Now somebody here - it wasn't you, was it, js207? - said that the cost of building massive defences would be exorbitant and possibly counter-productive. Something about an inch or two more on sea walls over the next hundred years would be unmanageable. Ah! Yes it was.

Maybe in America, but the Dutch, you allow, might want to build an extra foot or two on their existing defences rather than surrrender 12.5% of their country back to the sea. That's one eighth of their land, for those who like fractions. I agree, they very well might want to do that.

I acknowledge, and as it has been asserted so many times already on this thread, global warming is probably a natural phenomenon, and I agree that about 125,000 years ago the planet underwent a similar warming process to the present warm period (which started about 10,000 years ago). That period was warmer than this one has reached by a degree or so.

These warm/cold cycles are surprisingly regular and it's obvious that there's nothing we can do to stop it happening again if it's going to - and, with the greatest possible respect to young Ms Kristen Barynes, it is. But we should use our intelligence rather than our stubborness to deal with the situation. Last time, sea levels are supposed to have risen by between 4 and 6 metres and, according to the American University, Washington DC, "global warming has the potential to increase sea levels by as much as 20 feet (6.1 metres)." Bearing in mind that Holland's lowest city lies at 7 metres below sea level (that's 23 feet - much lower than New Orleans) and the sea defences would have to be at least 43 feet higher than that. Holland would be in the shadow of the sea wall until after midday! Obviously, not even the plucky Dutch could not possibly maintain sea defences on that scale. So they would have to move inland. Holland is, by the way, one of the world's most densely populated countries, with a propulation of 16 million or so. Where would they go? Germany? Denmark? Belgium? Britain? Well, if Holland is losing land to the sea, so too will those other countries be. They'll have less room to receive them and accomodate their own displaced population too. And something makes me suspect they'll be less than welcome if they try to settle in USA.

OK 43 feet is extreme. And it would probably take a very long time for sea levels to rise that far. But, according to the American University's figures, an 8 or 9 foot rise by 2100 is the best we can hope for. Even that will cause the Dutch (and the rest of the world) significant problems which must be planned for. The alternative is international conflict, and everyone will lose if that happens.

So, I've thought about the impliactions, js207, and I'm more convinced than before that political agreement at an international level, where global interests are put ahead of national ones - especially by those who can most easily afford to make sacrifices, is already overdue and is becoming more urgent by the hour.

... unless we're hit by an asteroid first.

TYWD