Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Thoughts on New Orleans

Expand Messages
  • J.H. Crawford
    Hi All, If the most dire predictions come true, New Orleans may substantially cease to exist as a habitable city today. While the risk has long been known, the
    Message 1 of 13 , Aug 29, 2005
      Hi All,

      If the most dire predictions come true, New Orleans
      may substantially cease to exist as a habitable city
      today. While the risk has long been known, the increasing
      frequency and strength of hurricanes may have made this
      site impossible to protect. When the wind and rain
      subside, the entire city may be under water to the level
      of first floors or even higher and may remain under water
      for weeks or even months. Since most of the city is built
      at one story, this may mean that 60% or more of the city
      may be uninhabitable. As it stands, many residents of the
      city may be left with nothing more than the cars in which
      they fled the storm.

      In addition, hydrocarbons stored above ground in the
      city are likely to be released if flooding is deep,
      as the tanks will break loose and spill their contents.

      Finally, the Mississippi River has long since been due
      to shift course to pass through Morgan City, far to
      the west of New Orleans. This would probably destroy
      New Orleans' long-standing role as a major port. I
      don't think this will occur as a result of the present
      storm (although it might), but the course change has
      long been regarded as inevitable. Only massive
      expenditures on levees, flood control structures,
      and dredging have kept the river flowing through New
      Orleans these last 40-50 years.

      So, the upshot of this is that, even if the death toll
      is not too high, the damage to they city may be so
      great as to make it unreasonable to consider for
      rebuilding. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
      is charged with managing these kinds of disasters and
      already has the statutory authority to relocate cities
      and towns out of the flood plain after catastrophic
      flooding. Whether or not this would even be considered
      in the case of a major city like New Orleans cannot be
      said at this point, but the possibility exists.

      If New Orleans, a city of about 1.3 million people,
      must be relocated to higher ground (quite some distance
      away), we should make the point that a new, carfree
      city to house the refugees would cost less to build
      and emit fewer greenhouse gases than any other
      alternative that might be considered.

      Whatever happens, we should be prepared to address the
      fact that, should New Orleans be destroyed, the event
      is largely the responsibility of the United States for
      releasing staggering quantities of greenhouse gasses
      during the past 150 years and for failing to even
      address the need for reductions. This event could be
      the wake-up call for America. It could turn out to be
      a disaster that far overshadows September 11th in terms
      of both loss of life and property damage. We should
      prepare ourselves to make the case that this event is
      the harbinger of things to come, and that action that
      was needed a long ago has now become urgent.

      For the sake of that lovely city, I hope that New Orleans
      will be spared what appears to be in prospect. But we
      should be prepared to speak up about the implications of
      this looming disaster.

      Regards,



      ------ ### -----
      J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
      mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
    • Simon Baddeley
      AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW ORLEANS LA 0506 AM CDT MON AUG 29 2005 .DISCUSSION... EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CATEGORY FOUR HURRICANE KATRINA
      Message 2 of 13 , Aug 29, 2005
        AREA FORECAST DISCUSSION
        NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE NEW ORLEANS LA
        0506 AM CDT MON AUG 29 2005

        .DISCUSSION...
        EXTREMELY DANGEROUS CATEGORY FOUR HURRICANE KATRINA WILL BE MAKING
        INITIAL LANDFALL OVER LOWER PLAQUEMINES PARISH SHORTLY. THE
        PROJECTED TRACK TAKES KATRINA NORTH TOWARDS THE LOWER PEARL RIVER
        VALLEY NEAR THE LA/MS BORDER LATE THIS MORNING. HURRICANE WINDS
        HAVE BEEN EXPANDING THE LAST COUPLE HOURS. IN ADDITION TO VERY
        STRONG WINDS...A MASSIVE STORM SURGE IS OCCURRING ALONG WITH
        EXTREMEMLY HEAVY RAINFALL AND FLASH FLOODING. WILL HAVE TO CUT THE
        DISCUSSION SHORT TO GET PRODUCTS OUT BEFORE LOSING COMMUNICATIONS.
        REFER TO THE OUR LATEST HURRICANE LOCAL STATEMENT..

