A Bigger Threat Even Than The Debt Crisis?

[Scunnered]

In AD100 growing grapes in yorkshire for wine making was probably commercial viable because of the cost of transporting wine from France, Italy etc.

In AD2000 lower transports costs mean there is no longer any commercial viability in growing grapes in yorkshire. As a result whatever vineyards there might have been have become pasture or arable land.

I'm still not convinced that it was ever possible to grow grapes in Yorkshire. There's a map at http://www.winelandsofbritain.co.uk/lecture.htm which shows the limits of viticulture in the UK at various periods in history (it's from a book written by a geology professor who seems to be an expert on growing vines). According to the map, the only part of Yorkshire where vines could potentially have been grown was Holderness, but I'm not aware of any archaeological evidence that vines were actually grown there (and note that it's at least a hundred miles south of Hadrian's wall). There certainly is evidence for vines been grown elsewhere in Britain during Roman times, but I believe that this was in Norhhamptonshire, Cambridgeshire, Lincolnshire and Buckinghamshire, all of which are a good deal further south (I suspect that the Hadrian's wall story originated with Melanie Phillips confusing Northamptonshire and Northumberland).

The only reference on this subject which I have to hand at the moment is the paper Palaeoclimate in urban environmental archaeology at York, England: problems and potential (World Archaeology (8), vol 2, October 1976) which states (re cultivation of exotic species in the York region in the Roman period):

The evidence is still too limited to be conclusive, even for such crops as the vine and fig. The recent finds of Roman grape seeds in York [...], the first record in the north of England, and similar finds from Doncaster and WInterton Villa, Lincolnshire, are unlikely to represent local viticulture [...], if only because of the marked rarity of the seeds. This is possibly substantiated by the tentative evidence for a vineyard of short duration in the late third century at North Thoresby, Lincs., which probably failed due to the unsuitability of soil and climate [...]. Lamb's [...] criteria for a good grape harvest would suggest that Briatin was completely unsuitable for viticulture except in sheltered spots and walled gardens.

The [...] are references which I couldn't be bothered to type out.

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'm determined to nail this one once and for all.

[libspero]

The funny thing in this debate is that both the sceptics and the alarmists could probably agree that a longterm view on future sustainability and a low polution environment would be beneficial for everybody. The GW debate is almost counter productive as it draws energy into an unwinnable debate rather than focusing attention on a simple long term global strategy for sustainability.

Also, it would probably get a lot more support if the government were seen to be taking it all seriously. How can they possibly entertain new runways and supporting luxury car manufacturers if they honestly think we are on the verge of an environmental apocalypse? If it wasn't such an obvious excuse for taxation I am sure a lot more people would be prepared to give the subject consideration.

[bogbrush]

"I suspect that the Hadrian's wall story originated with Melanie Phillips confusing Northamptonshire and Northumberland"

Could be, it's at least feasible.

It's still been warmer though, whether or not anyone was around to exploit that in the wine trade.

[bogbrush]

The funny thing in this debate is that both the sceptics and the alarmists could probably agree that a longterm view on future sustainability and a low polution environment would be beneficial for everybody. The GW debate is almost counter productive as it draws energy into an unwinnable debate rather than focusing attention on a simple long term global strategy for sustainability.

Also, it would probably get a lot more support if the government were seen to be taking it all seriously. How can they possibly entertain new runways and supporting luxury car manufacturers if they honestly think we are on the verge of an environmental apocalypse? If it wasn't such an obvious excuse for taxation I am sure a lot more people would be prepared to give the subject consideration.

Unquestionably true. Just because I don't believe in this doesn't mean I want to cover the world in plastic bags.

It was the same, but smaller, with Y2K. The amount of money wasted on that was staggering and NOTHING broke.

Avian flu - another hype, or do we thing we really did pop all the birds that carried it What's the death toll now? Is it past 300 yet?

And it's the same with Terrorism. 52 People killed in Britain over God knows how many years and we pay for that with our ancient freedoms.

MMGW is just the latest and biggest. It suits them all; the left have something to replace discredited communism, the governments get to make us think about something other than what they're doing to us and pay more tax, industry gets access to new premiums for technology, academia gets mega funding and the media gets its' stories. Lovely.

