PLEASE NOTE:
*
CCNet, 067/2000 - 9 June 2000
-----------------------------
CCNet-SPECIAL: KEEPING A COOL HEAD WHILE GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE IS
HEATING UP THE ATMOSPHERE
"This document is an evangelistic
statement about a coming
apocalypse, not a scientific statement
about the evolution of a
complicated system with significant
uncertainties."
--
John Christy, climatologist at the University of
Alabama-Huntsville
(1) U.S. CONGRESS CLIMATE STUDY PREDICTS ENVIRONMENTAL APOCALYPSE
YAHOO! News, 9 June 2000
(2) ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET UNSTABLE DURING PAST WARMING PERIODS
http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/uf-urs060600.html
(3) SKEPTICAL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS STILL SKEPTICAL ABOUT
GLOBAL WARMING SCARE
http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/
(4) HOW DO HUMAN ACTIVITIES AFFECT EARTH'S CLIMATE?
Centre for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and
Global Change
(5) GREENLAND ICE SHEET & SEA LEVEL RISE DURING LAST
INTERGLACIAL
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and
Global Change
(6) ANALYSING THE RISK OF CLIMATE CHANGE
R.N. Jones, CSIRO
(7) CLIMATE VARIABILITY, THE OCEANS & SOCIETAL IMPACTS
American Meteorological Society
---------
(1) U.S. CONGRESS CLIMATE STUDY PREDICTS ENVIRONMENTAL APOCALYPSE
From YAHOO! News, 9 June 2000
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20000609/us/climate_impact_2.html
Rising Temps Forecast Changes
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - It's a grim forecast: Salmon quit running the
Columbia River as the cold water fish move farther north; sugar
maples
in New England disappear; the barrier islands off the Carolinas
are
swept away by higher seas.
These changes in landscape and ecosystem are but a few of the
projections outlined in the first-ever detailed "national
assessment"
of what could be expected to occur in the United States - region
by
region - if the nation's climate becomes 5 degrees to 10 degrees
warmer
over the next 100 years.
The assessment, likely to be made public next week, is the
product of
four years of study, numerous workshops and reviews by hundreds
of
scientists both in and out of government who examined global
warming's
likely regional impacts as well as its effect on human health,
agriculture, forests and coastal areas across the country.
Unlike other studies that have examined general global impacts,
this
assessment was directed by Congress to focus on the United States
specifically.
Critics argue the analysis is little more than guess work and
that
computer climate models, heavily relied upon in the assessment,
cannot predict impacts on a regional basis.
"This document is an evangelistic statement about a coming
apocalypse,
not a scientific statement about the evolution of a complicated
system
with significant uncertainties," John Christy, a
climatologist at the
University of Alabama-Huntsville, wrote during a review of an
early
draft of the 128-page overview.
Christy, who is among a group of scientists skeptical about the
likelihood of significant global warming, did not return
telephone
calls seeking to know whether his views have changed about later
drafts.
The overview report, a recent draft copy of which was obtained by
The
Associated Press, acknowledges "significant uncertainties in
the
science underlying climate-change impacts" particularly
related to
human health. Still, it concludes "based on the best
available
information, most Americans will experience significant
impacts" from
the Earth's warming.
The forecast predicts "a complex mix of positive and
negative impacts"
and concludes there may be surprises. "It is very likely
that some
aspects and impacts of climate change will be totally
unanticipated,"
the report says.
But the assessment predicts entire ecosystems likely will shift
northward as temperatures increase, and coastal areas will have
to cope
with higher sea levels and the prospects of more frequent storms.
Cities will swelter in more frequent heat waves, and droughts
will
become more likely in parts of the Midwest.
At the same time, the warmer, wetter climate will cause larger
crop
yields for many farmers and cause tree growth to flourish in the
Northwest, although forests in the Southeast likely will break
into "a mosaic of forests, savannas and grasslands" and
sugar maples
could disappear from the Northeast.
The warming will cause ocean levels to rise, causing barrier
islands to
disappear and - when the geography allows - force wetlands and
marshes
inland. But the Great Lakes are predicted to decline because of
increased evaporation, causing yet different problems.
Tree, fish and animal species will migrate northward everywhere.