        My heart is very full sitting in comfort in England witnessing this with
        technologies only so recently available for an event of this kind.

        S
        .


        > From: "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@...>
        > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
        > Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:19:08 +0000
        > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>, <carfree_network@...>
        > Subject: [carfree_cities] Thoughts on New Orleans
        >
        >
        > Hi All,
        >
        > If the most dire predictions come true, New Orleans
        > may substantially cease to exist as a habitable city
        > today.
      • Mike Neuman
        ... The global warming skeptics, including the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration (answerable to the U.S. Department of Commerce) and the National
        Message 3 of 13 , Aug 29, 2005
          > ... Whatever happens, we should be prepared to address the
          > fact that, should New Orleans be destroyed, the event
          > is largely the responsibility of the United States for
          > releasing staggering quantities of greenhouse gasses
          > during the past 150 years and for failing to even
          > address the need for reductions. ...


          The global warming skeptics, including the National Atmospheric and
          Oceanic Administration (answerable to the U.S. Department of
          Commerce) and the National Weather Service (NWS) will assert there is
          no proven link between the two.

          NOAA's position (the Bush administration position) has always been
          that human-caused global warming, if it exists at all, is not causing
          problems of sufficient threat to require immediate reductions in
          greenhouse gas emissions. Federal agency staff who say otherwise get
          fired.

          I personally know a NWS staffer who got fired last month - for
          arguing that the NWS should consider global warming in its flood
          forecasting predictions. He started making the case that NWS should
          consider the affects of global warming in its predictions back in
          2000. NWS issued him 3 disciplinary suspensions (several weeks of
          leave without pay) for arguing the case over the last few years, and
          finally ordered him to leave his office last month, after 29 years of
          federal service. Prior to 2000, he had no received nothing but
          commendations from the NWS.

          Presumably, the same internal policy that tells NWS staff to ignore
          the affects of global warming in predicting floods applies similarly
          to predicting hurricanes.
        • Jason Meggs
          ... And most ironic that oil is spiking to $70/barrel, with the hurricane blamed! Joel, thanks for this perspective on planning ahead for New Orleans.
          Message 4 of 13 , Aug 29, 2005
            On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, J.H. Crawford wrote:

            > Whatever happens, we should be prepared to address the fact that, should
            > New Orleans be destroyed, the event is largely the responsibility of the
            > United States for releasing staggering quantities of greenhouse gasses
            > during the past 150 years and for failing to even address the need for
            > reductions. This event could be the wake-up call for America. It could
            > turn out to be a disaster that far overshadows September 11th in terms
            > of both loss of life and property damage. We should prepare ourselves to
            > make the case that this event is the harbinger of things to come, and
            > that action that was needed a long ago has now become urgent.

            And most ironic that oil is spiking to $70/barrel, with the hurricane
            blamed!

            Joel, thanks for this perspective on planning ahead for New Orleans.
            Everyone/anyone: how would we construct a campaign for best effect?

            Jason Meggs
            Berkeley, CA
          • Fred M. Cain
            Dear Mr. Crawford, It has been my experience in life that the most dire predictions rarely, if ever come true. But neither do our best hopes. The damage is
            Message 5 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
              Dear Mr. Crawford,

              It has been my experience in life that the most dire predictions
              rarely, if ever come true. But neither do our best hopes. The
              damage is devastating but it can and will be repaired using good ol'
              American know-how.

              I am in favor of reducing our very nearly complete dependancy on the
              automobile. I believe that would be good for people, good for
              neighborhoods, good for our cities and good for our Nation. But I'm
              not sure about the idea of building completely new cities that would
              be 100% car free. Sounds like overkill to me.

              I'm am also very skeptical about the idea of blaming disasters like
              this on global warming. There have always been hurricanes and there
              will continue to be in the future. Some years will be worse than
              others just like they always have been.

