Discussion:
Do you think what 'Club Manager' is doing is wrong? (Was: Prested Hall Sunday 8th)
(too old to reply)
Dario Western
2010-09-06 21:26:37 UTC
Permalink
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.

I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.

Let's spice this topic up and hopefully he will give some answers to this
thread question if we pressurize him long enough.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Best wishes,

Dario Western

"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield

Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com

Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Best wishes,

Dario Western

"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield

Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com

Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
next swim Sunday 8th 6-9pm near Colchester.
20m pool, steam, sauna, bar, food, massage (needs booking).
Free admisison for Under 35s.
see www.prested.com/natswim.htm
(yes it's a bit out of date.. apologies!)
Jenny6833A
2010-09-07 08:15:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.

In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.

Dario, I can only conclude that you're having a bad day.

:-)

Jenny
Danee
2010-09-07 13:25:29 UTC
Permalink
Dario, you know how much I respect you but I have to say that I too,
was wondering what kind of day you were having downunder. Jenny and
others say it all. Its about continuity. Its about someone, anyone,
finally realizing that hey, we have to attract younger people and the
first way is financially, then, we rebuild our programs.

Major props to this guy over there.

-Danee
www.internationalyn.org
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.
Dario, I can only conclude that you're having a bad day.
:-)
Jenny
Anna
2010-09-07 20:41:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Danee
Dario, you know how much I respect you but I have to say that I too,
was wondering what kind of day you were having downunder.  Jenny and
others say it all. Its about continuity. Its about someone, anyone,
finally realizing that hey, we have to attract younger people and the
first way is financially, then, we rebuild our programs.
Major props to this guy over there.
-Daneewww.internationalyn.org
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.
Dario, I can only conclude that you're having a bad day.
:-)
Jenny
Nudists don't have to attract younger people. Well I take the back. Of
course the people they need to attract is younger, but they can still
be considered more in an elder generation. While certainly welcoming
people from any generation nudists need to understand that most people
will get involved later in life when they feel they have the time and
when they get to a point they feel they don't have to care what others
think anymore.
Dario Western
2010-09-08 00:36:19 UTC
Permalink
Hi Danee,

The thing is if you are going to let u-35s in for free, then why not do the
same for the older people?

It's not fair to the o-35s that they have to shell out money for the event
when others get breaks.

We had a similar thread happening on here late last year in which we
discussed about concessions for the women such as free drinks to get them to
attend nudist venues.

Peter Riden from The Grand Barn who is a well known philogynist objected to
it saying that if you have already got the facilities that appeal to the
women then they will attend regardless - you don't need economic gimmicks.

The same thing goes for the under 35s. If you don't provide products,
amenities, and activities that are attractive to them then they won't come
to the venue. No amount of gimmickry will sell a shoddy product or venue -
the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

If it tastes good then people will buy it, if it tastes like shit then
nobody will buy it no matter how much you might want to dress it up.

Nudist venues are not charities - they are out there to make money. When
you become too altruistic or show favouritism towards a certain demographic
then that will give others a cause to complain and cause the older peeps to
take their custom somewhere else.

Oh, and to blondie64: I have not lived in the UK since I emigrated to Oz in
1982, but the problem I perceive with nudism in the Anglicised world - not
just in the UK - is the fact that too many of the venues are run by stuffy
retirees who have not got much of a grasp or liking for pop culture since
the 1980s.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Best wishes,

Dario Western

"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield

Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com

Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists

"Danee" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:a600b847-7fa5-4bb4-9ac0-***@m15g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...

Dario, you know how much I respect you but I have to say that I too,
was wondering what kind of day you were having downunder. Jenny and
others say it all. Its about continuity. Its about someone, anyone,
finally realizing that hey, we have to attract younger people and the
first way is financially, then, we rebuild our programs.

Major props to this guy over there.

-Danee
www.internationalyn.org
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the
uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that
nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.
Dario, I can only conclude that you're having a bad day.
:-)
Jenny
Peter Riden
2010-09-08 15:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
Hi Danee,
The thing is if you are going to let u-35s in for free, then why not do the
same for the older people?
It's not fair to the o-35s that they have to shell out money for the event
when others get breaks.
We had a similar thread happening on here late last year in which we
discussed about concessions for the women such as free drinks to get them to
attend nudist venues.
Peter Riden from The Grand Barn who is a well known philogynist objected to
it saying that if you have already got the facilities that appeal to the
women then they will attend regardless - you don't need economic gimmicks.
Here was my answer then, Dario, and it still applies for the topic at
hands.
Just transpose the "women" equation to your current subject, Dario...
******************************
A desperate move that I would never go for.
I don't know what the poster initially presented in that forum but
going out of
our way to attempt to get more women for the sake of number has no
validity for
me.
Dave has rightly expressed the main way to get women our way and he
has also
done so in actions... not only in words. Women not coming at THE GRAND
BARN are
missing out, period. Their punishment if I may say. The smart and
friendly ones
have come and keep coming our way.
A woman should feel insulted that she be demanded less than a male
when coming
at a function as here at TGB we believe that when a woman is coming
she's asked
to pay at par with her male counterpart.
The message sent from TGB's current administration is that a woman is
worth as
much as a man when it comes to financial participation.
Not like so many clubs who cater to the near free-loaders type of
women who
quest bargains rather than equal treatment with their male
counterpart. So when
Dario mentions "In order to attract women to nude recreation and
commercial nude
venues you need to be providing incentives for them that the textile
places do,
such as free or discounted drinks or maybe discounted entry fees if
they are
single, as well as facilities and services that they personally like."
you can
be sure that I fully disagree with that if a cater to the kind of
women I
cater... not the nearly free-loaders. And not only it's an insult to
some
respectable women but also to the whole male gender.
Why not have the same courtesy for both genders when it comes to
discounts.
You want discounts at TGB.. you join our choices of membership. Both
males and
females can have discounts.
I certainly will not try to duplicate the nauseating approach of some
venues for
the sole attempt of getting any kind of women at TGB. Only the best
nothing
less. Same for the men.
And those friendly women who feel they belong to that category will
come our way
with great enthusiasm..;-)
In Friendship& Universality
Peter Riden {T.W.A.N. Founder}
http://www.the-worldwide-affiliate-network.com
http://www.myspace.com/peter_riden
http://www.myspace.com/conceptpeterriden
http://ca.youtube.com/user/PeterRiden
http://twitter.com/PeterRiden
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=512421792&ref=profile
{TGB Conceptor}:http://www.the-grand-barn.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/The-Grand-Barn
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheGrandBarn
************************************************
I don't want to extend for those who think that going "their route"
would cure the current demographic.
I've said it all above...
Post by Dario Western
The same thing goes for the under 35s.  If you don't provide products,
amenities, and activities that are attractive to them then they won't come
to the venue.  No amount of gimmickry will sell a shoddy product or venue -
the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
If it tastes good then people will buy it, if it tastes like shit then
nobody will buy it no matter how much you might want to dress it up.
Nudist venues are not charities - they are out there to make money.  When
you become too altruistic or show favouritism towards a certain demographic
then that will give others a cause to complain and cause the older peeps to
take their custom somewhere else.
Oh, and to blondie64: I have not lived in the UK since I emigrated to Oz in
1982, but the problem I perceive with nudism in the Anglicised world - not
just in the UK - is the fact that too many of the venues are run by stuffy
retirees who have not got much of a grasp or liking for pop culture since
the 1980s.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
Dario Western
"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield
Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website:http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
               http://buzz.google.com
Groups:http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
             http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
             http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
             http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
Dario, you know how much I respect you but I have to say that I too,
was wondering what kind of day you were having downunder.  Jenny and
others say it all. Its about continuity. Its about someone, anyone,
finally realizing that hey, we have to attract younger people and the
first way is financially, then, we rebuild our programs.
Major props to this guy over there.
-Daneewww.internationalyn.org
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the
uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.
Dario, I can only conclude that you're having a bad day.
:-)
Jenny
Anna
2010-09-09 18:31:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
Nudist venues are not charities - they are out there to make money.  When
you become too altruistic or show favouritism towards a certain demographic
then that will give others a cause to complain and cause the older peeps to
take their custom somewhere else.
I don't know how it is in Australia, Dario, but in the United States
most nudist venues ARE non-profits such as co-ops.