In the Pacific Northwest, the salmon may shift farther north
because of
the warmer streams and offshore waters and be replaced by
warmer-water
species. And in Alaska the rising temperature is expected to
cause
further thawing of permafrost, damaging roads and buildings.
Some coastal cities, faced with sea level rise and more frequent
storm
surges, may have to redesign and adapt water, sewer and
transportation
systems, the study says. It makes no attempt to estimate the
costs of
such improvements.
An early draft of the overview summary was attacked in December
as
having "an extreme, alarmist tone" on predicting impact
on human
health. It since has been revised with more emphasis on the
uncertainties of predicting health impacts.
Nevertheless, the study says higher temperatures and increased
rainfall
likely will exacerbate air pollution, saddle large cities with
more
frequent and severe heat waves, and lead to the spread of
waterborne or
insect-carrying diseases, including malaria in the Southeastern
states.
In much of the country, winter will be much milder.. The result:
fewer
opportunities to ski and more time for mountain hiking and other
mild-weather recreation. The warmer weather will reduce the
mountain
snowpack, cutting summer runoff that feeds irrigation across much
of
the West. More rain in the arid Southwest could bring new
vegetation to
desert lands, but also more flash floods.
Copyright 2000, AP
================
(2) ANTARCTIC ICE SHEET UNSTABLE DURING PAST WARMING PERIODS
From http://www.eurekalert.org/releases/uf-urs060600.html
June 6, 2000
Contact: Sharon Kanfoush
skanfou@ufl.edu
352-392-2231
University of Florida
UF research shows Antarctic ice sheet was unstable in past
warming
periods
GAINESVILLE, Fla. --- A research team led by University of
Florida
geologists is the first to find evidence that parts of the
Antarctic
ice sheet have undergone episodes of massive instability that
appear to
correspond with periods of unusually warm temperatures in the
Northern
Hemisphere during the last ice age.
The findings, which will appear in an article in the journal
Science on
Friday, do not address the current debate over global warming and
its
impact on the polar ice caps. But the research adds to a growing
body
of evidence suggesting polar ice can undergo huge and rapid
changes
that may be tied to climate, said Sharon Kanfoush, a UF graduate
student and lead researcher on the project.
"The fact that the ice sheet has behaved very dynamically in
the past,
or undergone very rapid changes in the past, implies that such
changes
are possible in the future," Kanfoush said.
Geologists have known for several years that the Northern
Hemisphere
ice sheet has shed huge chunks of ice in the form of icebergs at
intervals of 1,000 years or more during the last period of
glacial
advancement, which extended from about 60,000 to 20,000 years
ago.
Researchers believe the ice sheet "calved" virtual
armadas of icebergs
just before extreme climatic periods that, over Greenland,
resulted in
as much as a 60-degree atmospheric temperature increases in 50
years.
The Northern Hemisphere ice sheet instability and subsequent
warming
spikes have spurred considerable discussion and debate. Until the
UF
work, however, no one had sought to broaden the issue by probing
what
happened to the Antarctic ice sheet in the same glacial period,
said
David Hodell, professor of geological sciences and the other UF
researcher on the team.
The team discovered that parts of the Antarctic ice sheet were
unstable
during the warming spikes in the Northern Hemisphere.
Two factors may be at work, Hodell said. One, the higher
temperatures
may have caused the Northern Hemisphere glaciers to melt, raising
sea
levels and causing grounded ice in the seas near Antarctica to
become
unstable. Alternatively, the higher temperatures may have altered
the
circulation of global ocean currents, bringing more warm water to
Antarctica and causing its ice shelf to begin to break up.
Four massive icebergs broke off from the Ross Ice Shelf in
Antarctica
this spring, the latest of several iceberg events that have
focussed
attention on global warming and its possible impact on
Antarctica.
Hodell said the UF team's research has no direct bearing on the
recent
events because the climate during the glacial-advancement period
was
fundamentally different from the climate in the modern era of
glacial
retreat.
But Hodell added that if water temperature increases or rising
sea
levels caused the Antarctic ice instability in the past, similar
increases could do the same today.
"You could make the analogy that finding these events during
the last
glacial period suggests that these grounded ice shelves are
inherently
unstable and susceptible to either temperature or sea level
change," he
said.