              It is theoretically possible that a warmer world could lead to an
              increase in hurricanes. But the problem I have with global warming,
              assuming it's really happening at all, is the complete overlooking
              of the fact that it would benefit some areas even if it were
              deleterious to other areas.

              Crops will be able to be grown in areas that have been too cold in
              the past and the melting of ice in the far north might open a
              northwest passage shipping lane that would benefit the world
              economy. As some areas grow too dry to grow crops any more, other
              areas will grow wetter. The Subsaharan area that has repeatedly
              been plagued by drought and famine would very likely grow wetter as
              the moisture-bearing trade winds shift northward.

              All these rosier scenarios assume, of course, that global warming is
              happening at all.

              Regards,
              Fred M. Cain

              --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford"
              <mailbox@c...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi All,
              >
              > If the most dire predictions come true, New Orleans
              > may substantially cease to exist as a habitable city
              > today. While the risk has long been known, the increasing
              > frequency and strength of hurricanes may have made this
              > site impossible to protect. When the wind and rain
              > subside, the entire city may be under water to the level
              > of first floors or even higher and may remain under water
              > for weeks or even months. Since most of the city is built
              > at one story, this may mean that 60% or more of the city
              > may be uninhabitable. As it stands, many residents of the
              > city may be left with nothing more than the cars in which
              > they fled the storm.
              >
              > In addition, hydrocarbons stored above ground in the
              > city are likely to be released if flooding is deep,
              > as the tanks will break loose and spill their contents.
              >
              > Finally, the Mississippi River has long since been due
              > to shift course to pass through Morgan City, far to
              > the west of New Orleans. This would probably destroy
              > New Orleans' long-standing role as a major port. I
              > don't think this will occur as a result of the present
              > storm (although it might), but the course change has
              > long been regarded as inevitable. Only massive
              > expenditures on levees, flood control structures,
              > and dredging have kept the river flowing through New
              > Orleans these last 40-50 years.
              >
              > So, the upshot of this is that, even if the death toll
              > is not too high, the damage to they city may be so
              > great as to make it unreasonable to consider for
              > rebuilding. The Federal Emergency Management Agency
              > is charged with managing these kinds of disasters and
              > already has the statutory authority to relocate cities
              > and towns out of the flood plain after catastrophic
              > flooding. Whether or not this would even be considered
              > in the case of a major city like New Orleans cannot be
              > said at this point, but the possibility exists.
              >
              > If New Orleans, a city of about 1.3 million people,
              > must be relocated to higher ground (quite some distance
              > away), we should make the point that a new, carfree
              > city to house the refugees would cost less to build
              > and emit fewer greenhouse gases than any other
              > alternative that might be considered.
              >
              > Whatever happens, we should be prepared to address the
              > fact that, should New Orleans be destroyed, the event
              > is largely the responsibility of the United States for
              > releasing staggering quantities of greenhouse gasses
              > during the past 150 years and for failing to even
              > address the need for reductions. This event could be
              > the wake-up call for America. It could turn out to be
              > a disaster that far overshadows September 11th in terms
              > of both loss of life and property damage. We should
              > prepare ourselves to make the case that this event is
              > the harbinger of things to come, and that action that
              > was needed a long ago has now become urgent.
              >
              > For the sake of that lovely city, I hope that New Orleans
              > will be spared what appears to be in prospect. But we
              > should be prepared to speak up about the implications of
              > this looming disaster.
              >
              > Regards,
              >
              >
              >
              > ------ ### ----
              -
              > J.H. Crawford Carfree
              Cities
              > mailbox@c... http://www.carfree.com
            • Doug Salzmann
              ... the ... I m ... would ... Well, OK. However, please be reminded that the design and development of carfree cities (new and otherwise) is the purpose of
              Message 6 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@b...>
                wrote:

                > I am in favor of reducing our very nearly complete dependancy on
                the
                > automobile. I believe that would be good for people, good for
                > neighborhoods, good for our cities and good for our Nation. But
                I'm
                > not sure about the idea of building completely new cities that
                would
                > be 100% car free. Sounds like overkill to me.