You correctly expose the inconsistencies; "committments" to 50 year targets combined with carbon inflating decisions while the Chinese just build another coal fired station every week or so.

Edited December 25, 2008 by bogbrush

[huw]

The funny thing in this debate is that both the sceptics and the alarmists could probably agree that a longterm view on future sustainability and a low polution environment would be beneficial for everybody. The GW debate is almost counter productive as it draws energy into an unwinnable debate rather than focusing attention on a simple long term global strategy for sustainability.

+1

Also, it would probably get a lot more support if the government were seen to be taking it all seriously. How can they possibly entertain new runways and supporting luxury car manufacturers if they honestly think we are on the verge of an environmental apocalypse? If it wasn't such an obvious excuse for taxation I am sure a lot more people would be prepared to give the subject consideration.

+2

[Byron]

As I have stated above, I am open minded about MMGW.

However, I grew up in South Wales. The coal tips in the valleys, the scarred scorched earth in the Swansea Vale, the brown rust on the houses fom the steel works, the smell of the oil refinery.

No-one saw anything wrong with it. The rivers were thick and black with coal dust and stunk.

Then came Aberfan.

After that, the people demanded change, gradually, all the scarring was landscaped, the rivers cleaned and fish returned, even Swansea Bay where the sea was filthy with sewage was cleaned.

Man can only truly live with nature, not against it, but we have too many get rich quickers, too many people who think that umpteen horsepower in their car or motor bike is a good thing. Fact is, we are power crazy. Just try suggesting a blanket 50 mph speed limit on ALL roads in order to reduce pollution and favour the electric car. Just try suggesting that we do not need to earn so much money and learn to live frugally as we did in the 1940's.

No conspicuous consumption is the rule. Never mind that the Italian cafe sells coffee cheaper, you must be seen in Costa Bomb or Stupid bucks. You are not to lead a life, no it must be a life style.

[bogbrush]

Never mind that the Italian cafe sells coffee cheaper, you must be seen in Costa Bomb or Stupid bucks. You are not to lead a life, no it must be a life style.

You'll start me on car adverts soon, and that shouldn't happen. Not on Christmas day.

[Scunnered]

You'll start me on car adverts soon, and that shouldn't happen. Not on Christmas day.

Oh, go on. You might well get me on-side with that one. I'd be up for a spot of Clarkson-bashing as well.

[bogbrush]

Oh, go on. You might well get me on-side with that one. I'd be up for a spot of Clarkson-bashing as well.

Join the queue.

[huw]

It was the same, but smaller, with Y2K. The amount of money wasted on that was staggering and NOTHING broke.

No different from paying buildings insurance ... I pay it every year and NOTHING breaks

Seriously, things would have broken if the renovation hadn't been done, nothing directly life threatening in the area I worked in (financial services) but on the other hand it's simply not acceptable for them to (for example) default on an annuity payment because they couldn't be bothered to fix well-known bugs in their IT systems. The firm evidently agreed with this, took the risk extremely seriously, and were prepared to throw money at it. All the other firms doing the same thing at the same time bid prices up, of course.

[Kurt Barlow]

Yes, and as I have already said this was to underline that it's been at least this warm before (and has fluctuated like made since) so what's the big deal?

It doesn't demonstrate it was warm - indeed during the middle ages we had a period known as the little ice age when people may still have been planting vines in Yorkshire. One theory is that this was at least part caused by the large scale felling of the northern forests in Europe which increased the albedo effect.

[erranta]

I'm still not convinced that it was ever possible to grow grapes in Yorkshire.

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'm determined to nail this one once and for all.

I'm sure I read at some time that they had some at Fountains abbey in walled gardens or one of those abbeys up there.

Romans Legions grog was supplemented with vines grown around Lincoln - supplied whole of GB.

They still have a token vineyard in Bishops Palace grounds next to Lincoln Cathedral.

Twas the highest building ever built when it was finished - eclipsing the Pyramid after 4,000 yrs.

Why do you need the vignette on viticulture?