The team came to its conclusions based on analysis of sediment
cores
from a series of sites in the southern Atlantic obtained on two
separate research cruises, including one cruise on the JOIDES
Resolution, a scientific research ship operated by the
International
Ocean Drilling Program. The cores, samples of material from as
far as
4,600 meters beneath the sea surface, contained large grains of
quartz
derived from Antarctica as well as fragments of volcanic
material. The
researchers concluded the minerals were deposited by melting
icebergs
that had split off from Antarctica near the Weddell Sea, then
drifted
north and east in the south Atlantic before melting. The Ocean
Drilling
Program is an international research partnership of scientific
institutions and governments.
The other members of the research team are Christopher Charles
and
Graham Mortyn, both with the Scripps Institute of Oceanography at
the
University of California at San Diego; Thomas Guilderson of the
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif.; and
Ulysses Ninnemann of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of
Columbia
University.
================
(3) SKEPTICAL CLIMATE SCIENTISTS STILL SKEPTICAL ABOUT
GLOBAL WARMING SCARE
From http://www.vision.net.au/~daly/
Skeptical Climate Scientists Unite against IPCC
5 June 2000
By David Wojick
Last week's summit of skeptical climate scientists had harsh
words for
the Third Assessment Report of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel
on
Climate Change (Electricity Daily, May 26). The scientists
unanimously
claim that systematic errors and omissions, pervade the draft
TAR.
A Capitol Hill crowd of about 150 heard the international group
of
scientists pour on the criticism. The IPCC is deliberately
ignoring
important science, and skewing what they do consider, the group
says.
Several startling revelations came out at the meeting. Norway's
Tom
Segalstad reported that early ice core analyses found
preindustrial
carbon dioxide levels well over present amounts, indicating that
there
may not in fact be a significant CO2 increase at all.
"But," Segalstad
says, "these findings have been dropped from subsequent
studies,
beginning about 1985, perhaps because they are not politically
correct."
Segalstad also noted that in order to get the "politically
correct" low
CO2 levels in the ice cores to link up properly with more recent
atmospheric measurements, the age estimates had to be changed
significantly. "They decided the air in the ice was 95 years
younger
than the ice it was in," he quips. Segalstad told
Electricity Daily
that he has been harassed and threatened in Norway for making
such
statements.
Prof. Fred Singer, who organized the summit, reported that tree
ring
data does not show any warming in the last century, contradicting
the
surface thermometer record.
Several speakers noted that there is no known way that the
surface
temperature can be rising while the atmospheric temperature, as
measured by satellites, is not warming. "Greenhouse gas
warming
must first occur high in the air, not near the ground. In fact,
atmospheric warming could increase evaporation and actually cool
the
surface, but we see none of that," American scientist
Hugh Ellsaesser explains.
According to New Zealand's Vincent Gray, "The IPCC tries to
prove that
the satellite and balloon records are wrong. It is much more
likely
that these records are correct and the surface data are
wrong." He
added, "The increased surface temperatures in the record are
mostly in
cold climates in the dead of winter when we would expect the
local heat
effect to be most prominent."
Germany's Peter Dietze presented his own alternative model which
he
says incorporates many features ignored by the IPCC. According to
Dietze the IPCC errors are so gross that a relatively simple
model is
sufficient to estimate their magnitude. "The IPCC's best
guess for
warming due to CO2 doubling is a factor of 4 to 6 too high"
(see http://www.microtech.com.au/daly/forcing/moderr.htm)
David Wojick, who chaired one of the panels, sums up the event
saying
"if these scientists are right, then the IPCC's errors and
omissions
are disgraceful." He notes that the 1000 page TAR itself, at
the very
end, says "In sum, a strategy must recognize what is
possible. In
climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are
dealing
with a coupled non-liner chaotic system, and therefore that the
prediction of a specific future climate state is not
possible." Wojick
quips that - "The IPCC should read its own last
chapter."
===============
(4) HOW DO HUMAN ACTIVITIES AFFECT EARTH'S CLIMATE?
