Volcanic Dust
 

Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust. Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

mark

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
mark wrote:
Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust. Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

You know that it's excellent fertiliser?


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

wrote in message
...
In article ,
mark wrote:
Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

You know that it's excellent fertiliser?



I didn't. Presumably if it is dark the ground will warm up and be of benefit
to plants.

mark

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
mark wrote:

Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

You know that it's excellent fertiliser?

I didn't. Presumably if it is dark the ground will warm up and be of benefit
to plants.

It won't be that heavy, from the sound of it, except perhaps up
in Shetland.

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

wrote:
In article ,
mark wrote:
Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.
You know that it's excellent fertiliser?
I didn't. Presumably if it is dark the ground will warm up and be of benefit
to plants.

It won't be that heavy, from the sound of it, except perhaps up
in Shetland.

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

Slightly too much of some of them. It is fine as a moderate dusting but
bad in excessively large amounts and at short range.

Most notably sulphur dioxide and soluble fluorides in volcanic ash are a
real problem in Iceland itself and can cause crop failures and devastate
agriculture. As also happened in Europe when Laki went pop.

It could be very nasty if as expected the bigger badder Katla erupts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katla

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7070239.ece

Regards,
Martin Brown

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
You know that it's excellent fertiliser?

It won't be that heavy, from the sound of it, except perhaps up
in Shetland.

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

Slightly too much of some of them. It is fine as a moderate dusting but
bad in excessively large amounts and at short range.

Like most things, even water.

Most notably sulphur dioxide and soluble fluorides in volcanic ash are a
real problem in Iceland itself and can cause crop failures and devastate
agriculture. As also happened in Europe when Laki went pop.

It could be very nasty if as expected the bigger badder Katla erupts.

For a year or so, yes. Iceland isn't a major source of worry on a
global scale, though. Consider what would happen if Yellowstone
went up (it's due, though dormant) or something on that scale.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

"mark" wrote in message
o.uk...
Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright, sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

mark



http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/s...-201004152642/

R.
:-)

Volcanic Dust
 

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:07:55 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:48:26 +0100, "mark"
wrote:

Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust. Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

There's a deathly hush here. Perhaps it has something to do with closed
airports.

Now you mention it, I have not seen or heard any planes for ages. They
usually wake me up every few minutes.

Steve

--
Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. www.justnn.com

Volcanic Dust
 

Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
There's a deathly hush here. Perhaps it has something to do with closed
airports.
Now you mention it, I have not seen or heard any planes for ages. They
usually wake me up every few minutes.

Have you seen the radar website of all the planes? It's really fun to
watch! :-)

http://www.flightradar24.com/

Volcanic Dust
 

"mark" wrote in message
o.uk...
Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright, sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

Cloudy all day here in Leics but only 5C at 11.30 a.m. No sulphur smell but
a dramatic reduction in temperature since yesterday.
Tina



No smell

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Malcolm wrote:

In article ,
writes
In article ,
mark wrote:

Just been and had a sniff.
No smell of sulphur detected here in Norfolk or any volcanic dust.
Bright,
sunny, clouds with about a third blue sky.

You know that it's excellent fertiliser?

I didn't. Presumably if it is dark the ground will warm up and be of benefit
to plants.

It won't be that heavy, from the sound of it, except perhaps up
in Shetland.

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

When Hekla erupted in 1963, it covered an extensive area of Iceland with
ash which was so high in fluorides that it poisoned large numbers of
sheep and cattle :-(

Even fertilisers are toxic in excess. Iron is a classic one for
plants - animals are even more sensitive.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Malcolm wrote:

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

When Hekla erupted in 1963, it covered an extensive area of Iceland with
ash which was so high in fluorides that it poisoned large numbers of
sheep and cattle :-(

Even fertilisers are toxic in excess. Iron is a classic one for
plants - animals are even more sensitive.

Indeed, but in this instance we neither have control over what's in the
dust nor how much lands, just as the Icelanders didn't in 1970 (it was
that year I now recall that the fluoride was expelled not 1963). It
shouldn't necessarily be regarded as "excellent fertiliser".

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message ,
writes
In article ,
Malcolm wrote:

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

When Hekla erupted in 1963, it covered an extensive area of Iceland with
ash which was so high in fluorides that it poisoned large numbers of
sheep and cattle :-(

Even fertilisers are toxic in excess. Iron is a classic one for
plants - animals are even more sensitive.

Indeed, but in this instance we neither have control over what's in the
dust nor how much lands, just as the Icelanders didn't in 1970 (it was
that year I now recall that the fluoride was expelled not 1963). It
shouldn't necessarily be regarded as "excellent fertiliser".

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

There could be matters of greater concern on the horizon (assuming they
are visible!).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7070239.ece



--
Gopher .... I know my place!