While of course they need money to continue to exist, they do not
continue to exist to make money.

Perhaps it is different in your part of the world.
Anna
2010-09-09 18:38:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
Peter Riden from The Grand Barn who is a well known philogynist objected to
it saying that if you have already got the facilities that appeal to the
women then they will attend regardless - you don't need economic gimmicks.
The Grand Barn ISN'T a nudist venue.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4732625826

http://www.the-grand-barn.com/

http://www.the-grand-barn.com/bra/about_tgb.html

https://thegrandbarn.com/echo/reservations.php
Anna
2010-09-09 18:47:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Post by Dario Western
Peter Riden from The Grand Barn who is a well known philogynist objected to
it saying that if you have already got the facilities that appeal to the
women then they will attend regardless - you don't need economic gimmicks.
The Grand Barn ISN'T a nudist venue.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4732625826
http://www.the-grand-barn.com/
http://www.the-grand-barn.com/bra/about_tgb.html
https://thegrandbarn.com/echo/reservations.php
http://the-worldwide-affiliate-network.com/closer/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12

http://tinyurl.com/28cuw5l

An afternoon at TGB

nathsteeve » Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:11 pm

It was hot and sunny. Just relaxing by the pool when this couple came
by. They went and got themselves naked - on the other side. I decided
to go and get some sun on a lounge chair, and started getting half
hard. He was putting some tan oil on her, and was rubbing her niples.
That was really hot. Then, I started jacking off like hell. We went
altogether in the hot tub and she took my cock in her hands and was
jaking me off while her boyfriend was looking. A good time at TGB!

-----

Like I have said in the past - basically a FUCK FARM (Excuse The
Language).

But at least Peter Ridden is clear that this is no way a nudist
resort.

SO, live and let live. I hope since the pervs have their own place to
perv out they will stay away from nudist venues (though it never seems
to work out that way).
Anna
2010-09-09 18:56:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Post by Anna
Post by Dario Western
Peter Riden from The Grand Barn who is a well known philogynist objected to
it saying that if you have already got the facilities that appeal to the
women then they will attend regardless - you don't need economic gimmicks.
The Grand Barn ISN'T a nudist venue.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=4732625826
http://www.the-grand-barn.com/
http://www.the-grand-barn.com/bra/about_tgb.html
https://thegrandbarn.com/echo/reservations.php
http://the-worldwide-affiliate-network.com/closer/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12
http://tinyurl.com/28cuw5l
An afternoon at TGB
nathsteeve » Sun Jan 24, 2010 4:11 pm
It was hot and sunny. Just relaxing by the pool when this couple came
by. They went and got themselves naked - on the other side. I decided
to go and get some sun on a lounge chair, and started getting half
hard. He was putting some tan oil on her, and was rubbing her niples.
That was really hot. Then, I started jacking off like hell. We went
altogether in the hot tub and she took my cock in her hands and was
jaking me off while her boyfriend was looking. A good time at TGB!
-----
Oh, here is Peter Ridden's response:

http://the-worldwide-affiliate-network.com/closer/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=12

http://tinyurl.com/28cuw5l

Re: An afternoon at TGB

by Peter Riden » Thu Mar 18, 2010 2:14 am


One of the most solid supporter of what is offered at THE GRAND BARN,
Steeve!!

Of course Steph for us close friends. You've been coming at TGB for a
decade already and you've always acted up with class and knows when
and when not.
Yes, these 2 sweet friends were nice and I'm glad for you that you
made the most of the first encounter you had with them. They came back
but you weren't around..;-)
Lots of interesting occurrences can take place at TGB and all between
consenting mature adults, isn't it nice..;-)
This year you need to tell all your friends that the place to be is
here at TGB..;-)
Anna
2010-09-07 20:38:18 UTC
Permalink
They unaccompanied females paying only half ground fees.

They do that in Las Vegas with their "European Style Pools" (which as
we are learning really shouldn't be called that because Europeans
aren't as accepting of Female (or even in some places Male)
toplessness as we in the United States think they are).

http://govegas.about.com/od/lasvegashotels/tp/toplesstop.htm

The reason they do that of course is obvious. The males are attracted
to the pools by the thought of a lot of topless women.

Such a policy does tend to lead to lewdness and therefore shouldn't be
part of the policy of any true nudist facility.
Anna
2010-09-07 21:09:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
They unaccompanied females paying only half ground fees.
They do that in Las Vegas with their "European Style Pools" (which as
we are learning really shouldn't be called that because Europeans
aren't as accepting of Female (or even in some places Male)
toplessness as we in the United States think they are).
http://govegas.about.com/od/lasvegashotels/tp/toplesstop.htm
The reason they do that of course is obvious.  The males are attracted
to the pools by the thought of a lot of topless women.
Such a policy does tend to lead to lewdness and therefore shouldn't be
part of the policy of any true nudist facility.
So nudists want to charge half fees for women. They do that in Vegas
as well.

In doing so you corrupt the integrity of nudism.

Like I said, they thought Nudism was dying out in 1971 too. But it's
still here. Nudism being an activity that will always attract a very
small segment of society will always struggle but clubs commented to
the cause will muddle through like they always have.

Don't Destroy Nudism to Save It.
Dario Western
2010-09-08 00:55:53 UTC
Permalink
Hi Anna,

"So nudists want to charge half fees for women. They do that in Vegas
as well.

In doing so you corrupt the integrity of nudism."

Agreed with you on that.

