7 m WORLD WIDE SEA RISE WITHIN 5 YEARS

Comments sent to DAILY TELEGRAPH, Australia, by Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
following article published today (see below) making reference to
NASA's new terrible findings ( which are still short of the mark
though ) :

NASA research is correct in estimating an exponential aggravation of
sea levels world wide.
I might add the following information if I may :

Some subsea volcanic activity is quite noticeable in both North &
South pole now, with one major underwater volcano being discovered
recently in Antarctic
The melting of Ice caps will also generate erratic instability of the
Earth axis re nominal value, leading in turn what is known by the
True Geology as "magmatic sloshing" ... hence to re- activation of
probable existing ( although not known) volcanoes under both North &
South Ice Caps

If so the projection of 7 m for sea level rises will be brought back
to a mere 5 years according to my computations.

Yours sincerely

Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Discoverer of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre mines in the Great Sandy Desert

Exploration Geologist & Offshore Consultant
Mobile +33 650 171 464
Founder of the True Geology

~ Ignorance is the Cosmic Sin, the One never Forgiven ~


for background info.
http://www.tnet.com.au/~warrigal/grule.html
http://users.indigo.net.au/don/tel/index.html
http://members.iimetro.com.au/~hubbca/turcaud.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/bbing/stories/s28534.htm
Email: sir.jean-paul.turcaud(at)neuf.fr


************************************************

DAILY TELEGRAPH
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegrap...001021,00.html

SITUATION CRITICAL ON CLIMATE
By Michelle Cazzulino


June 26, 2007 12:00am

MELTING ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica will cause the sea
level to rise much faster than previously anticipated, according to
alarming new NASA research.

The alarming prediction was made by a research team led by James
Hansen, from NASA's Goddard Institute, and published in a peer-
reviewed paper titled Climate Change and Trace Gases.

The document argues the Earth is perilously close to entering a new
era of runaway climate change, warning that while conditions are
currently classified as "serious", they are likely to tip into
"dangerous" over the next decade.

It says while the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had
forecast a sea level rise of 18cm-59cm, that figure did not take into
account melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica.

"That's beginning to lose mass and is situated on a bedrock below sea
level, so it's potentially unstable and could give a very large sea-
level rise," Mr Hansen said.

Beyond Zero Emissions spokesman Matthew Wright said immediate action
was needed.

"There is little point setting 2020 or 2050 greenhouse gas reduction
targets," he said.

"We have too much carbon in the air now, in 2007."

wrote in message
oups.com...
Comments sent to DAILY TELEGRAPH, Australia, by Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
following article published today (see below) making reference to
NASA's new terrible findings ( which are still short of the mark
though ) :

NASA research is correct in estimating an exponential aggravation of
sea levels world wide.
I might add the following information if I may :

Some subsea volcanic activity is quite noticeable in both North &
South pole now, with one major underwater volcano being discovered
recently in Antarctic
The melting of Ice caps will also generate erratic instability of the
Earth axis re nominal value, leading in turn what is known by the
True Geology as "magmatic sloshing" ... hence to re- activation of
probable existing ( although not known) volcanoes under both North &
South Ice Caps

If so the projection of 7 m for sea level rises will be brought back
to a mere 5 years according to my computations.

Just goes to show that the Torygraph will publish any old ****.
BTW, you are obviosuly living in a fantasy - since they didn't publish it.
cheers
Bill

Landy wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Comments sent to DAILY TELEGRAPH, Australia, by Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
following article published today (see below) making reference to
NASA's new terrible findings ( which are still short of the mark
though ) :

NASA research is correct in estimating an exponential aggravation of
sea levels world wide.
I might add the following information if I may :

Some subsea volcanic activity is quite noticeable in both North &
South pole now, with one major underwater volcano being discovered
recently in Antarctic
The melting of Ice caps will also generate erratic instability of the
Earth axis re nominal value, leading in turn what is known by the
True Geology as "magmatic sloshing" ... hence to re- activation of
probable existing ( although not known) volcanoes under both North &
South Ice Caps

If so the projection of 7 m for sea level rises will be brought back
to a mere 5 years according to my computations.

Just goes to show that the Torygraph will publish any old ****.
BTW, you are obviosuly living in a fantasy - since they didn't publish it.
cheers
Bill

(Good to see Bill has his cheery smile back.) Hi Bill.
You know what they call that kind of overreaction, don't you?

On 26 juin, 13:41, don findlay wrote:
Landy wrote:
wrote in message
roups.com...

kind forward of some answer in aus.ng
**********************************************

On 26 juin, 15:53, "Chom Noamsky" wrote:
* "10x" wrote in message
*
* ...
*
* So get a surveyor to figure out where the new coastline is going
to be
* and start buying prospective ocean front property.
*
* I hope you won't mind a few million displaced Banglasheshi moving
in with
* you.

Well seen both !

jpturcaud

wrote in message
oups.com...
Comments sent to DAILY TELEGRAPH, Australia, by Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
following article published today (see below) making reference to
snip

It's interesting how one can almost always spot a Google-poster
even *before* examining the message headers.




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Let me get this straight. It is going to rise 1.2 meters per year or 10
centimeters a month so all I have to do is put a meterstick in the ocean and
come back in a month to see if the claim is bull****. Right?