From Centre for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
http://www.co2science.org/
1 June 2000
How Do Human Activities Affect Earth's Climate? Bob Dylan Said It
Best:
The Answer is Blowin' in the Wind
"The effect of radiative forcing by anthropogenic aerosols
is one of
the largest sources of uncertainty in climate
prediction." So wrote
Satheesh and Ramanathan (2000) in the 4 May issue of Nature
in
summarizing the results of their study of the effects of
human-induced
pollution of the atmosphere over the tropical northern Indian
Ocean.
Taking a cue from our father's long-standing quest to utilize
"natural
experiments" to quantify the effects of various
climate-perturbing
phenomena (Idso, 1998), the two researchers determined the
clear-sky
radiative consequences of the December-to-April northeastern
low-level
monsoonal flow of air that transports anthropogenic aerosols,
including
sulphates, nitrates, organics, soot and fly ash, from the Indian
sub-continent and the south Asian region literally thousands of
kilometers over the entire north Indian Ocean and as far south as
10° S
latitude.
So what did Satheesh and Ramanathan learn about the radiative
consequences of these aerosols? In their own words,
"mean clear-sky
solar radiative heating for the winters of 1998 and 1999
decreased at
the ocean surface by 12 to 30 Wm-2," which they suggested
would likely
lead to a sizeable reduction of evaporation from the ocean's
surface
and a significant decrease in the hydrologic cycle over a large
portion
of the planet. However, they also noted that the increased
absorption
of solar radiation by the anthropogenic haze might be capable of
"burning off" low-level trade-wind cumulus clouds,
which would allow
more solar radiation to reach and warm the ocean surface,
counteracting
the consequences of the first perturbation.
Eight days later, in the 12 May issue of Science, Ackerman et al.
(2000) verified the speculations of Satheesh and Ramanathan
regarding
low-level cumulus cloud burn-off. From data obtained over the
same
oceanic region, they concluded that the anthropogenic haze of
1998
likely reduced fractional cloud coverage there by 25%, and that
the
even heavier haze of 1999 may have reduced it by 40%.
These are large effects. In fact, Schwartz and Buseck
(2000) note that
the anthropogenic aerosol-induced clear-sky radiative forcing
found by
Satheesh and Ramanathan is "three to seven times as great as
global
average longwave (infrared) radiative forcing by increases in
greenhouse gases over the industrial period - but opposite in
sign."
Yet enhanced by the cloud burn-off effects of the aerosols, the
total
warming effect may approach the magnitude of the cooling effect,
depending on a number of assumptions about the chemical and
physical
characteristics of the aerosols.
The upshot of all these findings, in the words of Schwartz and
Buseck,
is that "unfortunately for those who would like a quick and
accurate
assessment of anthropogenic climate forcing over the industrial
period,
the studies … demonstrate that there is much to be learned
before such
an assessment can confidently be given."
Clearly, as all involved in these studies have unhesitatingly
affirmed,
we are far from knowing even the sign of the net anthropogenic
impact
on climate since we began to mine and burn coal, gas and oil in
prodigious quantities. Yet whoever is responsible for the
ultimate
synthesis of the massive IPCC reports continues to claim that the
balance of evidence suggests a human impact on earth's climate
over
this period, which is further claimed to be an unprecedented
warming of
the globe.
Where is the attention of these folks to the findings of studies
such
as these, which clearly demonstrate that we are not yet anywhere
close
to being able to make such a stunning determination? In
contemplating
this question, all we can do is shake our heads and ask, Where's
their's?
Dr. Craig D. Idso
President
Dr. Keith E. Idso
Vice President
References
Ackerman, A.S., Toon, O.B., Stevens, D.E., Heymsfield, A.J.,
Ramanathan, V. and Welton, E.J. 2000. Reduction of
tropical
cloudiness by soot. Science 288: 1042-1047.
Idso, S.B. 1998. CO2-induced global warming: a
skeptic's view of
potential climate change. Climate Research 10: 69-82.
Satheesh, S.K. and Ramanathan, V. 2000. Large
differences in tropical
aerosol forcing at the top of the atmosphere and Earth's
surface.
Nature 405: 60-63.
Schwartz, S.E. and Buseck, P.R. 2000. Absorbing phenomena.
Science 288:
989-990.