"Like I said, they thought Nudism was dying out in 1971 too. But it's
still here. Nudism being an activity that will always attract a very
small segment of society will always struggle but clubs commented to
the cause will muddle through like they always have.

Don't Destroy Nudism to Save It."

You see, this is what the clubs are doing wrong. Nudism thrived the most
when it was focused on things that were geared towards the betterment of
humanity: IOW when it promoted physical culture, health, sports, diet and
exercise.

Places like health farms, gymansiums, sports centres and sporting games
attract a much larger segment of society and the nudist clubs today have
gone in the opposite direction. With the likes of Ponderosa having the
annual 'Nudes A Poppin', several nudist clubs allowing swing parties to be
hosted on their grounds and on their webpages, and many family clubs losing
touch with what people in their teens to 30's like, as well as some being
'must strip even for first timers' - then it's no wonder why they are
getting such a small segment of people interested - mostly middle aged to
elderly men.

When you ignore the needs and the best interests of the others, then it will
be inevitable your club will be forced to close it's doors soon.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Best wishes,

Dario Western

"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield

Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com

Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
Anna
2010-09-08 16:22:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
Hi Anna,
"So nudists want to charge half fees for women. They do that in Vegas
as well.
In doing so you corrupt the integrity of nudism."
Agreed with you on that.
Here's an article you might be interested in.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/09/the-sexism-of-ladies-night-ctd.html

http://tinyurl.com/2bpge73

"The goal of ladies nights is not really to attract more female
customers, but to attract more male customers (who will pay full
price) looking to go to bars with more female customers (for whom they
will buy full-priced drinks). "

It's a response to this article.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/09/the-sexism-of-ladies-night.html

http://tinyurl.com/2924k63
Anna
2010-09-07 21:04:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that nudism/naturism
is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with no sense of
favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
In short, you object to pricing that seeks to cure the well known
demographic problems of modern naturism.
Define "modern"

The reason I ask is below is a link to an article from the 1970s
saying one of the things that nudists need to worry about going
forward is that it needs to attract a young generation.

Nearly 40 years later nudism is still here.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,905385,00.html

Modern Living: The Decline of Nudism

Monday, Jul. 19, 1971
Modern Living: The Decline of Nudism

Balmy Southern California has long been a natural habitat for nudists.
But now the new permissiveness has caught up with this once-daring
tribe. After visiting a former citadel of the cult near Los Angeles,
TIME Correspondent Timothy Tyler reports:

Mel Hocker, one of the alltime great American nudists, is still out
there in the nude. But he is not smiling and carefree, the way you
would imagine a nudist to be. At 60, Mel sits alone in his little
office, a mass of naked wrinkles, glum, dispirited, forlorn. Forlorn
because just outside Mel's screen door, his own twelve-acre nudist club
—the Oakdale Guest Ranch—is going silently to seed in the dry heat of
the San Bernardino Mountains. In fact, the club's membership in two
years has plummeted from 300 to 60 couples, and it continues to
plummet as the elderly members die off. Another nudist camp near by
recently closed up for good.

"It's the sexual revolution that's killing us," moans Mel, who has
been nude nonstop now for 18 years. "The pornographic movies, the
topless-bottomless bars, the dirty magazines—they're making nudism in
America passé." To show what he means, Mel slips into shower clogs and
takes us on a tour of his camp, mercifully letting us keep our pants
on. The layout of the place hints of its past grandeur: 16 rustic
cabins idling on a hillside, and down on the flat, dozens of vacant
trailer slips where you can almost envision happy, laughing naked
people swarming around gaily decorated mobile homes. But now, Mel
says, the remaining members are mostly middle-aged and elderly couples
who come out only on the warm weekends. The grandiose pool is empty,
tennis and volleyball courts are unused, nets hanging limp in the sun.

The only sounds of life come from a screened hut with a sign on it
that says CORNER NUDE STAND. Inside, a pretty young woman is dancing
nude to a jukebox; the other patrons, mostly older males, sit drinking
beer, droning apathetically and ignoring the woman. A sign on the wall
says NUDI BURGERS. MORE MEAT LESS DRESSING. Hocker sits down, sips a
Coke and brightens somewhat. "I pioneered in nudism, you know" he
shouts over the music. "We were the first nudist place to serve beer,
and we were first with nude dancing. This place has attracted your
professional people, right down to the honorable janitor who pushes
the broom."

Hard to Upstage. Hocker's mind slips gradually back into nudism's
past, and he glowingly recalls how he became a nudist in the sedate
year of 1953. That was back when he was living in Long Beach and
nudism was still considered risqué. In their search for an outdoor
health spa, Hocker and his wife Ann stumbled on nudism. "We were the
talk of Long Beach for a long time," recalls Ann (equally nude), her
eyes gleaming with a certain mischievous pride. After four years
Hocker quit his job as a cost analyst with the Ford Motor Co., bought
Oakdale, an established nudist club just outside San Bernardino, and
made nudism a full-time way of life. "You can't beat it," says Hocker.
"It's so — natural. It just seems right not to wear clothes. You can't
upstage anybody around here with a mink coat or a good suit. Haha. And
then there's the sun. Believe me, after a weekend out here in the
nude, you can really kill 'em on your job."

But in the last few years, as the sexual revolution progressed, the
once tantalizing concept of prancing nude through the woods came to
seem tame indeed to Southern Californians. Even last year's special
event—nude skydiving with music by 15 bare members of the Long Beach
Municipal Band—was sparsely attended. Just as well, perhaps, since one
hapless skydiver was badly scratched when he landed in a buckthorn
patch.

Looking for Longhairs. Now, it appears, Oakdale has only one slim
chance left for survival: a transfusion of good old American public
relations techniques. Earlier this year Hocker decided to hire Sparky
Blaine, a promoter and manager of topless dancing girls, to push
Oakdale back into the big time. For Sparky, 43, Oakdale was a
revelation. He abandoned his Beverly Hills office, together with his
clothes, philosophizing that "I do most of my work by phone anyway,"
and moved right into one of the Oakdale cabins. "Out here," he mused,
"I can float nude in the pool while my nude secretary sits on the edge
and takes a letter—working conditions are marvelous."

Sparky's big job is to promote the Miss Nu

de Cosmos Pageant, a nude beauty contest held at Oakdale each summer.
His first change has been to bill the pageant "The Woodstock of the
Nudist Movement." He explains: "We've got to get the longhairs in
here. Only way to save the place. And why not? They took their clothes
off at Woodstock. Why can't they do it here?

"The old nudes have got to step aside or this place is going to die.
What we should do, we should let all the good-looking girls join free,
then we'd have something. It's youth, baby, that's where it's at. The
old blood's dying with the trees." Sparky continues ecstatically:
"Just give me ten showgirls out here, and varoom, the young guys'll
come out of Los Angeles in first gear. I'm putting up a big stand; I'm
gonna have two go-go girls dancing on top of it at night, with
spotlights on 'em, so people can see 'em from the highway."