[Kurt Barlow]

I'm still not convinced that it was ever possible to grow grapes in Yorkshire. There's a map at http://www.winelandsofbritain.co.uk/lecture.htm which shows the limits of viticulture in the UK at various periods in history (it's from a book written by a geology professor who seems to be an expert on growing vines). According to the map, the only part of Yorkshire where vines could potentially have been grown was Holderness, but I'm not aware of any archaeological evidence that vines were actually grown there (and note that it's at least a hundred miles south of Hadrian's wall). There certainly is evidence for vines been grown elsewhere in Britain during Roman times, but I believe that this was in Norhhamptonshire, Cambridgeshire, Lincolnshire and Buckinghamshire, all of which are a good deal further south (I suspect that the Hadrian's wall story originated with Melanie Phillips confusing Northamptonshire and Northumberland).

The only reference on this subject which I have to hand at the moment is the paper Palaeoclimate in urban environmental archaeology at York, England: problems and potential (World Archaeology (8), vol 2, October 1976) which states (re cultivation of exotic species in the York region in the Roman period):

The evidence is still too limited to be conclusive, even for such crops as the vine and fig. The recent finds of Roman grape seeds in York [...], the first record in the north of England, and similar finds from Doncaster and WInterton Villa, Lincolnshire, are unlikely to represent local viticulture [...], if only because of the marked rarity of the seeds. This is possibly substantiated by the tentative evidence for a vineyard of short duration in the late third century at North Thoresby, Lincs., which probably failed due to the unsuitability of soil and climate [...]. Lamb's [...] criteria for a good grape harvest would suggest that Briatin was completely unsuitable for viticulture except in sheltered spots and walled gardens.

The [...] are references which I couldn't be bothered to type out.

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'm determined to nail this one once and for all.

I agree - the further north the less the commercial viability of any vineyard. Indeed that link you posted refers to industrial vineyards.

In one of my previous posts - I suggested the South facing side of Hadrians wall - there was a reason for this

You can grow grapes in Scotland - a sheltered south facing (ideally sheltered from the west and east aswell ) wall is fine. Also remember that the further north you go the longer the summer day which partly offsets the weaker sun. Coincidentially the north pole on midsummer solstice gets more solar energy than the equator due to the longer day (and also cloud cover at the equator).

I live in east anglia and grow peaches, kiwi fruit, and apricots in my garden. The climate may not make it commercially viable from a 21st Century perspective - but I can grow edible fruit.

Edited December 25, 2008 by Kurt Barlow

[bogbrush]

So are we agreeing it has been hotter than now in the past or not? Actually, that was the whole point.

[bogbrush]

No different from paying buildings insurance ... I pay it every year and NOTHING breaks

Seriously, things would have broken if the renovation hadn't been done, nothing directly life threatening in the area I worked in (financial services) but on the other hand it's simply not acceptable for them to (for example) default on an annuity payment because they couldn't be bothered to fix well-known bugs in their IT systems. The firm evidently agreed with this, took the risk extremely seriously, and were prepared to throw money at it. All the other firms doing the same thing at the same time bid prices up, of course.

I must disagree there. My own business was forced to undertake reviews by insane customers armed with audit requirements. We have/had technology running across financial systems through to manufacturing systems some self-contained, others networked. We even had some bespoke stuff written around 1991. It wasn't insignificant, and a lot of it was brought in a while previously.

WE NEVER CHANGED A LINE OF CODE. NOTHING BROKE.

Friends in other businesses reported the same thing. It is inconceivable that such a catastrophe in waiting could have been managed so effectively that the result was virtual perfection. Christ, industry can't respond that fast across all businesses on anything let alone systems written over 30 years. One of our plants even had a control system so old it wasn't supported by anyone anywhere. We just left it.

I accept a lot of money was spent. One of my customers provided £25m for it in their accounts one year. Contacts within there confided to me that it was known to be a waste but they equally had investors to satisfy and since the executives couldn't lose by looking prudent, and would have lost everything had they had any problem at all that they hadn't shown due diligence over, it was a fait accompli. I'm sure the same logic applied throughout all industries.

I also recall the reaction from the IT industry to the 1st Jan realisation of no problems; a new date was cobbled up as a possible problem (I forget the rationale). That also passed without incident.

Edited December 26, 2008 by bogbrush

[laurejon]

Climate change is obviously fake. Imagine if it were true for a moment, and that it was a terrible problem.