Copyright © 2000. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide
and Global
Change
===============
(5) GREENLAND ICE SHEET & SEA LEVEL RISE DURING LAST
INTERGLACIAL
From Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global
Change
http://www.co2science.org/
The Greenland Ice Sheet and Sea Level Rise of the Last
Interglacial
References
Cuffey, K.M. and Marshall, S.J. 2000. Substantial
contribution to
sea-level rise during the last interglacial from the Greenland
ice
sheet. Nature 404: 591-594.
Hvidberg, C.S. 2000. When Greenland ice melts.
Nature 404: 551-552.
What was done
Previous model estimates of the Greenland ice sheet's
contribution to
sea level rise during the last interglacial were one to two
meters.
Cuffey and Marshall reevaluated these estimates based on a
recalibration of oxygen-isotope-derived temperatures from central
Greenland ice cores.
What was learned
The results of Cuffey and Marshall's model analysis suggest that
the
Greenland ice sheet was much smaller during the last interglacial
than
previously thought. Melting of the ice sheet, they estimate,
contributed somewhere between four and five and a half meters to
sea
level rise.
What it means
One of the major concerns of believers in CO2-induced global
warming is
that rising global temperatures may result in the rapid melting
and
collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. However, according to
Hvidberg, Cuffey and Marshall's results imply that "high sea
levels
during the last interglacial should not be interpreted as
evidence for
extensive melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, and so
challenges
the hypothesis that the West Antarctic is particularly sensitive
to
climate change." Nevertheless, the possibility exists that
sea levels
in the present interglacial may rise to the height of those of
the last
interglacial as a result of a major shrinking of the Greenland
ice
sheet. Such a scenario does not bode well for coastal
populations, but
Cuffey and Marshall estimate that the widespread melting of the
Greenland ice sheet took place over the course of a few
millennia,
which, according to Hvidberg, draws a "less dramatic picture
than the
suggested collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, with its
accompanying rapid increase in sea level."
Reviewed 1 June 2000
Copyright © 2000. Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and
Global
Change
================
(6) ANALYSING THE RISK OF CLIMATE CHANGE
R.N. Jones: Analysing the risk of climate change using an
irrigation
demand model. CLIMATE RESEARCH, 2000, Vol.14, No.2, pp.89-100
CSIRO,PRIVATE BAG NO 1,ASPENDALE,VIC 3195,AUSTRALIA
Due to the high degree of uncertainty accompanying projections of
greenhouse-induced climate change, specific impacts cannot be
predicted
with any accuracy. At best, a range of projected climate change
bounded
by its high and low extremes can be used to produce a range of
impacts,
results that are often too broad to be of practical use in
planning for
adaptation and mitigation. However, by addressing outcomes in the
initial stages of an impact assessment through the construction
of
user-defined thresholds, it is possible to identify outcomes that
should either be avoided, in the case of a negative impact, or
aimed
for, in the case of a positive impact. By quantifying these
thresholds
as functions of key climatic variables, and creating projections
for
these variables that take account of a comprehensive range of
quantifiable uncertainties, the risk of threshold exceedance can
be
analysed. This information can then be used in a risk assessment
to
identify windows for adaptation, describing the timing and degree
of
adaptation needed to prevent 'dangerous' climate change occurring
for a
particular activity. This procedure is illustrated through the
use of
an irrigation demand model for perennial pasture, based on data
collected from a farm in northern Victoria, Australia. Seasonal
water-use is used to estimate an annual farm cap of 12 M1 ha(-1)
based
on the annual water right. The exceedance of this farm cap in 50%
of
years is taken to represent a critical threshold beyond which the
farmer cannot adapt. The method of risk analysis utilises
projected
ranges of regional rainfall and temperature change, combined with
a
sensitivity analysis, to construct risk response surfaces. Monte
Carlo
sampling is used to scale 100 yr of weather-generated data to
calculate
the probability of the annual farm cap being exceeded across
ranges of
temperature and rainfall change projected at 10 yr intervals from
2000
to 2100. Based on the model projections of changing water demand,
some
degree of adaptation is indicated by 2030, although the
theoretical
critical threshold is not approached until 2050. This procedure
represents a considerable advance in 'bottom up' studies where
the
impact on a specific activity is being addressed. It provides a
basis
for the planning of adaptation measures and can potentially
contribute
to the assessment of dangerous climate change as required by the
UN
Framework Convention for Climate Change. Copyright 2000,
Institute for
Scientific Information Inc.