At 60, Mel Hocker sits alone in his little office, a mass of naked
wrinkles, glum, dispirited, forlorn, brooding about the passing of the
golden age of nudism and wearily watching Sparky Blaine trying to
create a last varoom.

-----

Gosh, you know what is REALLY Going to Kill Nudism? That Ice Age we
are going into.

Can there be anything done to stop this Global Cooling? By 2001 we
will all be under miles of snow. Try nudism when everything is
covered by Ice.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,944914,00.html


Monday, Jun. 24, 1974
Another Ice Age?

In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding
terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in
parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst
flooding in centuries. In Canada's wheat belt, a particularly chilly
and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a
disappointingly small harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has
suffered from uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A
series of unusually cold winters has gripped the American Far West,
while New England and northern Europe have recently experienced the
mildest winters within anyone's recollection.

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the
past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to
suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations
are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the
weather varies from place to place and time to time, when
meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they
find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the
past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing.
Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for
the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of
another ice age.

Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and
thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward
migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the
Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about
2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported
by other convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of
Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his
wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern
Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had
suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever
since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example,
were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered
year round.

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one
thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry,
high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep
from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. Indeed it is
the widening of this cap of cold air that is the immediate cause of
Africa's drought. By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and
preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara
region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way
from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds
have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to
the south. Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different
weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds
swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the
bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and
warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of
widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—
the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.

Sunspot Cycle. The changing weather is apparently connected with
differences in the amount of energy that the earth's surface receives
from the sun. Changes in the earth's tilt and distance from the sun
could, for instance, significantly increase or decrease the amount of
solar radiation falling on either hemisphere—thereby altering the
earth's climate. Some observers have tried to connect the eleven-year
sunspot cycle with climate patterns, but have so far been unable to
provide a satisfactory explanation of how the cycle might be involved.

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The
University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists
suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as
a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more
sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.

Climatic Balance. Some scientists like Donald Oilman, chief of the
National Weather Service's long-range-prediction group, think that the
cooling trend may be only temporary. But all agree that vastly more
information is needed about the major influences on the earth's
climate. Indeed, it is to gain such knowledge that 38 ships and 13
aircraft, carrying scientists from almost 70 nations, are now
assembling in the Atlantic and elsewhere for a massive 100-day study
of the effects of the tropical seas and atmosphere on worldwide
weather. The study itself is only part of an international scientific
effort known acronymically as GARP (for Global Atmospheric Research
Program).

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be
extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a
1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface
could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it
sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred
years.

The earth's current climate is something of an anomaly; in the past
700,000 years, there have been at least seven major episodes of
glaciers spreading over much of the planet. Temperatures have been as
high as they are now only about 5% of the time. But there is a peril
more immediate than the prospect of another ice age. Even if
temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near
future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the
U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply
reduced. University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former
president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the
continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave
the world a grim premonition of what might happen. Warns Hare: "I
don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if
there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
Anna
2010-09-07 21:13:13 UTC
Permalink
After all it is kind of hard to be a nudist during an ice age!

Perhaps future nudists can build indoor facilities,

Gosh, you know what is REALLY Going to Kill Nudism? That Ice Age we
are going into.

Can there be anything done to stop this Global Cooling? By 2001 we
will all be under miles of snow. Try nudism when everything is
covered by Ice.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,944914,00.html

Monday, Jun. 24, 1974
Another Ice Age?

In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding
terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in
parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst
flooding in centuries. In Canada's wheat belt, a particularly chilly
and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a
disappointingly small harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has
suffered from uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A
series of unusually cold winters has gripped the American Far West,
while New England and northern Europe have recently experienced the
mildest winters within anyone's recollection.

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the
past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to
suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations
are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the
weather varies from place to place and time to time, when
meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they
find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the
past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing.
Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for
the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of
another ice age.

Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and
thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward
migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the
Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about
2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported
by other convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of
Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his
wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern
Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had
suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever
since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example,
were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered
year round.

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one
thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry,
high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep
from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. Indeed it is
the widening of this cap of cold air that is the immediate cause of
Africa's drought. By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and
preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara
region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way
from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds
have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to
the south. Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different
weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds
swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the
bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and
warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of
widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—
the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.

Sunspot Cycle. The changing weather is apparently connected with
differences in the amount of energy that the earth's surface receives
from the sun. Changes in the earth's tilt and distance from the sun
could, for instance, significantly increase or decrease the amount of
solar radiation falling on either hemisphere—thereby altering the
earth's climate. Some observers have tried to connect the eleven-year
sunspot cycle with climate patterns, but have so far been unable to
provide a satisfactory explanation of how the cycle might be involved.

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The
University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists
suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as
a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more
sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.

Climatic Balance. Some scientists like Donald Oilman, chief of the
National Weather Service's long-range-prediction group, think that the
cooling trend may be only temporary. But all agree that vastly more
information is needed about the major influences on the earth's
climate. Indeed, it is to gain such knowledge that 38 ships and 13
aircraft, carrying scientists from almost 70 nations, are now
assembling in the Atlantic and elsewhere for a massive 100-day study
of the effects of the tropical seas and atmosphere on worldwide
weather. The study itself is only part of an international scientific
effort known acronymically as GARP (for Global Atmospheric Research
Program).

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be
extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a
1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface
could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it
sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred
years.

The earth's current climate is something of an anomaly; in the past
700,000 years, there have been at least seven major episodes of
glaciers spreading over much of the planet. Temperatures have been as
high as they are now only about 5% of the time. But there is a peril
more immediate than the prospect of another ice age. Even if
temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near
future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the
U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply
reduced. University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former
president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the
continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave
the world a grim premonition of what might happen. Warns Hare: "I
don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if
there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
Terry J. Wood
2010-09-11 03:26:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jenny6833A
Post by Dario Western
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that
nudism/naturism is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal
with no sense of favouritism.
I gather you also object to kids being admitted free, first timers
getting a price break, unaccompanied females paying only half ground
fees, student discounts, etc.
Sounds like capitalism to me!

blondie64
2010-09-07 09:37:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that
nudism/naturism is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with
no sense of favouritism.
Let's spice this topic up and hopefully he will give some answers to this
thread question if we pressurize him long enough.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
Dario Western
"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield
Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com
Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
Dario Western
"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield
Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website: http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
http://buzz.google.com
Groups: http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
next swim Sunday 8th 6-9pm near Colchester.
20m pool, steam, sauna, bar, food, massage (needs booking).
Free admisison for Under 35s.
see www.prested.com/natswim.htm
(yes it's a bit out of date.. apologies!)
dario have you ever been to a naturist swim in the UK in the last 10 years?
you geuinely find the age group attending is over 40 y/o let alone over 35
y/o so givingan enticement for a younger market is good business sense as
if you don't start encouraging younger people you will find your member
would have passed away and your club with it soon afterwards!
if you look at Eureka's website in Kent UK there have some wonderful shot of
events in the 70's & 80's which were well attended but it does appear the
club is less attended now and the atmosphere may have changed?