Governments around the world would follow China's lead and one child per family would be the max.

Flying anywhere would be stigmatised, inefficent cars banned.

What do we have instead.

More benefits paid the more children somone has.

Extra runways built, bailouts for Jaguar and Rangerover, foreign owned populting cars.

Carbon credits, were a rich nation buys the carbon alowance from a poor nation (who wouldnt have used it)

To me it seems there are two different types of people who use the forum. The original members who have years of seeing the lies from the media and government, they have been coming here for years. Given strange looks when they said houses were over priced.

Then we have the new members who are now on board re house prices, because it can now no longer be denied. However, everything else they are still believing and argueing for the governments position.

If you work on the principle that everything you have been told is a lie, you wont be far from wrong.

Given that Gordon Brown is at loggerheads with the EU as he has kept the recent Carbon Auction remmittences in the treasury and will not spend the money on Climate Change/Green Projects I think the case should be closed.

Climate change is a mythical pyramid scam setup by Global Extremists who having ruined the worlds financial system with Ponzi Schemes, have now invented yet another Ponzi scheme in the form of a Global Stealth Tax under the guise of climate change.

[laurejon]

Climate change is obviously fake. Imagine if it were true for a moment, and that it was a terrible problem.

Governments around the world would follow China's lead and one child per family would be the max.

Flying anywhere would be stigmatised, inefficent cars banned.

What do we have instead.

More benefits paid the more children somone has.

Extra runways built, bailouts for Jaguar and Rangerover, foreign owned populting cars.

Carbon credits, were a rich nation buys the carbon alowance from a poor nation (who wouldnt have used it)

To me it seems there are two different types of people who use the forum. The original members who have years of seeing the lies from the media and government, they have been coming here for years. Given strange looks when they said houses were over priced.

Then we have the new members who are now on board re house prices, because it can now no longer be denied. However, everything else they are still believing and argueing for the governments position.

If you work on the principle that everything you have been told is a lie, you wont be far from wrong.

Given that Gordon Brown is at loggerheads with the EU as he has kept the recent Carbon Auction remmittences in the treasury and will not spend the money on Climate Change/Green Projects I think the case should be closed.

Climate change is a mythical pyramid scam setup by Global Extremists who having ruined the worlds financial system with Ponzi Schemes, have now invented yet another Ponzi scheme in the form of a Global Stealth Tax under the guise of climate change.

[bogbrush]

To me it seems there are two different types of people who use the forum. The original members who have years of seeing the lies from the media and government, they have been coming here for years. Given strange looks when they said houses were over priced.

Then we have the new members who are now on board re house prices, because it can now no longer be denied. However, everything else they are still believing and argueing for the governments position.

If you work on the principle that everything you have been told is a lie, you wont be far from wrong.

Nearly. I'm a newbie who believes nothing the machinery tells me when I can deduce a motive for deceiving me. The motives for the MMGW myth are so obvious you can't miss them.

[huw]

I must disagree there. My own business was forced to undertake reviews by insane customers armed with audit requirements. We have/had technology running across financial systems through to manufacturing systems some self-contained, others networked. We even had some bespoke stuff written around 1991. It wasn't insignificant, and a lot of it was brought in a while previously.

WE NEVER CHANGED A LINE OF CODE. NOTHING BROKE.

Well we did a huge number of rigorously designed tests using live data (using an old mothballed mainframe), found a large number of bugs that would have had a real-world impact, and changed lots of lines of COBOL (not me personally, I was working as a test manager). The fact that some systems might have been y2k-safe all along says nothing of what state other (possibly larger, older and more labyrinthine) systems were in.

The renovated software was rolled out in stages over a year in advance of the y2k deadline meaning there was plenty of time for live running and quiet fixes, it wasn't as if a big button was pushed on midnight at New Year.

But as I said, it was primarily about risk management, the firm was not prepared to accept the risk of not being able to meet their obligations to people whose money they were looking after. This seems eminently sensible for a financial institution to me; even if it's an old-fashioned approach to doing business that has largely been abandoned as of 2007/8

[Kurt Barlow]

Well we did a huge number of rigorously designed tests using live data (using an old mothballed mainframe), found a large number of bugs that would have had a real-world impact, and changed lots of lines of COBOL (not me personally, I was working as a test manager). The fact that some systems might have been y2k-safe all along says nothing of what state other (possibly larger, older and more labyrinthine) systems were in.

