Fester,

More News on RECCE theory

200 Scientists converge on Hobart to discuss global sea rise .. and greenhouse warming based on SHA maps from TOPEX and JASON.

That's like 200 electrical engineers converging on Paris to discuss the effect of lightning on Parisian prostitutes.

This looks like its going to be a science SEARCH & AVOID Conference.

Those 200 scientists and their 2500 IPCC buddies have grants, salaries and a whole host of dollar incentives to hold the greenhouse warming line.

I just hope they don't lay plans to prevent independent scientists from gaining free and unfettered access to SHA data in future. Already last year at 4 critical times when SHA anomalies appeared to clear, off the NSW coast, and rains fell, the SHA maps became unusable artefact. That's a hell of a coincidence given the SHA guardian's predisposition with greenhouse atmospheric warming.

We can only hope they are objective enough to see that science is about TRUTH and not so much about money and living on Easy-Street.

Further, they say "It (SHA maps)also helps explain dramatically changing water temperatures off the NSW coast".

I have seen no explanation to date that takes into account the precise alignment of those SHA anomaly zones with 4 or 5 major ports (Tweed River, Macleay River to Coffs, Sydney to Wollongong, Bega to Eden) along the NSW coast.

Thanks Kaep. Personally I see governments more as ignorant crisis managers than malignant abusers of inside information, at least where science is concerned. At least by posting on this forum you provide a record of recce theory.

So your suggestion is that government action shifted the blue area from Mackay to SEQ in an attempt to attract Odette to the latter? Would this strategy have been more successful had they waited till Odette was closer to the coast?

Fester,

If Iemma/Carr and Howard were just ignorant crisis managers they would have stopped immigration 10 years ago in order to avert water shortages and gridlocked state services amidst the worst drought in a century..

They are actually considering accelerating immigration to over 140000 per year as it gives them more taxes and more political power. As long as they keep the profits in the hands of a few big development groups they have a real dictatorship that on the surface still seems to be a benign Democracy. Its a megalomaniac's dream not seen since the technological revolutions of the early 1930's. It has been enabled by the unbridled rise in IT technology whose protected high end use to sequester power and wealth will lead to world war as surely as mass production technology led to to WWII for precisely the same reason.

As for Mackay to Rockhampton, The latest SHA map http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/trinanes/tmp/sha1173308706.gif
shows a total removal of SHA anomalies. That indicates the seriousness with which authorities regard a cyclone strike to this sensitive military, farming and metropolitan complex. I don't believe experimenting or flirting with cyclones is on the table. But lets see how the maps pan out over the next 30 days. That will be interesting because that region needs to pollute in order to expand and prosper. Shame about the GBR!

The best bet now would be to arrange a cyclone attractor somewhere between Townsville and Mackay and let a cyclone hit land. The rainy aftermath will eventually work its way down to SEQ and more importantly for NSW to the head of the Darling River.

Also in this map there is a very high SHA anomaly along the west coast of Cape York. That is due to heated waters and thus a LOW pressure zone is building there. That Low will look for a Sth Easterly high entropy zone in which to dissipate. Nothing stands out at the moment and the Low may dissipate as torrential rains but I will report if anything changes.

In Today's Sydney Morning Herald:

"Cyclone George is still passing and it's not safe for volunteers to head out there yet," the Western Australia Fire and Emergency Services Authority spokeswoman said
said."

"It's going to be a couple of hours until they can go out and out and do a recce (reconnaissance mission)."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/cyclone-george-kills-one/2007/03/09/1173166934455.html

Comment:

Why would a journo define a perfectly standard english language noun like recce unless avoiding confusion with an alternative definition RECCE (Regional Ectopic Climate Catastrophe Event)?

I think the WA Emergency Service and the Journos are on to RECCE Theory.

What they should have said was:

It's going to be a couple of hours until the RECCE is over so they can go out and do a recce and assess the wrecceage

KAEP,

Thank you for the link to the online SMH report. I clicked on it at around 6:20 PM EDST Friday 9 March 2007. The words you quoted in your post were not present in the online version. Did they perhaps come from a printed SMH? Or were they perhaps originally present in the online report, having since been removed?

Whilst it may be wise not to try and read too much into a routine newspaper report, a turn of phrase can be on occasions extremely revealing. I notice in the quote within your post what may be a couple of typographical errors. The first, seemingly inconsequential, is the repetition of 'said' at the end (and on the next line down) of the first statement attributed to the spokeswoman for the WAFESA. The second is in the curious use of the phrase 'go out and out and do a recce' in the second quote within your post.

If the speaker you quoted was really talking about conducting a recconaissance, the use of the phrase 'go out and out' is seemingly inappropriate. If the words are accurately reported, however, they could make sense in a different context. That context could be one in which, as you suggest, the speaker was using the acronym RECCE (Regional Ectopic Climate Catastrophe Event) but was NOT talking about undertaking recconaissance, the problem being that the journalist did not realise the meaning of the acronym in the context.

What if the journalist was listening in on a conversation, the context of which he did not fully understand, and what the speaker really said was "Its going to be a couple of [years] until they can go out and out and DO a RECCE."? That would be a damaging claim or admission! One perhaps important enough to have to obfuscate in the immediate circumstances of the reporting, and editorially censor subsequently.

I guess the question is, were these apparent typos your own (quite understandable) errors, or are your quotes absolutely verbatim from your original source? If the latter, we may have a problem.

Kaep plugging away.

Forest,

Apologies for any confusion.

I did not intend to give the impression that the quote was verbatim in anything other than the use of 'recce' and its definition as that was the only reference on which I was making any claim.

I included the source article so people could check that. I added the name of the cyclone and the WA spokeswoman reference for forum brevity. The extra 'out and' was a typo.

The exact quote:

"The Cyclone is still passing and it's not safe for volunteers to head out there yet," she said.

"It's going to be a couple of hours until they can go out and do a recce (reconnaissance mission)."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/cyclone-george-kills-one/2007/03/09/1173166934455.html

Perhaps a better intro to my post would have been: Approximately in today's SMH:

And my claims about authorities catching on to RECCE theory?.

The Qld cyclone season is not over and the US hurricane season starts in June. I will continue to report events here and on the New York Times science forum. Just watch what happens and keep an ear out for that word RECCE! After all science is based on experimental research is it not?