Ric blondie64
Anna
2010-09-07 21:16:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by blondie64
dario have you ever been to a naturist swim in the UK in the last 10 years?
you geuinely find the age group attending is over 40 y/o let alone over 35
y/o so givingan enticement for a younger market is good business sense  as
if you don't start encouraging younger people you will find your member
would have passed away and your club with it soon afterwards!
if you look at Eureka's website in Kent UK there have some wonderful shot of
events in the 70's & 80's which were well attended but it does appear the
club is less attended now and the atmosphere may have changed?
Ric blondie64
Yeah if we don't get a young crowd in I doubt nudism will last much
into the 1990s.

Just look at this article.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,905385,00.html

Monday, Jul. 19, 1971
Modern Living: The Decline of Nudism

Balmy Southern California has long been a natural habitat for nudists.
But now the new permissiveness has caught up with this once-daring
tribe. After visiting a former citadel of the cult near Los Angeles,
TIME Correspondent Timothy Tyler reports:

Mel Hocker, one of the alltime great American nudists, is still out
there in the nude. But he is not smiling and carefree, the way you
would imagine a nudist to be. At 60, Mel sits alone in his little
office, a mass of naked wrinkles, glum, dispirited, forlorn. Forlorn
because just outside Mel's screen door, his own twelve-acre nudist club
—the Oakdale Guest Ranch—is going silently to seed in the dry heat of
the San Bernardino Mountains. In fact, the club's membership in two
years has plummeted from 300 to 60 couples, and it continues to
plummet as the elderly members die off. Another nudist camp near by
recently closed up for good.

"It's the sexual revolution that's killing us," moans Mel, who has
been nude nonstop now for 18 years. "The pornographic movies, the
topless-bottomless bars, the dirty magazines—they're making nudism in
America passé." To show what he means, Mel slips into shower clogs and
takes us on a tour of his camp, mercifully letting us keep our pants
on. The layout of the place hints of its past grandeur: 16 rustic
cabins idling on a hillside, and down on the flat, dozens of vacant
trailer slips where you can almost envision happy, laughing naked
people swarming around gaily decorated mobile homes. But now, Mel
says, the remaining members are mostly middle-aged and elderly couples
who come out only on the warm weekends. The grandiose pool is empty,
tennis and volleyball courts are unused, nets hanging limp in the sun.

The only sounds of life come from a screened hut with a sign on it
that says CORNER NUDE STAND. Inside, a pretty young woman is dancing
nude to a jukebox; the other patrons, mostly older males, sit drinking
beer, droning apathetically and ignoring the woman. A sign on the wall
says NUDI BURGERS. MORE MEAT LESS DRESSING. Hocker sits down, sips a
Coke and brightens somewhat. "I pioneered in nudism, you know" he
shouts over the music. "We were the first nudist place to serve beer,
and we were first with nude dancing. This place has attracted your
professional people, right down to the honorable janitor who pushes
the broom."

Hard to Upstage. Hocker's mind slips gradually back into nudism's
past, and he glowingly recalls how he became a nudist in the sedate
year of 1953. That was back when he was living in Long Beach and
nudism was still considered risqué. In their search for an outdoor
health spa, Hocker and his wife Ann stumbled on nudism. "We were the
talk of Long Beach for a long time," recalls Ann (equally nude), her
eyes gleaming with a certain mischievous pride. After four years
Hocker quit his job as a cost analyst with the Ford Motor Co., bought
Oakdale, an established nudist club just outside San Bernardino, and
made nudism a full-time way of life. "You can't beat it," says Hocker.
"It's so — natural. It just seems right not to wear clothes. You can't
upstage anybody around here with a mink coat or a good suit. Haha. And
then there's the sun. Believe me, after a weekend out here in the
nude, you can really kill 'em on your job."

But in the last few years, as the sexual revolution progressed, the
once tantalizing concept of prancing nude through the woods came to
seem tame indeed to Southern Californians. Even last year's special
event—nude skydiving with music by 15 bare members of the Long Beach
Municipal Band—was sparsely attended. Just as well, perhaps, since one
hapless skydiver was badly scratched when he landed in a buckthorn
patch.

Looking for Longhairs. Now, it appears, Oakdale has only one slim
chance left for survival: a transfusion of good old American public
relations techniques. Earlier this year Hocker decided to hire Sparky
Blaine, a promoter and manager of topless dancing girls, to push
Oakdale back into the big time. For Sparky, 43, Oakdale was a
revelation. He abandoned his Beverly Hills office, together with his
clothes, philosophizing that "I do most of my work by phone anyway,"
and moved right into one of the Oakdale cabins. "Out here," he mused,
"I can float nude in the pool while my nude secretary sits on the edge
and takes a letter—working conditions are marvelous."

Sparky's big job is to promote the Miss Nude Cosmos Pageant, a nude
beauty contest held at Oakdale each summer. His first change has been
to bill the pageant "The Woodstock of the Nudist Movement." He
explains: "We've got to get the longhairs in here. Only way to save
the place. And why not? They took their clothes off at Woodstock. Why
can't they do it here?

"The old nudes have got to step aside or this place is going to die.
What we should do, we should let all the good-looking girls join free,
then we'd have something. It's youth, baby, that's where it's at. The
old blood's dying with the trees." Sparky continues ecstatically:
"Just give me ten showgirls out here, and varoom, the young guys'll
come out of Los Angeles in first gear. I'm putting up a big stand; I'm
gonna have two go-go girls dancing on top of it at night, with
spotlights on 'em, so people can see 'em from the highway."

At 60, Mel Hocker sits alone in his little office, a mass of naked
wrinkles, glum, dispirited, forlorn, brooding about the passing of the
golden age of nudism and wearily watching Sparky Blaine trying to
create a last varoom.
Anna
2010-09-07 21:24:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by blondie64
Post by Dario Western
This guy (who is too cowardly to give his real name on the uk.rec.naturist
newsgroup) is granting free admission to under 35s to his nude swims at
Prested Hall in the UK, just near London.
I think that this is bad business ethics, as I thought that
nudism/naturism is supposed to be about treating everyone as an equal with
no sense of favouritism.
Let's spice this topic up and hopefully he will give some answers to this
thread question if we pressurize him long enough.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
Dario Western
"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield
Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website:http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
             http://buzz.google.com
Groups:http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
           http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
           http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
           http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best wishes,
Dario Western
"A noble heart embiggens the smallest of men" - Jebediah Springfield
Mobile: (0437) 428-859
Website:http://picasaweb.google.com/westernorama
             http://buzz.google.com
Groups:http://groups.google.com/group/Brisbane_Nudists
           http://groups.google.com/group/Christiannudist
           http://groups.google.com/group/Laissez-Fayre
           http://groups.google.com/group/YoungAussieNudists
next swim Sunday 8th 6-9pm near Colchester.
20m pool, steam, sauna, bar, food, massage (needs booking).
Free admisison for Under 35s.
seewww.prested.com/natswim.htm
(yes it's a bit out of date.. apologies!)
dario have you ever been to a naturist swim in the UK in the last 10 years?
you geuinely find the age group attending is over 40 y/o let alone over 35
y/o so givingan enticement for a younger market is good business sense  as
if you don't start encouraging younger people you will find your member
would have passed away and your club with it soon afterwards!
if you look at Eureka's website in Kent UK there have some wonderful shot of
events in the 70's & 80's which were well attended but it does appear the
club is less attended now and the atmosphere may have changed?
Ric blondie64
Of course the Atmosphere has changed. They warned about Global
Cooling in the 1970s. Pretty hard to be a nudist when snow covers the
UK all year long.

http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,944914,00.html

Monday, Jun. 24, 1974
Another Ice Age?