The renovated software was rolled out in stages over a year in advance of the y2k deadline meaning there was plenty of time for live running and quiet fixes, it wasn't as if a big button was pushed on midnight at New Year.

But as I said, it was primarily about risk management, the firm was not prepared to accept the risk of not being able to meet their obligations to people whose money they were looking after. This seems eminently sensible for a financial institution to me; even if it's an old-fashioned approach to doing business that has largely been abandoned as of 2007/8

Good Post Huw

Y2k is one of the standard claims of 'scare story' but as you correctly point out a hell of a lot of preventative work was carried out prior to Y2K.

Other noteable 'Scare Stories' include Ozone depletion and acid rain. Of course in the case of Ozone depletion the phase out of CFC's , and in the case of acid rain - flue gas desulphurisation occured to mitigate the worst effects are conveniently overlooked by the Conspiracy theory brigade

Pandemic flu outbreaks will be a conspiracy theory scare story - until it happens and then it will be a conspiracy that we were not prepared.

Edited December 26, 2008 by Kurt Barlow

[Kurt Barlow]

So are we agreeing it has been hotter than now in the past or not? Actually, that was the whole point.

From all the evidence I have seen the global average temperature is significantly higher than it has been for at least 2000 years - including when the romans were 'growing grapes up Hadrians wall' and the Vikings were perilously farming the edge of Greenland.

Thats not to say that regionally some places may be cooler - usually accounted for by shifts in ocean currents (the UK gets approximately 30-35% of its warmth from the Gulf Stream).

[ccc]

Climate change (That we can do anything about) is a mythical pyramid scam setup by Global Extremists who having ruined the worlds financial system with Ponzi Schemes, have now invented yet another Ponzi scheme in the form of a Global Stealth Tax under the guise of climate change.

I hope you don't mind my little correction.

[ccc]

From all the evidence I have seen the global average temperature is significantly higher than it has been for at least 2000 years - including when the romans were 'growing grapes up Hadrians wall' and the Vikings were perilously farming the edge of Greenland.

Thats not to say that regionally some places may be cooler - usually accounted for by shifts in ocean currents (the UK gets approximately 30-35% of its warmth from the Gulf Stream).

As I have already said numerous times...........

Numbers like the above are MEANINGLESS when discussing climate change on the planet Earth. That is why the 'global warming' community use them on a regular basis.....

Unless you are talking in 100's of thousands then you are wasting your time. You may as well be taking 2 seconds out of a football game to decide what side is on top. A futile and pointless exercise.

[VedantaTrader]

Ahh yes, man made global warming. Only without the warming for the last 5 years or so.

How otherwise intelligent people can fall for this scam i have no idea. This scam is almost as big as the scam to convince people that HIV is the cause of AIDS and that high cholesterol levels cause heart disease. All total lies based on media spin and political agendas.

You absolute nutjob. I can assure you HIV can lead to AIDS, as I have had very close first hand experience with HIV people in South east Asia, and have spoke to many specialists on the subject...your ignorance and naviety is astounding...

I have two friends who have done phds in immunlogy and molecular biology(studying the effects of drugs on the body in particular), and I can assure you HIV is very real. If you want yo get into a conversation about cd4,cd8, viral loads, ccrc5 receptors...

I tell you what...go to Africa and start barebacking dozens of girls if you are so sure of your statement.

Also, it is common knowledge that the link between cholestral and heart disease is unclear, and it is also becoming common knowledge that elevated levels of homocysteine levels in the blood lead to cardiovascular disease. What scam? It shows how little you have read, how little you have travelled mate, or embraced much in your life when you can come out with such nonsense....

[Kurt Barlow]

As I have already said numerous times...........

Numbers like the above are MEANINGLESS when discussing climate change on the planet Earth. That is why the 'global warming' community use them on a regular basis.....

Unless you are talking in 100's of thousands then you are wasting your time. You may as well be taking 2 seconds out of a football game to decide what side is on top. A futile and pointless exercise.

Why?