"Never anonymous Bud" <newskat@katxyzkave.net> skrev i meddelandet
news:n5jn209akuo8un7opf1v1ka90nhogec6as@4ax.com...
While still snuggled in a 'spider hole', icycalmca@yahoo.com (Daryl
Krupa)
scribbled:

Sea level 3500 years ago was about 5 metres (16 feet)
lower than at present, not 300 feet (90 metres) lower.
This is true for the south coast of North America and for
the east coast of North America, too.

Kennewick Man didn't arrive 3500 years ago.

Nor was the waterlevel 5 meters lower 3500 years ago!
Correct figure for the last 8-900 years observe for the last eight- to
ninehundred years is 8 meters - 12,5 meters waterlevel rise!!! Then we
haven't taken into consideration the different figures for landrise which
can vary more than 1 meter/100 years between two areas less then 10 miles
from each other.

I wonder where Daryl has got the figures for 3500 years ago from, such
assumptions aren't correct at all.

Philip,
if you knew anything at all about what I do and have done for the last 34
years

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 06:53:34 GMT, "Inger E Johansson"
inger_e.johansson@notelia.com> did some sarious thank'n and
scribbled:

Philip,
if you knew anything at all about what I do and have done for the last 34
years

That is stand around and talk about the great things you
have done, but when questioned all you do is flubber around
trying to divert attention away from the fact you have not a
clue about the science and what you do know is mostly myth.

Yeah, I know what you have been doing, there is google.

"Inger E Johansson" wrote...
"Never anonymous Bud" ...
Daryl Krupa scribbled:

Sea level 3500 years ago was about 5 metres (16 feet)
lower than at present, not 300 feet (90 metres) lower.
This is true for the south coast of North America and for
the east coast of North America, too.

Kennewick Man didn't arrive 3500 years ago.

Nor was the waterlevel 5 meters lower 3500 years ago!
Correct figure for the last 8-900 years observe for the last eight- to
ninehundred years is 8 meters - 12,5 meters waterlevel rise!!! Then we
haven't taken into consideration the different figures for landrise which
can vary more than 1 meter/100 years between two areas less then 10 miles
from each other.

I wonder where Daryl has got the figures for 3500 years ago from, such
assumptions aren't correct at all.

I already told you:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/of01-076/HTMLDOCS/FIGURE3.HTM

Could someone else please reply and quote this, so she can see it?
(She's "PLONK!"'d me.)

"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:de5o20dabujsp4t8bevrtnj2q2cm5rplgi@4ax.com...

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)

I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(



Eric S don't bother speaking with Erik H,
I suggest he speaks to someone of those who is working close to him, then he
will realise that he doesn't know half of what he thinks he knows re.
waterlevels and ice-free corridors in the past. But if he asks right person
he will be told that I contrary to him knows exactly what I am talking
about. A bit cryptic for most of the other readers of the line so I guess I
have to repeat what I have told some of you long ago. I have in my own
family a specialist in questions re. Environmental changes in water and air.
I grow up with those discussions and studies all around me.

Not only have such a specialist in my family, I too have participated in
that sphere. Not to mention that I during my study in Geography above basic
course did a special study of the waters north of NA and the environmental
changes.

So if anyone is interested present your case - your arguments with full data
of hydrologic situation, grounds on land and islands, landrise over the last
3500 years, angle for sun-influent at it's yearly peak, waterlevels in the
Oceans for same period etc. etc What ever you think you have to present your
case. I am up to take that discussion - but I am not accepting to discuss
what a person has had from a book or two leaning to specialist scholars
without having done a valuation of their own.

Inger E

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)


I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(

Eric Stevens wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)


I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(


Having written a number of manual drafts myself I know how
difficult it is to make them good. If the Simrad systems you own
are produced in Norway, send me a comment and I'll pass it on to
our document department. But I suspect they are from the Denmark
factory which adresses the leisure boat market in which case I
have no influence, sorry.

Erik Hammerstad wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote:
Erik Hammerstad wrote:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)


I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(


Having written a number of manual drafts myself I know how
difficult it is to make them good. If the Simrad systems you own
are produced in Norway, send me a comment and I'll pass it on to
our document department. But I suspect they are from the Denmark
factory which adresses the leisure boat market in which case I
have no influence, sorry.