In Africa, drought continues for the sixth consecutive year, adding
terribly to the toll of famine victims. During 1972 record rains in
parts of the U.S., Pakistan and Japan caused some of the worst
flooding in centuries. In Canada's wheat belt, a particularly chilly
and rainy spring has delayed planting and may well bring a
disappointingly small harvest. Rainy Britain, on the other hand, has
suffered from uncharacteristic dry spells the past few springs. A
series of unusually cold winters has gripped the American Far West,
while New England and northern Europe have recently experienced the
mildest winters within anyone's recollection.

As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the
past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to
suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations
are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the
weather varies from place to place and time to time, when
meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they
find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the
past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing.
Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for
the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of
another ice age.

Telltale signs are everywhere —from the unexpected persistence and
thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward
migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the
Midwest.Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about
2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported
by other convincing data. When Climatologist George J. Kukla of
Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory and his
wife Helena analyzed satellite weather data for the Northern
Hemisphere, they found that the area of the ice and snow cover had
suddenly increased by 12% in 1971 and the increase has persisted ever
since. Areas of Baffin Island in the Canadian Arctic, for example,
were once totally free of any snow in summer; now they are covered
year round.

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one
thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry,
high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep
from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. Indeed it is
the widening of this cap of cold air that is the immediate cause of
Africa's drought. By blocking moisture-bearing equatorial winds and
preventing them from bringing rainfall to the parched sub-Sahara
region, as well as other drought-ridden areas stretching all the way
from Central America to the Middle East and India, the polar winds
have in effect caused the Sahara and other deserts to reach farther to
the south. Paradoxically, the same vortex has created quite different
weather quirks in the U.S. and other temperate zones. As the winds
swirl around the globe, their southerly portions undulate like the
bottom of a skirt. Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and
warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of
widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—
the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example.

Sunspot Cycle. The changing weather is apparently connected with
differences in the amount of energy that the earth's surface receives
from the sun. Changes in the earth's tilt and distance from the sun
could, for instance, significantly increase or decrease the amount of
solar radiation falling on either hemisphere—thereby altering the
earth's climate. Some observers have tried to connect the eleven-year
sunspot cycle with climate patterns, but have so far been unable to
provide a satisfactory explanation of how the cycle might be involved.

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The
University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists
suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as
a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more
sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.

Climatic Balance. Some scientists like Donald Oilman, chief of the
National Weather Service's long-range-prediction group, think that the
cooling trend may be only temporary. But all agree that vastly more
information is needed about the major influences on the earth's
climate. Indeed, it is to gain such knowledge that 38 ships and 13
aircraft, carrying scientists from almost 70 nations, are now
assembling in the Atlantic and elsewhere for a massive 100-day study
of the effects of the tropical seas and atmosphere on worldwide
weather. The study itself is only part of an international scientific
effort known acronymically as GARP (for Global Atmospheric Research
Program).

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be
extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a
1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface
could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it
sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred
years.

The earth's current climate is something of an anomaly; in the past
700,000 years, there have been at least seven major episodes of
glaciers spreading over much of the planet. Temperatures have been as
high as they are now only about 5% of the time. But there is a peril
more immediate than the prospect of another ice age. Even if
temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near
future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the
U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply
reduced. University of Toronto Climatologist Kenneth Hare, a former
president of the Royal Meteorological Society, believes that the
continuing drought and the recent failure of the Russian harvest gave
the world a grim premonition of what might happen. Warns Hare: "I
don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if
there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."
Richard Burnham
2010-09-08 10:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Of course the Atmosphere has changed.  They warned about Global
Cooling in the 1970s.  Pretty hard to be a nudist when snow covers the
UK all year long.
Likely if humans weren't here the earth would be cooling. That was
certainly a possibility to be considered.

But already in the 1950s climate scientists were becoming aware that
the human race was pumping large amounts of insulating material into
the atmosphere, and that the warming effect of that would counteract
any natural cooling tendency. And it was easy to calculate that at the
rate this pumping was being done the amount of warming would be quite
large.
(Interestingly, the first person to really draw attention to this was
an oceanographer who noticed the effect that the extra CO2 was having
on the oceans.)

And so it has happened - over the last few decades the warming has
been pretty much in line with what was expected, quite spectacular
this year, in fact. And the rate of pumping increased more than anyone
seems to have expected in the 50s and 60s.

This will probably not make a lot of difference to sunbathing in the
UK - since warmer air means more moisture off the ocean, it may well
mean more cloud and rain (and snowfall in the winter).

By the way, it's odd how many people think that something published in
1970 outweighs 40 years of intensive research since.

RB
Anna
2010-09-08 16:15:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Burnham
By the way, it's odd how many people think that something published in
1970 outweighs 40 years of intensive research since.
RB
They were wrong then and they are wrong now.

Perhaps not so much wrong but they are intentionally deceiving us.

Why would they do that?

First, crises get the grants. That's the best way to get grants from
government.

Second, many of these people are indeed socialists. They see this as a
way to get anti-capitalist governmental policy passed.

Here's a great documentary.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647
Richard Burnham
2010-09-08 17:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Post by Richard Burnham
By the way, it's odd how many people think that something published in
1970 outweighs 40 years of intensive research since.
RB
They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
Oooh, I do love a pseudonymous troll who can argue from a state of
total ignorance.Total ignorance is a firm ground for total certainty.
Don't you agree?
Post by Anna
Perhaps not so much wrong but they are intentionally deceiving us.
Why would they do that?
First, crises get the grants. That's the best way to get grants from
government.
Not out of the GW Bush presidency, which actively censored the work of
its scientists. if I were a climate scientist, I could get cash in my
pocket (literally) from the oil industry by being 'sceptic'. Not
grants, which have to be spent on research and research assistants,
and from which you are not allowed to augment your modest salary.
Scepticism pays much better.
Post by Anna
Second, many of these people are indeed socialists. They see this as a
way to get anti-capitalist governmental policy passed.
Done your research on this? Or are you just reading Tea Party blogs
and the like?
Post by Anna
Here's a great documentary.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647
No, it's not a great documentary. It's old stuff, and if you knew
anything it has been well refuted. It is simply propaganda that would
do the communists proud, it did not even touch on the scientific
evidence and it included a faked graph. The fact that you even think
of linking to this shows your ignorance of the subject. Got anything
better?