================
(7) CLIMATE VARIABILITY, THE OCEANS & SOCIETAL IMPACTS
From The American Meteorological Society
http://www.ametsoc.org/AMS/
Symposium held at the 81st AMS Annual Meeting 14—19 January
2001,
Albequerque, New Mexico
Every year our nation seems to experience more weather extremes
and
record heat. Is this the impact of global warming or just the
effects
of natural climate variability? Have we experienced such extremes
in
the past? What are the societal impacts of climate variability?
Can
some of this variability be forecast, and if so, how can this
information be used to mitigate the impacts of weather-related
natural
disasters and to derive economic and social benefits?
The past few decades have seen an explosion of research in a
variety of
fields into these topics, and answers to some of these questions
are
slowly coming into view. The ocean plays a central role in
producing
climate variations and enabling seasonal and longer-term
forecasts.
This variability also has strong impacts on marine ecosystems and
in
the coastal zone where much of our population has moved in recent
years. The past decades of research have led to routine seasonal
forecasts that are primarily based on an understanding of the El
Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomena. What will the
future hold?
One can anticipate that only the surface has been scratched in
terms of
using this technology and understanding in diverse applications
and in
continued improvements to the forecasting capability.
This multidisciplinary symposium focuses on many of the questions
raised in the previous paragraph. It is organized around invited
and
solicited papers with extensive use of poster sessions for recent
research results. Sessions are organized by timescale, that is,
taking
an end-to-end look at the ocean’s role in producing societal
impacts
through impacting climate variability for the distant past
(paleoclimates), the present (which is being impacted by seasonal
to
interannual and decadal climate variability), long-term trends,
and the
future under different global change scenarios.
The intent is to bring together experts from climate science,
oceanography, and users from social and economic sectors to
assess the
lessons learned from the past and present climate for the future.
Topics to be discussed include future requirements for ocean
observing
systems; main research threads that need to be followed, which
are
increasingly becoming more interdisciplinary; the status and
future of
climate information and forecasts; and what modes on interaction
should
be developed between users and producers of climate information.
Of
special interest would be contributions that help put in
perspective
the climate extremes the United States has experience over the
past few
years, for example, record-setting monthly and seasonal
temperatures,
extreme events, an apparent increase in Atlantic hurricane
activity,
and enhanced drought activity.
Oral presentations should offer to review or summarize any of the
major
topic areas and these will be drawn both from invited and
solicited
papers. Poster presentations should contain more focused,
cutting-edge
research contributions. Contributions are encouraged in the
following
end impacts areas:
* climate and the fall of civilizations,
* droughts through the ages,
* use of climate information for disaster mitigation and economic
benefits,
* climate impacts in the coastal zone,
* impacts on marine ecosystems,
* impacts on ecosystems and health, and
* the potential societal impacts of global change.
In the areas of climate variability, contributions are sought for
paleoclimate reconstruction of the ocean–atmosphere system;
abrupt
regime shifts; the major modes of climate variability such as
ENSO, the
Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Arctic Oscillation (the North
Atlantic
Oscillation); climate forecast system; and coupled systems for
assessing
global change. For the role of the ocean, contributions are
sought for
the role of the ocean in producing climate variations on all the
timescales, the role of the ocean in the carbon cycle,
requirements for
ocean observing system required to understand and document global
climate variability, the global Ocean Data Assimilation
Experiment,
systems to assess change in the coastal oceans, and trends toward
interdisciplinary observing systems. Solicitations are also
sought for
topics that might not have been mentioned but are in the spirit
of the
symposium.
FURTHER INFORMATION at: http://www.ametsoc.org/AMS/
----------------------------------------
THE CAMBRIDGE-CONFERENCE NETWORK (CCNet)
----------------------------------------
The CCNet is a scholarly electronic network. To
subscribe/unsubscribe,
please contact the moderator Benny J Peiser <b.j.peiser@livjm.ac.uk>.
Information circulated on this network is for scholarly and
educational use only. The attached information may not be copied
or
reproduced for any other purposes without prior permission of the
copyright holders. The fully indexed archive of the CCNet, from
February 1997 on, can be found at http://abob.libs.uga.edu/bobk/cccmenu.html