AP22 Autopilot. CA40 sounder, GPs, plotter, radar are the most recent
aquisitions. The problem is that while all the information is in the
manual, you have to look all over the manual to find it. This is a PIA
when trying to set it up. The sounder/fish finder is the worst from
this point of view. The older Dataline gear was no problem.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 16:17:37 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:


Eric Stevens wrote:


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:



And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)


I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(


Having written a number of manual drafts myself I know how
difficult it is to make them good. If the Simrad systems you own
are produced in Norway, send me a comment and I'll pass it on to
our document department. But I suspect they are from the Denmark
factory which adresses the leisure boat market in which case I
have no influence, sorry.


AP22 Autopilot. CA40 sounder, GPs, plotter, radar are the most recent
aquisitions. The problem is that while all the information is in the
manual, you have to look all over the manual to find it. This is a PIA
when trying to set it up. The sounder/fish finder is the worst from
this point of view. The older Dataline gear was no problem.



Eric Stevens

Philip Deitiker <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message news:<sh2o2057rone4ng02jsvjohgn66gccsp7q@4ax.com>...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> did some sarious thank'n
and scribbled:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)

Oh, have you discovered yet another species in the Ingress
genus. We already have Ingress misrepresenticus.
Ingress contrivacus, Ingress diverticulus computerus.
What shall we call this Ingress neptunemixupicus.

The Ingress neptunemixupicus name was invoked when she entered the
forum declaring whales were shot by cannon........

or maybe when she asserted that a Bronze Age ship (with cargo in situ)
was found in the English Channel...

or any one of the many other nautical sekrits buried beneath the
ancient 386 5 1/2 disks buried beneath the swidish arkhives achtung !

Inger E Johansson wrote:

"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> skrev i meddelandet
news:de5o20dabujsp4t8bevrtnj2q2cm5rplgi@4ax.com...

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> wrote:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)

I've got three of your company's systems on my boat. Maybe more than
three, depending on how you count them. I can testify as to their
efficacy. But the manuals are something else again .... :-(



Eric S don't bother speaking with Erik H,
I suggest he speaks to someone of those who is working close to him, then he
will realise that he doesn't know half of what he thinks he knows re.
waterlevels and ice-free corridors in the past. But if he asks right person
he will be told that I contrary to him knows exactly what I am talking
about. A bit cryptic for most of the other readers of the line so I guess I
have to repeat what I have told some of you long ago. I have in my own
family a specialist in questions re. Environmental changes in water and air.
I grow up with those discussions and studies all around me.

Not only have such a specialist in my family, I too have participated in
that sphere. Not to mention that I during my study in Geography above basic
course did a special study of the waters north of NA and the environmental
changes.

So if anyone is interested present your case - your arguments with full data
of hydrologic situation, grounds on land and islands, landrise over the last
3500 years, angle for sun-influent at it's yearly peak, waterlevels in the
Oceans for same period etc. etc What ever you think you have to present your
case. I am up to take that discussion - but I am not accepting to discuss
what a person has had from a book or two leaning to specialist scholars
without having done a valuation of their own.

Inger E

No point in discussing water level issues with Inger since
geoscience has progressed far beyond what she learned decades ago.
For example consider Inger's often repeated claim that the
general sea level at LGM was 150+ m, against this recent abstract.

"Estimating past continental ice volume from sea-level data",
Glenn A. Milne, Jerry X. Mitrovicab and Daniel P. Schragc;
Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 21, Issues 1-3 , January 2002:

[blah... blah... blah... blah... ] Barbados data [blah... blah... blah... blah... blah...] sea-level rise
of 115–135 m. [blah... blah... blah... blah...]

Erik Hammerstad wrote:

[blah... blah... blah... blah... ] Barbados data [blah... blah... blah... blah... blah...] sea-level rise
of 115–135 m. [blah... blah... blah... blah...]