RB
Anna
2010-09-08 22:16:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Burnham
Post by Anna
Post by Richard Burnham
By the way, it's odd how many people think that something published in
1970 outweighs 40 years of intensive research since.
RB
They were wrong then and they are wrong now.
Oooh, I do love a pseudonymous troll who can argue from a state of
total ignorance.Total ignorance is a firm ground for total certainty.
Don't you agree?
Post by Anna
Perhaps not so much wrong but they are intentionally deceiving us.
Why would they do that?
First, crises get the grants. That's the best way to get grants from
government.
Not out of the GW Bush presidency, which actively censored the work of
its scientists. if I were a climate scientist, I could get cash in my
pocket (literally)  from the oil industry by being 'sceptic'. Not
grants, which have to be spent on research and research assistants,
and from which you are not allowed to augment your modest salary.
Scepticism pays much better.
Post by Anna
Second, many of these people are indeed socialists. They see this as a
way to get anti-capitalist governmental policy passed.
Done your research on this? Or are you just reading Tea Party blogs
and the like?
Post by Anna
Here's a great documentary.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647
No, it's not a great documentary. It's old stuff, and if you knew
anything it has been well refuted. It is simply propaganda that would
do the communists proud, it did not even touch on the scientific
evidence and it included a faked graph. The fact that you even think
of linking to this shows your ignorance of the subject. Got anything
better?
RB
Why wait another 40 years to prove that yet again you are WRONG!

So take your socialist crap somewhere else!

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100908/tts-climate-warming-science-ice-c1b2fc3.html

http://tinyurl.com/2exvkqh

Climate: New study slashes estimate of icecap loss

PARIS (AFP) - – Estimates of the rate of ice loss from Greenland and
West Antarctica, one of the most worrying questions in the global
warming debate, should be halved, according to Dutch and US
scientists.

In the last two years, several teams have estimated Greenland is
shedding roughly 230 gigatonnes of ice, or 230 billion tonnes, per
year and West Antarctica around 132 gigatonnes annually.

Together, that would account for more than half of the annual three-
millimetre (0.2 inch) yearly rise in sea levels, a pace that compares
dramatically with 1.8mm (0.07 inches) annually in the early 1960s.

But, according to the new study, published in the September issue of
the journal Nature Geoscience, the ice estimates fail to correct for a
phenomenon known as glacial isostatic adjustment.

This is the term for the rebounding of Earth's crust following the
last Ice Age.

Glaciers that were kilometers (miles) thick smothered Antarctica and
most of the northern hemisphere for tens of thousands of years,
compressing the elastic crust beneath it with their titanic weight.

When the glaciers started to retreat around 20,000 years ago, the
crust started to rebound, and is still doing so.

This movement, though, is not just a single vertical motion, lead
researcher Bert Vermeersen of Delft Technical University, in the
Netherlands, said in phone interview with AFP.

"A good analogy is that it's like a mattress after someone has been
sleeping on it all night," he said.

The weight of the sleeper creates a hollow as the material compress
downwards and outwards. When the person gets up, the mattress starts
to recover. This movement, seen in close-up, is both upwards and
downwards and also sideways, too, as the decompressed material expands
outwards and pulls on adjacent stuffing.

Often ignored or considered a minor factor in previous research, post-
glacial rebound turns out to be important, says the paper.

It looks at tiny changes in Earth's gravitational field provided by
two satellites since 2002, from GPS measurements on land, and from
figures for sea floor pressure.

These revealed, among other things, that southern Greenland is in fact
subsiding, as the crust beneath it is pulled by the post-glacial
rebound from northern America.

With glacial isostatic adjustment modelled in, the loss from Greenland
is put at 104 gigatonnes, plus or minus 23 gigatonnes, and 64
gigatonnes from West Antarctica, plus or minus 32 gigatonnes.

These variations show a large degree of uncertainty, but Vermeersen
believes that even so a clearer picture is emerging on icesheet loss.

"The corrections for deformations of the Earth's crust have a
considerable effect on the amount of ice that is estimated to be
melting each year," said Vermeersen, whose team worked with NASA's Jet
Propulsation Laboratory and the Netherlands Institute for Space
Research.

"We have concluded that the Greenland and West Antarctica ice caps are
melting at approximately half the speed originally predicted."

If the figures for overall sea level rise are accurate, icesheet loss
would be contribute about 30 percent, rather than roughly half, to the
total, said Vermeersen. The rest would come mainly from thermal
expansion, meaning that as the sea warms it rises.

The debate is important because of fears that Earth's biggest
reservoirs of ice, capable of driving up ocean levels by many metres
(feet) if lost, are melting much faster than global-warming scenarios
had predicted.

In 2007, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
predicted oceans would rise by 18-59 centimeters (7.2 and 23.6 inches)
by 2100, a figure that at its upper range means vulnerable coastal
cities would become swamped within a few generations.

The increase would depend on warming estimated at between 1.1 and 6.4
degrees Celsius (1.98-11.52 degrees Fahrenheit) this century, the IPCC
said. It stressed, though, the uncertainties about icesheet loss.

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100908/tts-climate-warming-science-ice-c1b2fc3.html
Richard Burnham
2010-09-09 12:39:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Why wait another 40 years to prove that yet again you are WRONG!
So take your socialist crap somewhere else!
pseudo-Anna,

I'm glad to see that you are paying some attention to the scientific
literature, even if the link you provide is not in any way evidence
against anthropogenic global warming.

Perhaps you are not aware that the evidence for AGW comes not from
climate scientists, but from physicists. They have known since the
1890s that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will warm the earth. This was
long before Hansen, Mann et al. were born. There is no reasonable
doubt about this. What people did not realise until around the 50s or
60s is how much CO2 humans were adding to the atmosphere - currently
around 2 parts per million, on the way to doubling the CO2
concentration by the end of this century.

I do realise that the Republican party is against science on the
grounds that it is 'socialist'. The laws of physics do not care
whether you call them 'socialist' or not. But they are making sure
that your ugly, stupid, ignorant ass will get warmed, whether you bury
your head in the sand or not.

What the climate scientists are trying to do is not persuade you AGW
is true, but try to work out what the likely consequences will be. For
that, I think they should receive thanks (and proper scientific
criticism where they are wrong), not abuse and threats.

Here is a good video:
http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml

I realise you will not look at it though, as (a) it involves some
intellectual effort, and (b) as it's real science, there is a danger
of your mind being changed.