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Gopher wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

There could be matters of greater concern on the horizon (assuming they
are visible!).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7070239.ece

Precisely. And, even if the wind is towards us, the ash STILL won't
be dense enough to cause significant (or any?) toxicity. The acid
rain may kill trees, as someone else pointed out, but that will be
a different and shorter-term effect.

Oh, and it's not Yellowstone that I should have mentioned: it's Long
Valley (Mammoth Lakes). Smaller than Yellowstone, but has been
twitching for 30+ years - including a 2' change in the level of the
valley floor! Still, I can view an event that might take out Las
Vegas as having a positive side.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message ,
writes
In article ,
Malcolm wrote:

The reason is that it contains lots of useful trace elements.

When Hekla erupted in 1963, it covered an extensive area of Iceland with
ash which was so high in fluorides that it poisoned large numbers of
sheep and cattle :-(

Even fertilisers are toxic in excess. Iron is a classic one for
plants - animals are even more sensitive.

Indeed, but in this instance we neither have control over what's in the
dust nor how much lands, just as the Icelanders didn't in 1970 (it was
that year I now recall that the fluoride was expelled not 1963). It
shouldn't necessarily be regarded as "excellent fertiliser".

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Have some of our water - lot's in there.
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
hugh wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK? Because we already have enough of it? Try again.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message ,
writes
In article ,
hugh wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK? Because we already have enough of it? Try again.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Another note, 3 weeks old from the revered Daniel Finkelstein in The
Times which put the wind up me "good'n praaper". Gilbert White's
observations are interesting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle7074418.ece
--
Gopher .... I know my place!

In developed economies, the trace elements needed by agriculture can easily and relatively cheaply be provided by man if they are not being sourced from dust blowing from volcanoes and deserts. Usually only tiny amounts are needed. But, as noted in Jared Diamond's book "Collapse", more primitive societies attempting to farm lands not so benefiting suffered from large reductions in soil fertility once they had used up the soil's initial endowments of trace elements. Dust blown off deserts and volcanoes also affects the fertility of oceans, and here man has not so far been as successful in substituting for nature, as exhibited by some recent experiments in deliberate ocean fertilisation.

The effect of volcanoes does seem to depend upon exactly what type they are and at what latitude. Whilst some parts of the world find volcanic soils exceedingly naturally fertile, and are particularly sought after for growing coffee for example, the effect of volcanism in Iceland has been to kill off vegetation and allow soils to be blown away. Iceland's volcanoes are in general not of a common type.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message ,
writes
In article ,
hugh wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK? Because we already have enough of it? Try again.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Sorry does not compute.
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Janet Baraclough wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK?

I don't.

I live and learn. Still, my main point was correct :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message
from contains these words:

In article ,
hugh wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK?

I don't.

Because we already have enough of it? Try again

http://www.dentalhealth.org.uk/faqs/...p?LeafletID=17

"only a few places (Hartlepool in the North East of England , and parts
of Essex) have enough natural fluoride to benefit dental health.
Elsewhere it is added to only around 10% of the UK population's water
supply - mainly in the West Midlands and the North East."

http://www.ciwem.org/policy/policies/fluoridation.asp

"Existing Arrangements (UK)

Since the 1960s, over 5 million people (about 10% of the UK population)
have received artificially fluoridated water, mainly in the Midlands,
north-east and eastern parts of England.
1. About half a million people in the UK receive water which is
naturally fluoridated at, or about, the optimum level of one part per
million. A further one million people receive water which is naturally
fluoridated at a lower level, but which still confers some dental
benefit. These areas are generally found in a band running down the
eastern side of the country, from Hartlepool in the north down to parts
of Essex.
2. About 5 million people receive water where the fluoride content has
been artificially increased to a level of one part per million. Major
schemes are in operation in Birmingham and throughout the West Midlands,
and also in Tyneside."

Janet
And also Cheshire.

It is enforced medication without choice. If people didn't feed their
kids such obnoxious confectionery there would be no need for it.
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
hugh wrote:

It is enforced medication without choice. If people didn't feed their
kids such obnoxious confectionery there would be no need for it.

You're wrong.

Most people of my age have bad teeth, and the lack of fluorides was
one of the main causes. Many of us had virtually no access to
sweets. The introduction to fluorine to toothpaste (yes, I got
that wrong) caused a major improvement.

Volcanic Dust
 

In message ,
writes
In article ,
hugh wrote:

It is enforced medication without choice. If people didn't feed their
kids such obnoxious confectionery there would be no need for it.

You're wrong.

Most people of my age have bad teeth, and the lack of fluorides was
one of the main causes. Many of us had virtually no access to
sweets. The introduction to fluorine to toothpaste (yes, I got
that wrong) caused a major improvement.