Philip Deitiker <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message news:<sh2o2057rone4ng02jsvjohgn66gccsp7q@4ax.com>...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> did some sarious thank'n
and scribbled:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)

Oh, have you discovered yet another species in the Ingress
genus. We already have Ingress misrepresenticus.
Ingress contrivacus, Ingress diverticulus computerus.
What shall we call this Ingress neptunemixupicus.

The Ingress neptunemixupicus name was invoked when she entered the
forum declaring whales were shot by cannon........

or maybe when she asserted that a Bronze Age ship (with cargo in situ)
was found in the English Channel...

or any one of the many other nautical sekrits buried beneath the
ancient 386 5 1/2 disks buried beneath the swidish arkhives achtung !

On 13 Feb 2004 00:02:06 -0800, gblack@hnpl.net (George) wrote:

Philip Deitiker <Nopdeitik@att.net.spam > wrote in message
news:<sh2o2057rone4ng02jsvjohgn66gccsp7q@4ax.com>...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 23:45:53 +0100, Erik Hammerstad
egeha.is.all.you.need@start.no> did some sarious thank'n
and scribbled:


And on a personal note, I am quite sure and pleased that the
multibeam echo sounder used for the seabed mapping was made by me
and my engineers - see, Inger, I know what I'm talking about ;-)

Oh, have you discovered yet another species in the Ingress
genus. We already have Ingress misrepresenticus.
Ingress contrivacus, Ingress diverticulus computerus.
What shall we call this Ingress neptunemixupicus.

The Ingress neptunemixupicus name was invoked when she entered the
forum declaring whales were shot by cannon........


But whales were shot by cannon and you were told this over and over
again. See my Message-ID: <r3lg9u43qgtotk4p4dm5omj1dfq30s9djp@4ax.com
dated 20 Mar 2002 in which I wrote:

"Will somebody **please** tell Geotge Black that harpoons were first
fired from cannon on whalers under sail in 1731.

I post (yet) again
http://www.whalecraft.net/Swivel%20Guns.html and
http://www.whalecraft.net/Shoulder_Guns.html describe the first use
of swivel guns in 1731. The exploding harpoon came much later."

Subsequently, Mike Cleven (several times?) repeated this to you.

or maybe when she asserted that a Bronze Age ship (with cargo in situ)
was found in the English Channel...

There was some discussion of this but I can't identify the article.
Perhaps she was thinking of something along the lines of:

http://www.calmoreshow.org.uk/bitspic.htm

"1300 BC A large Bronze Age boat was discovered in Dover in
1992, dated to around 1300BC in the Middle Bronze Age made
of four oak planks: two flat bottom planks and two curved side
planks and additional side planks. The bottom planks were fixed
together without nails or carpentry joints, but by ramming wedges
and cross-timbers through a pair of upstanding ridges on either
side of the main joint and through a series of cleats (or
semi-circular wooden hoops). The Tools of the Time Wedges,
axes, adzes, chisels and gouges would have been more than
capable of producing good work.We know from other Bronze Age
boats that carpentry jointing was known at the time.The side
planks were stitched to the base by yew withies, and the seams
made watertight by compressed moss. It seems, also, that the
boat, some 15m long, was made out of single lengths of oak
timber, requiring the use of massive trees with long, straight
sections of trunk uninterrupted by branches. Boats did cross the
channel in this period, part of the cargo of a Bronze Age boat -
mainly broken metalwork - was found on the seabed off Dover in
1974. A scrap of unworked shale found in the boat has been
proved to come from Kimmeridge Bay in Dorset, which may
suggest the boat was plying along the south coast 3,000 years
ago. "

or any one of the many other nautical sekrits buried beneath the
ancient 386 5 1/2 disks buried beneath the swidish arkhives achtung !




Eric Stevens

No point in discussing water level issues with Inger since
geoscience has progressed far beyond what she learned decades ago.
For example consider Inger's often repeated claim that the
general sea level at LGM was 150+ m, against this recent abstract.

"Estimating past continental ice volume from sea-level data",
Glenn A. Milne, Jerry X. Mitrovica and Daniel P. Schrag;
Quaternary Science Reviews, Volume 21, Issues 1-3 , January 2002:
snip
"These LGM ice volume estimates map into a eustatic (or meltwater)
sea-level rise of 115–135 m."
snip