                Well, OK. However, please be reminded that the design and development
                of carfree cities (new and otherwise) is the purpose of this group.
                It's what we talk about here.

                > I'm am also very skeptical about the idea of blaming disasters like
                > this on global warming. There have always been hurricanes and
                there
                > will continue to be in the future. Some years will be worse than
                > others just like they always have been.

                That's certainly true. On the other hand, the evidence is
                overwhelming that increasing ocean water temperatures in particular
                regions (e.g. areas of the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico) will indeed
                increase both the incidence and intensity of hurricanes. Warm water,
                after all, is the very fuel that feeds those systems.

                > All these rosier scenarios assume, of course, that global warming
                is
                > happening at all.

                The vast majority of reputable researchers who have studied the issue
                are quite convinced that it is, indeed, happening. The weight of the
                evidence and prevailing opinion is such that the burden must be on
                those few who challenge the proposition to explain and justify their
                skepticism.

                For a good introduction to the evidence and arguments supporting
                global warming, please visit the Union of Concerned Scientists:

                http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/global_warming/index.cfm

                -Doug
              • Richard Risemberg
                I saw a note in a deeply buried paragraph on the storm in the NYT a few days ago, to the effect that Katrina was teh 11th named storm of the hurricane season.
                Message 7 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                  I saw a note in a deeply buried paragraph on the storm in the NYT a few days ago, to the effect that Katrina was teh 11th named storm of the hurricane season. Typical for recent years is 3 by this time.

                  Quite a change. And heat waves killing tens of thousands in France and Germany, flip-flopping drought/flood cycles playing hell with Midwestern agriculture, frigid summer days in Southern California, and more and more...and every bit of it in line with computer simulations of global warming effects.

                  After a while you just gotta see that it's here, it's real, and it's now...and we did it.

                  Richard

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Doug Salzmann <doug@...>
                  Sent: Aug 30, 2005 10:55 AM
                  To: carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Thoughts on New Orleans

                  --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@b...>
                  wrote:

                  > I am in favor of reducing our very nearly complete dependancy on
                  the
                  > automobile. I believe that would be good for people, good for
                  > neighborhoods, good for our cities and good for our Nation. But
                  I'm
                  > not sure about the idea of building completely new cities that
                  would
                  > be 100% car free. Sounds like overkill to me.

                  Well, OK. However, please be reminded that the design and development
                  of carfree cities (new and otherwise) is the purpose of this group.
                  It's what we talk about here.

                  > I'm am also very skeptical about the idea of blaming disasters like
                  > this on global warming. There have always been hurricanes and
                  there
                  > will continue to be in the future. Some years will be worse than
                  > others just like they always have been.

                  That's certainly true. On the other hand, the evidence is
                  overwhelming that increasing ocean water temperatures in particular
                  regions (e.g. areas of the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico) will indeed
                  increase both the incidence and intensity of hurricanes. Warm water,
                  after all, is the very fuel that feeds those systems.

                  > All these rosier scenarios assume, of course, that global warming
                  is
                  > happening at all.

                  The vast majority of reputable researchers who have studied the issue
                  are quite convinced that it is, indeed, happening. The weight of the
                  evidence and prevailing opinion is such that the burden must be on
                  those few who challenge the proposition to explain and justify their
                  skepticism.