Not knowing what age you are I can't really respond. Did you not have
access to anything containing sugar?
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha

Volcanic Dust
 

In message , Martin
writes
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:57:01 +0100, hugh ] wrote:

In message , Janet Baraclough
writes
The message
from contains these words:

In article ,
hugh wrote:

Most of this country (perhaps all) is short of fluorides. If the
ash is dense enough here to cause toxicity, we will have a global
winter on our hands and more serious things to worry about. With
the possible exception of Shetland and the VERY far north.

Have some of our water - lot's in there.

Why do you think that it's deliberately added to most water supplies
in the UK?

I don't.

Because we already have enough of it? Try again

http://www.dentalhealth.org.uk/faqs/...p?LeafletID=17

"only a few places (Hartlepool in the North East of England , and parts
of Essex) have enough natural fluoride to benefit dental health.
Elsewhere it is added to only around 10% of the UK population's water
supply - mainly in the West Midlands and the North East."

http://www.ciwem.org/policy/policies/fluoridation.asp

"Existing Arrangements (UK)

Since the 1960s, over 5 million people (about 10% of the UK population)
have received artificially fluoridated water, mainly in the Midlands,
north-east and eastern parts of England.
1. About half a million people in the UK receive water which is
naturally fluoridated at, or about, the optimum level of one part per
million. A further one million people receive water which is naturally
fluoridated at a lower level, but which still confers some dental
benefit. These areas are generally found in a band running down the
eastern side of the country, from Hartlepool in the north down to parts
of Essex.
2. About 5 million people receive water where the fluoride content has
been artificially increased to a level of one part per million. Major
schemes are in operation in Birmingham and throughout the West Midlands,
and also in Tyneside."

Janet
And also Cheshire.

It is enforced medication without choice. If people didn't feed their
kids such obnoxious confectionery there would be no need for it.

but they do and there is.
But IMO that does not justify inflicting it on the rest of us against
our will.
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
hugh wrote:

It is enforced medication without choice. If people didn't feed their
kids such obnoxious confectionery there would be no need for it.

You're wrong.

Most people of my age have bad teeth, and the lack of fluorides was
one of the main causes. Many of us had virtually no access to
sweets. The introduction to fluorine to toothpaste (yes, I got
that wrong) caused a major improvement.

Not knowing what age you are I can't really respond. Did you not have
access to anything containing sugar?

In my 60s. And effectively not.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

It's reached Cambridge.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 13:05:11 +0100 (BST), wrote:



My wife's car was covered in it this morning.
Nasty greyish-black stuff. Darted straight off to the car-wash, so
she did.
SE Wales

--
(¯`·. ®óñ© © ²°¹° .·´¯)

Volcanic Dust
 

In message , Janet Baraclough
wrote
The message
from hugh ] contains these words:


It is enforced medication without choice.

I agree completely. How pointless, to mass-medicate an unmeasured
dose of something
which can do so much harm in overdose (to teeth, bones and brains).

http://www.voice.buz.org/mailarchive/msg00026.html
http://www.wddty.com/fluoride-lowering-iq-s.html

Until around age 12 when their second teeth came through, our kids had
a daily drop or tiny tablet of paediatric fluoride
dosage, available from baby clinics. They're in their 30's and all have
perfect teeth, no caries or fillings.


Many people of a certain age have a mouth full of fillings because NHS
dentists were paid on the number of fillings they performed. As a
result, on every dentist visit a filling was required irrespective of
any problem with the teeth.

Is the improvement in dental health in more recent years due to
additives in the water or due to the fraudulent activity in the dental
profession being curtailed?

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Volcanic Dust
 

In article ,
Alan wrote:

Many people of a certain age have a mouth full of fillings because NHS
dentists were paid on the number of fillings they performed. As a
result, on every dentist visit a filling was required irrespective of
any problem with the teeth.

That is a commonly repeated statement but, as far as I know, has
no basis in fact. A lot of the time, my friends and relatives
had no more than a checkup - but they had had a less problematic
childhood.

Is the improvement in dental health in more recent years due to
additives in the water or due to the fraudulent activity in the dental
profession being curtailed?

As has been pointed out, it's not the water, but the evidence is
that additional fluoride is a major factor.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Volcanic Dust
 

Alan wrote:
Many people of a certain age have a mouth full of fillings because NHS
dentists were paid on the number of fillings they performed. As a
result, on every dentist visit a filling was required irrespective of
any problem with the teeth.

That may explain why I have all my baby teeth filled, but haven't had a
filling caused by anything other than broken teeth due to weakness caused by
previous fillings since I went to uni.

:-(

Volcanic Dust