy. As a result, the river Derwent increased it's level by over 8 feet. No river system in Cumbria could have coped with that, and no amount of dredging in Workington would have prevented it.

 

....................................

What is missing from this list of 'purposes for dredging' ? ( Admittedly copied from Wiki )

 

• Capital: dredging carried out to create a new harbour, berth or waterway, or to deepen existing facilities in order to allow larger ships access. Because capital works usually involve hard material or high-volume works, the work is usually done using a cutter suction dredge or large trailing suction hopper dredge, but for rock works drilling and blasting along with mechanical excavation may be used.
  
• Preparatory: work and excavation for future bridges, piers or docks/wharves, often connected with foundation work.
  
• Maintenance: dredging to deepen or maintain navigable waterways or channels which are threatened to become silted with the passage of time, due to sedimented sand and mud, possibly making them too shallow for navigation. This is often carried out with a trailing suction hopper dredge. Most dredging is for this purpose, and it may also be done to maintain the holding capacity of reservoirs or lakes.
  
• Land reclamation: dredging to mine sand, clay or rock from the seabed and using it to construct new land elsewhere. This is typically performed by a cutter-suction dredge or trailing suction hopper dredge. The material may also be used for flood or erosion control.
  
• Beach nourishment: mining sand offshore and placing on a beach to replace sand eroded by storms or wave action. This is done to enhance the recreational and protective function of the beaches, which can be eroded by human activity or by storms. This is typically performed by a cutter-suction dredge or trailing suction hopper dredge.
  
• Harvesting materials: dredging sediment for elements like gold or other valuable trace substances.
  
• Seabed mining: a possible future use, recovering natural metal ore nodules from the sea's abyssal plains.
  
• Construction materials: dredging sand and gravels from offshore licensed areas for use in construction industry, principally for use in concrete. Very specialist industry focused in NW Europe using specialized trailing suction hopper dredgers self discharging dry cargo ashore.
  
• Anti-eutrophication: Dredging is an expensive option for the remediation of eutrophied (or de-oxygenated) water bodies. However, as artificially elevated phosphorus levels in the sediment aggravate the eutrophication process, controlled sediment removal is occasionally the only option for the reclamation of still waters.
  
• Contaminant remediation: to reclaim areas affected by chemical spills, storm water surges (with urban runoff), and other soil contaminations. Disposal becomes a proportionally large factor in these operations.
  
• Removing trash and debris: often done in combination with maintenance dredging, this process removes non-natural matter from the bottoms of rivers and canals and harbors.
  

Answer, improving inland drainage. Paradoxically, the increased level of sediment carried downstream by inland flood waters can actually necessitate additional dredging of estuaries as it increases the rate at which they silt up, affecting navigation and wildlife.

Edited 26 November, 2009 by badgerx16

[TopGun]

"The anti-western intellectual cranks of the left suffered a collective breakdown when communism collapsed. Climate change is their new theology… But the heretics will have a voice in Copenhagen and the truth will out. Climate change is being used to impose an anti-human utopia as deadly as anything conceived by Stalin or Mao."

 

The lovely Nick Griffin last week.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/nick-griffin-bnp-copenhagen-summit

[Verbal]

"The anti-western intellectual cranks of the left suffered a collective breakdown when communism collapsed. Climate change is their new theology… But the heretics will have a voice in Copenhagen and the truth will out. Climate change is being used to impose an anti-human utopia as deadly as anything conceived by Stalin or Mao."

 

The lovely Nick Griffin last week.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/29/nick-griffin-bnp-copenhagen-summit

 

[Mao Cap]

Just for you Minty:

 

 

Just occurred to me how odd it is that us nanny-state loving quasi-communists are keener on individual liberty than all the freedom-loving capitalists. Hmm.

[Saint George]

So not only did the CRU delete a load of, erm...'Inconvienient' emails...The also DUMPED the RAW DATA too!

 

Na....no way,.....No self respecting bunch of fraudsters, i mean scientist would do this would they?.........Dumping raw data so their results couldn't be fully checked? So much for Peer Review eh........na never.....There again, the sheeple would never even notice, so hey, why not.

 

"SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

 

“ “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” – George Orwell, 1984

[badgerx16]

So not only did the CRU delete a load of, erm...'Inconvienient' emails...The also DUMPED the RAW DATA too!

 

Na....no way,.....No self respecting bunch of fraudsters, i mean scientist would do this would they?.........Dumping raw data so their results couldn't be fully checked? So much for Peer Review eh........na never.....There again, the sheeple would never even notice, so hey, why not.

 

"SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

 

“ “Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.” – George Orwell, 1984

 

More St G b0ll0x and biased reporting misrepresenting the truth - what a surprise !

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/35233_Did_Climate_Scientists_Destroy_Data_A-_No.#rss

 

"the article at The Times, oddly enough, just happens to leave out that part of Phil Jones’ explanation.

According to CRU’s Web site, “Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data.”

Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit, said that the vast majority of the station data was not altered at all, and the small amount that was changed was adjusted for consistency.

The research unit has deleted less than 5 percent of its original station data from its database because the stations had several discontinuities or were affected by urbanization trends

, Jones said.

“When you’re looking at climate data, you don’t want stations that are showing urban warming trends,” Jones said, “so we’ve taken them out.” Most of the stations for which data was removed are located in areas where there were already dense monitoring networks, he added. “We rarely removed a station in a data-sparse region of the world.”

Refuting CEI’s claims of data-destruction, Jones said, “We haven’t destroyed anything.

The data is still there — you can still get these stations from the [NOAA] National Climatic Data Center.

”"

[Minty]

That doesn't actually *prove* anything and doesn't necessarily mean they have done anything wrong. Of course it's easy to make that jump for many people because it fits in with their agenda. Those without an agenda, like myself, would probably agree that it is silly that they did not keep the raw data, and want to know more about this situation, but without jumping to conclusions.

 

Science is coming second to the desire of selfish groups who simply want to be proven right, or to prove others wrong, and enjoy gloating about it if and when possible. If it could be proven irrefutably that current Climate Change was predominantly man-made, the last thing I'd want to do would be to gloat about it... quite sad really. If it was the other way around, I have no doubt that George would be taking huge delight in belittling others for daring to have an alternative view, however well-intentioned it is.

 

BTW George, any comment on the ACCCE case above, that you've conveniently ignored?

 

Edit - Interesting response from Badger, and not at all surprising. Heard of the CEI George?

Edited 30 November, 2009 by Minty

[hypochondriac]

I just want him to answer your original post minty...