                  For a good introduction to the evidence and arguments supporting
                  global warming, please visit the Union of Concerned Scientists:

                  http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/global_warming/index.cfm

                  -Doug





                  Post messages to: carfree_cities@...
                  Unsubscribe (blank message): carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
                  Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                • Simon Baddeley
                  How far does the Arc have to rise above the ground, or indeed how far must it float before we agree there s a Flood? S
                  Message 8 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                    How far does the Arc have to rise above the ground, or indeed how far must
                    it float before we agree there's a Flood?
                    S


                    > From: Richard Risemberg <rickrise@...>
                    > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:03:46 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
                    > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Thoughts on New Orleans
                    >

                    >> All these rosier scenarios assume, of course, that global warming
                    > is
                    >> happening at all.
                  • Doug Salzmann
                    ... I desperately wish we could answer that question, Simon. Certainly, the preservation of civilization depends upon finding that agreement very soon, if it
                    Message 9 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                      On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Simon Baddeley wrote:

                      > How far does the Arc have to rise above the ground, or indeed how far must
                      > it float before we agree there's a Flood?
                      > S

                      I desperately wish we could answer that question, Simon. Certainly, the
                      preservation of civilization depends upon finding that agreement very
                      soon, if it isn't already too late.

                      Joel's initial message on this subject sets, I think, the correct tone.
                      Hopefully, we can use intrusions into public awareness like the one now
                      arising from the disaster along the Gulf (as more reports keep coming in,
                      it's becoming clear that this is a *very* big disaster) to create
                      "teachable moments" -- at least for those we can reach who may be
                      teachable.

                      I imagine that there will be at least a handful -- in New Orleans and
                      Gulfport, Biloxi, etc. -- who will be willing to consider new
                      possibilities.



                      -Doug







                      >
                      >
                      > > From: Richard Risemberg <rickrise@...>
                      > > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                      > > Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:03:46 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
                      > > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                      > > Subject: Re: [carfree_cities] Re: Thoughts on New Orleans
                      > >
                      >
                      > >> All these rosier scenarios assume, of course, that global warming
                      > > is
                      > >> happening at all.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > Post messages to: carfree_cities@...
                      > Unsubscribe (blank message): carfree_cities-unsubscribe@...
                      > Group address: http://www.egroups.com/group/carfree_cities/
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >

                      "Force always attracts men of low morality."

                      -Albert Einstein


                      ==================
                      Doug Salzmann
                      P.O. Box 1007
                      Larkspur, CA 94977
                    • chbuckeye
                      ... there ... As previously noted, the scientific community is overwhelmingly convinced that the evidence shows that global warming is a reality. I will grant
                      Message 10 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                        --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@b...>
                        wrote:

                        > I'm am also very skeptical about the idea of blaming disasters like
                        > this on global warming. There have always been hurricanes and
                        there
                        > will continue to be in the future. Some years will be worse than
                        > others just like they always have been.

                        As previously noted, the scientific community is overwhelmingly
                        convinced that the evidence shows that global warming is a reality.

                        I will grant you, however, that this should not be confused with the
                        question of how much of global warming is attributable to human
                        activity. For the moment, there is still some debate on this
                        question.



                        > It is theoretically possible that a warmer world could lead to an
                        > increase in hurricanes. But the problem I have with global
                        warming,
                        > assuming it's really happening at all, is the complete overlooking
                        > of the fact that it would benefit some areas even if it were
                        > deleterious to other areas.

                        But overall the world will be warmer.

                        Even if the Sahara becomes wetter as you suggest, the economic and
                        personal cost to change the world could still be catastrophic. If the
                        Great Plains becomes too hot and dry for farming, but the Sahara
                        becomes an ideal growing climate, what do you tell the farmers in
                        Nebraska? Who moves to the Sahara and who trains the new residents
                        how to farm? How long between the time the Great Plains loses
                        productivity and the Sahara becomes productive farmland and what do we
                        eat in the meantime? who is going to pay to build the infrastructure
                        to grow the crops in the Sahara and transport them back to the US?

                        Saying that some areas become wetter and others drier so what's the
                        big deal ignores some pretty big problems.
                      • Simon Baddeley
                        A paper published last month in Nature by Dr. Kerry Emanuel, a meteorologist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is part of an emerging body of
                        Message 11 of 13 , Aug 30, 2005
                          A paper published last month in Nature by Dr. Kerry Emanuel, a meteorologist
                          at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is part of an emerging body of
                          research challenging the prevailing view that it is unwise to correlate
                          hurricane trends and global warming.

