Christoph Reuss,
On the matter of potential super-volcanoes, you have just libelled me in
saying that I am perpetrating a hoax. You may say that as your opinion but
not as a fact. A degree of laxity is tolerable on the Net, but not to make
serious charges in this discussion list on which I have been writing in
good faith for five or six years. Whether you value your reputation or not
I don't know, but I value mine among colleagues I have learned to respect
and, I hope, respect my truthfulness. I don't suppose you'll make an
apology, but it is certainly due.
"Potentially active volcanoes" are mere pin pricks and quite different from
very rare super-volcanoes. That you have found no Net reference to
super-volcanoes is beside the point. Either keep on looking or do as I
originally suggested -- make contact with your nearest university geology
department and ask an expert to show you four or five sites around the
world -- including Yosemite.
I have already said that I do not wish to discuss Kyoto any further because
you refuse to discuss it in a logical manner, but I thought that an article
from a serious newspaper might be helpful to other FWers. Not to you, of
course, because you have already made up your mind.
Keith Hudson
At 16:10 15/04/01 +0200, you wrote:
>Keith Hudson wrote today:
>> For those FWers who, like me, are still prepared to be sceptical about the
>> findings of the IPCC report, here's an extract from an article in today's
>> Sunday Times by Melanie Phillips.
>>
>> <<<<
>> [it is said that] there are no more than 10 active scientists in the world
>> who disagree with the notion of human-induced climate change.
>>
>> But there are thousands of scientists who disagree with the prediction of
>> climatic catastrophe caused by human agency and who are utterly dismayed by
>> what they see as the falsehoods of Kyoto and the IPCC report. Many have
>> signed statements saying so; these are never reported.
>
>Well, looks like these aren't reported by the Sunday Times either (where
>is the list of those "thousands of scientists", and where is the text of
>the "signed statements saying so" ?) -- perhaps because it's a hoax ?
>
>
>> Dr Jan Veizer, the renowned geologist, has produced a definitive
>> reconstruction of the world's climate history, which says there is no
>> correlation between cold and warm periods and low and high levels of CO2.
>> Indeed, there were long periods when rises in CO2 were accompanied by a
>> drop in the average temperature. Some scientists say this report alone
>> sounds the death knell for the man-made global warming theory.
>
>Oh really ? Then have a look at the graph from Nature, vol. 329, p. 410,
>which shows the temperature and atmospheric CO2 variations over the last
>160,000 years -- both variables vary *synchronously* ! See online graph at
>http://www.fsl.noaa.gov/~osborn/CG_Figure_34.gif
>
>
>> So I repeat what I wrote before: "The jury is still out".
>
>Yeah, thanks to fossil-fuel "experts", the jury will be out until it's
>much too late for action.
>
>During the last decades, humans have released carbon into the atmosphere
>that had been stored during millions of years. Something like this has
>never occurred before in the history of this planet. The global ecosystem
>has no chance to react fast enough to this sudden release of so much carbon.
>The only way is to reduce emissions ASAP.
>
>
>> Whether the IPCC report will turn out to be plausible or not as the
>> evidence accumulates over the next decade or so, there is no doubt
>> whatsoever that it has been captured by a bunch of politicians (starting
>> with Margaret Thatcher)
>
>Maggie T the Green zealot, hahaha. How absurd can your CO2-revisionism get?
>
>
>> trying to persuade other politicians to become equally hysterical.
>
>Btw, in the meantime I have checked out everything about your "Yosemite
>super-doom-volcano". It's definitely a *hoax*:
>If you have a look at the U.S. map of potentially active volcanos at
>http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Imgs/Gif/WesternUSA/Maps/map_potentially_active.gif
>you'll see that the only volcanic structure in the Yosemite area is the
>"Long Valley Caldera". According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the next
>major eruption of LVC is expected in 100,000 years, and not even this
>eruption will come anywhere near your doom-predictions of global dimensions.
>Talk about hysterical claims !
>
>Chris
>
>
>
>
___________________________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, General Editor, Calus <http://www.calus.org>
6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727;
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