RB
Anna
2010-09-09 14:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Burnham
Post by Anna
Why wait another 40 years to prove that yet again you are WRONG!
So take your socialist crap somewhere else!
pseudo-Anna,
I'm glad to see that you are paying some attention to the scientific
literature, even if the link you provide is not in any way evidence
against anthropogenic global warming.
Perhaps you are not aware that the evidence for AGW comes not from
climate scientists, but from physicists. They have known since the
1890s that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will warm the earth. This was
long before Hansen, Mann et al. were born. There is no reasonable
doubt about this. What people did not realise until around the 50s or
60s is how much CO2 humans were adding to the atmosphere - currently
around 2 parts per million, on the way to doubling the CO2
concentration by the end of this century.
I do realise that the Republican party is against science on the
grounds that it is 'socialist'. The laws of physics do not care
whether you call them 'socialist' or not. But they are making sure
that your ugly, stupid, ignorant ass will get warmed, whether you bury
your head in the sand or not.
What the climate scientists are trying to do is not persuade you AGW
is true, but try to work out what the likely consequences will be. For
that, I think they should receive thanks (and proper scientific
criticism where they are wrong), not abuse and threats.
Here is a good video:http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
I realise you will not look at it though, as (a) it involves some
intellectual effort, and (b) as it's real science, there is a danger
of your mind being changed.
RB
Let's talk about this in forty years. By then you will probably go
back to predicting a New Ice Age.

The Left has never let continuously being wrong bother them.
Richard Burnham
2010-09-09 18:27:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Post by Richard Burnham
Post by Anna
Why wait another 40 years to prove that yet again you are WRONG!
So take your socialist crap somewhere else!
pseudo-Anna,
I'm glad to see that you are paying some attention to the scientific
literature, even if the link you provide is not in any way evidence
against anthropogenic global warming.
Perhaps you are not aware that the evidence for AGW comes not from
climate scientists, but from physicists. They have known since the
1890s that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will warm the earth. This was
long before Hansen, Mann et al. were born. There is no reasonable
doubt about this. What people did not realise until around the 50s or
60s is how much CO2 humans were adding to the atmosphere - currently
around 2 parts per million, on the way to doubling the CO2
concentration by the end of this century.
I do realise that the Republican party is against science on the
grounds that it is 'socialist'. The laws of physics do not care
whether you call them 'socialist' or not. But they are making sure
that your ugly, stupid, ignorant ass will get warmed, whether you bury
your head in the sand or not.
What the climate scientists are trying to do is not persuade you AGW
is true, but try to work out what the likely consequences will be. For
that, I think they should receive thanks (and proper scientific
criticism where they are wrong), not abuse and threats.
Here is a good video:http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
I realise you will not look at it though, as (a) it involves some
intellectual effort, and (b) as it's real science, there is a danger
of your mind being changed.
RB
Let's talk about this in forty years. By then you will probably go
back to predicting a New Ice Age.
The Left has never let continuously being wrong bother them.
And clearly you do not let being ignorant bother you.

Here's another piece of socialist propaganda. It demonstrates a
phenomenon that is commonplace in science (I can tell you why), has
been known for nearly 200 years, but it is the basis of the greenhouse
effect.



And I know you will not look at it. What does it feel like to be
afraid to look at something in case it might show you to be wrong?
It's not an experience I've ever had. But I guess the people who
refused to look through Galileo's telescope felt exactly the same as
you.

RB
Anna
2010-09-09 18:52:38 UTC
Permalink
On Sep 9, 11:27 am, Richard Burnham <***@xemaps.com> wrote Socialist
Propaganda:

Like I said, let's talk about it in 40 years. When all your global
warming is proven false (although we don't even need to wait 40 years
with all the scandals about fraudulent data coming out with
Climategate).

In the mean time just enjoy all the snow (of your nonexistent Ice
Age). Perhaps you can spend your summer vacation next year ice skating
on the Thames.
DekaNttuB
2010-09-09 18:55:28 UTC
Permalink
Come on just read what he constantly posts.

He is a sick old man, with no real life of his own.
Richard Burnham
2010-09-09 19:50:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Like I said, let's talk about it in 40 years. When all your global
warming is proven false (although we don't even need to wait 40 years
with all the scandals about fraudulent data coming out with
Climategate).
So point me to the fraudulent data. from 'climategate'. So far, no-one
has produced any. But the video you posted had a faked graph. So you
are a fraud. Or more likely self-deceiving.

By the way, the news report you posted was wrong. The result was that
melting was less than originally measured, because the calibration of
the measurements was wrong. The paper does not say anything about how
the measurements compare with any prediction - this is rather an
important distinction.

RB
[snip]
Richard Burnham
2010-09-09 18:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anna
Post by Richard Burnham
Post by Anna
Why wait another 40 years to prove that yet again you are WRONG!
So take your socialist crap somewhere else!
pseudo-Anna,
I'm glad to see that you are paying some attention to the scientific
literature, even if the link you provide is not in any way evidence
against anthropogenic global warming.
Perhaps you are not aware that the evidence for AGW comes not from
climate scientists, but from physicists. They have known since the
1890s that adding CO2 to the atmosphere will warm the earth. This was
long before Hansen, Mann et al. were born. There is no reasonable
doubt about this. What people did not realise until around the 50s or
60s is how much CO2 humans were adding to the atmosphere - currently
around 2 parts per million, on the way to doubling the CO2
concentration by the end of this century.
I do realise that the Republican party is against science on the
grounds that it is 'socialist'. The laws of physics do not care
whether you call them 'socialist' or not. But they are making sure
that your ugly, stupid, ignorant ass will get warmed, whether you bury
your head in the sand or not.
What the climate scientists are trying to do is not persuade you AGW
is true, but try to work out what the likely consequences will be. For
that, I think they should receive thanks (and proper scientific
criticism where they are wrong), not abuse and threats.
Here is a good video:http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm09/lectures/lecture_videos/A23A.shtml
I realise you will not look at it though, as (a) it involves some
intellectual effort, and (b) as it's real science, there is a danger
of your mind being changed.
RB
Let's talk about this in forty years. By then you will probably go
back to predicting a New Ice Age.
The Left has never let continuously being wrong bother them.
And clearly you do not let being ignorant bother you.

Here's another piece of socialist propaganda. It demonstrates a
phenomenon that is commonplace in science (I can tell you why), has
been known for nearly 200 years, but it is the basis of the greenhouse
effect.

http://youtu.be/Ot5n9m4whaw

And I know you will not look at it. What does it feel like to be
afraid to look at something in case it might show you to be wrong?
It's not an experience I've ever had. But I guess the people who
refused to look through Galileo's telescope felt exactly the same as
you.

RB
Tom Sacold
2010-09-09 18:30:52 UTC
Permalink
It is a very well run and well attended event.

Prested Hall and the clubs involved should be congratulated on their ongoing
success and not criticised.
Loading...