--
How can Congress be against the war on Iraq and also be calling for war on
Iran? They cannot be if they represent the voters. They can be if they
represent Israel.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 3809
nizkor http://www.giwersworld.org/nizkook/nizkook.phtml
Larry Shiff http://www.giwersworld.org/computers/newsagent.phtml a8

On 26 juin, 22:24, Matt Giwer wrote:
Let me get this straight. It is going to rise 1.2 meters per year or 10
centimeters a month so all I have to do is put a meterstick in the ocean and
come back in a month to see if the claim is bull****. Right?

No, Sir !

Such process are in fact resulting from chain reaction, and let say
that a probable major volcanic activity is triggered right underneath
one of the Inlandsis, you may find yourself with a 1m rise in a
month.
Are you aware of that subsea volcanic activity in Antarctic ?
Are you aware too of the erratic wobbling of Earth axis at the present
time ? ... and parallely the progressive loss of balancing rotation
masses at the Poles ?

I believe this will result in an very instable situation for the
planet especially since great masses of water such a Aral, Asof seas,
lake Tchad have disappeared and on the opposite some 10 000 dams have
been loaded on Earth spinning periphery and some are very large
indeed

Personally I do not know when it will occur but contrarily to official
views & according to the True Geology indeed, Earth is not spinning
out of inertia from some alleged Big Bang but is driven both on its
own rotation & orbit by the Sun itself. The nature of a driving force
is unstable since the flow relative to the centre of the vortex has a
tangential speed slower than the one on the outside of the driven
body ! Do you get that clear ? Let see for example the analogy of a
cork in a bottom propeller driven washing machine, what you can
observe is the instability of that cork having a tendency to be always
instable and redressing & falling in turn its position. The stability
of the Earth on the other hand is determined by its Polar masses and a
magmatic adaptation to eventual impact & accident seen for example as
the Equatorial Bulge.

Now what I am getting at is the fact that if you upset the equilibrium
by playing with the greatest momentum forces i.e. the ones relatives
to the greatest tangential speed on periphery of the spinning body,
you can not expect an immediate re-equilibrium by the magmatic masses
underlying the crust since those masses are constrained by greater &
greater thickness of crust ( or Lithosphere ) In clear and although
this is not known indeed but by the True Geology, as a planet drifts
from mother star on the Plane of Ecliptic, its crust thickness to the
point where Quakes ( or adaptation by Planet Expansion to an
anisobaric & anisotropic environment ) are no longer possible ( see
the case for example of Olympus mons on Mars )

Once then the point of instability of our Earth will be reached you
will get all those reactions in series, and my intrinsic belief is not
if it will happen but when it will happen ! Further the intentions of
Government are not to develop new technologies developed from a proper
understanding of the UPL ( Universal Pressure Law ) but to keep on
cashing as well as those in real financial power upon well proven
system of quick return on investment ? Correct ? Unfortunately for
those greedy beasts of prey, we are all on the same boat

Yours sincerely


Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
Australia Mining Pioneer
Discoverer of Telfer, Nifty & Kintyre mines in the Great Sandy Desert

wrote in message
ps.com...
On 26 juin, 22:24, Matt Giwer wrote:
Let me get this straight. It is going to rise 1.2 meters per year
or 10
centimeters a month so all I have to do is put a meterstick in the ocean
and
come back in a month to see if the claim is bull****. Right?

No, Sir !

Such process are in fact resulting from chain reaction, and let say
that a probable major volcanic activity is triggered right underneath
one of the Inlandsis, you may find yourself with a 1m rise in a
month.

SNIP

Let's see . . hmmm . . . 140M square miles of ocean, at 2.56M sq. meters
per sq. mile, works out to 3.6 times 10 *14* cubic meters needed to raise
that surface area by one meter. That's 360 TRILLION (not British trillion)
cubic meters. That's 140,000 cubic kilometers . . . the largest volcanic
eruption in the past 10,000 years was 1815 Tambora at 100 cubic kilometers.
So the proposed new eruption would be 1400 times larger than that, and would
have to take place entirely beneath the surface of the ocean, or all of its
deposits would have to end up there. Seems unlikely.

Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA

"Mike Williams" wrote in message
t...

Snip

Let's see . . hmmm . . . 140M square miles of ocean, at 2.56M sq. meters
per sq. mile, works out to 3.6 times 10 *14* cubic meters needed to raise
that surface area by one meter. That's 360 TRILLION (not British trillion)
cubic meters. That's 140,000 cubic kilometers . . . the largest volcanic
eruption in the past 10,000 years was 1815 Tambora at 100 cubic
kilometers. So the proposed new eruption would be 1400 times larger than
that, and would have to take place entirely beneath the surface of the
ocean, or all of its deposits would have to end up there. Seems unlikely.

I made a math error, and thereby greatly underestimated the amount of
displacement required to raise sea level one meter. I believe the correct
figure is just about 363,000 cubic kilometers, thereby requiring the
equivalent of 3,630 Tamboras..

Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA USA

On Jun 27, 8:15 am, "The Physicist" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com... Comments sent to DAILY TELEGRAPH, Australia, by Sir Jean-Paul Turcaud
following article published today (see below) making reference to

snip

It's interesting how one can almost always spot a Google-poster
even *before* examining the message headers.


I'm considering asking Google to flag certain posters by content...