                          http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nature03906.html

                          The evidential criteria for anything to be regarded as "true" in science are
                          very strict and subject to rigorous peer review.

                          Emanual concluded that the destructive power of hurricanes had increased 50%
                          over the last half a century, and that a rise in surface temperatures linked
                          to global warming was at least partly responsible. Emanuel said after his
                          paper was published "I was one of those sceptics myself - a year ago." See:

                          http://wind.mit.edu/~emanuel/home.html

                          Simon


                          > From: chbuckeye <coleridge3150@...>
                          > Reply-To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 21:29:44 -0000
                          > To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>
                          > Subject: [carfree_cities] Re: Thoughts on New Orleans
                          >
                          > --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@b...>
                          > wrote:
                          >
                          >> I'm am also very skeptical about the idea of blaming disasters like
                          >> this on global warming. There have always been hurricanes and
                          > there
                          >> will continue to be in the future. Some years will be worse than
                          >> others just like they always have been.
                          >
                          > As previously noted, the scientific community is overwhelmingly
                          > convinced that the evidence shows that global warming is a reality.
                          >
                          > I will grant you, however, that this should not be confused with the
                          > question of how much of global warming is attributable to human
                          > activity. For the moment, there is still some debate on this
                          > question.
                        • Debra Efroymson
                          Oh well! The Maldives, part of Bangladesh, and other coastal countries go underwater...too bad for them...as long as Siberians get a warmer winter! Increase
                          Message 12 of 13 , Sep 1, 2005
                            Oh well! The Maldives, part of Bangladesh, and other
                            coastal countries go underwater...too bad for
                            them...as long as Siberians get a warmer winter!
                            Increase in forest fires, floods, hurricanes,
                            droughts, and extinction of various species don't
                            sound too pleasant for anyone. But hey, if avoiding
                            it means giving up our cars, I guess we'd better just
                            accept global destruction, eh?
                            Debra Efroymson
                            Dhaka, Bangladesh

                            --- "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@...>
                            wrote:

                            the
                            > complete overlooking
                            > of the fact that it would benefit some areas even if
                            > it were
                            > deleterious to other areas.
                            >




                            ____________________________________________________
                            Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
                            http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                          • J.H. Crawford
                            Hi All, ... Look, folks, Fred M. Cain is trolling. Like his pal Tom Frost, who s been banned from this list (and who, for all I know, may BE Tom Frost, if
                            Message 13 of 13 , Sep 1, 2005
                              Hi All,

                              Debra responded to Fred M. Cain as follows:

                              >Oh well! The Maldives, part of Bangladesh, and other
                              >coastal countries go underwater...too bad for
                              >them...as long as Siberians get a warmer winter!
                              >Increase in forest fires, floods, hurricanes,
                              >droughts, and extinction of various species don't
                              >sound too pleasant for anyone. But hey, if avoiding
                              >it means giving up our cars, I guess we'd better just
                              >accept global destruction, eh?

                              >--- "Fred M. Cain" <fredmcain@...>
                              >wrote:
                              >
                              >> the
                              >> complete overlooking
                              >> of the fact that it would benefit some areas even if
                              >> it were
                              >> deleterious to other areas.

                              Look, folks, Fred M. Cain is "trolling." Like his pal
                              Tom Frost, who's been banned from this list (and who,
                              for all I know, may BE Tom Frost, if that's HIS real name),
                              he tries to get us to waste time arguing with him.

                              Just forget about this stuff. If I see another post
                              from Fred M. Cain in the same vein as his recent "work,"
                              I'll just ban him, too. But there will be more like him.

                              These people have nothing better to do with their time.
                              Learn to recognize them and ignore them. (There's
                              nothing they hate worse than simply being ignored.)

                              Regards,



                              ------ ### -----
                              J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
                              mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.