Bishop Hill Time Out can't find the place
Nov 8, 2013 Climate: WG2 Media This is a guest post by Katabasis.
Time Out published an online article yesterday entitled 'Err, Thames Barrier not really working as barrier'.
Some mild flooding took place at various places along the Thames on Monday, as it so often does. The article depicts numerous pictures from somewhere on the Thames that it describes as looking "pretty scary". A picture of rising water 'at the gates' is sure to have a psychological impact on many of us, myself included:
Another picture paints an apparently grim scenario for an intrepid cyclist:
In the second paragraph the author states, "OK we’re not talking apocalyptic, and we don’t want to scaremonger". Oh but you DO want to scaremonger, don't you? Planet of the Apes is mentioned for some reason followed in the third paragraph by the obligatory (get your sick bags ready) reference to how "this risk will increase as the effects of global warming become more pronounced".
Worse, to truly compound the horror, we are told that this is taking place near the Tate Modern. Oh the horror!
Now if you didn't follow the hyperlink given in the article when the Tate Modern is mentioned, you might go away with the distinct impression that the pictures in the article depict what is happening there.
The only problem is that the pictures included are several miles away from the Tate Modern.
I recognised the location as it is in fact my stomping ground - Greenwich. The pictures originate from the walkway next to the Royal Naval College. It floods with such regularity that it barely warrants comment, so why is Time Out trying to whip up spurious unprecedented, or a "one in 1,000 chance" flooding event (yes, they wrote that) on the basis of completing misleading pictures accompanying an equally misleading narrative?
Is it because what actually happened at the Tate Modern on Monday was, well how do we put it, a damp squib?
If you're easily disturbed, look away now:;)
Reader Comments (35)
This 1 in 1000 chance they mention, is that 1 in 1000 high tides?
Last time I went to the Louvre, I couldn’t get into the gallery with the Greek vases because it was stuffed full of statues from the lower ground floor. I asked how long the gallery would be closed, and why, and was told: “a long time”. You see, Paris suffers serious flooding from the Seine every hundred years, and the last time was in 1914...
For dramagreens it's all about PR ... and stuff the truth
... As the recent article in WUWT points out.
Stewgreen love the term dramagreens it is so perfect.
Stewgreen love the term dramagreens it is so perfect.
I lived near the Thames and would walk back from school along the towpath in Chiswick. It would flood with regularity on the equinoxes or spring tides. Nothing much changed after the barrier was built because it is only closed in exceptional circumstances.
So in forty years of 'global warming' nothing has changed!
New study of gauge data suggests sea level rise is currently only 1mm pa:
More at:
The Hockey Schtick, Saturday, September 21, 2013
I worked on the construction of the barrier in the 70s and the levels shown are no better or worse in that location than they were then. They only close the barrier when they expect a surge beyond acceptable limits and therefore it is most likely that it was open when the pictures were taken. So another piece of alarmist crap written by idiots.
Stewgreen,
'For dramagreens it's all about PR' - what a fantastic term you have just coined. If you are content, I intend to use it frequently.
Geting back to the Thames. Talk a stroll along the river bank at Chiswick and note the flood barriers installed in pubs and residences. Really old barriers; like older than the recent cAGW scare so beloved of the modern dramagreen (first use right there!).
Strand on the Green, Chiswick, 1930s:
http://www.british-towns.net/england/southeastern/greater-london/hounslow/strand-on-the-green/album/flood-water
It has always flooded.
I blame the Scottish.
If it wasn't for them getting rid of their glaciers, those living in the south wouldn't have such a problem
It costs a lot of money to open and close the Thames Barrier, and the authorities keep quiet about the real reason in case the Greens find out (possible contamination of the land by increased levels of dihydrogen monoxide).
Planet of the Apes always struck me as inconsistent with The Day of The Triffids.
A good wash through to remove the rubbish filling the Tate Modern sounds like a plus to me.
I wonder why the Romans and people in Medieval times built London on a flood plain containing lots of marshes.
TerryS - Yes, my fault. If only there was a 1/2 a mile of ice above my house like there was 12,000 years ago, London would be high and dry and my conscience would be clear. The return of the Rannoch Ice sheet might make the school run more difficult, even with the landy, and I would probably have to have a very long extension to the woodstove flue. But I am sure the stories about having to move to the south of France are just alarmist exaggeration, and we could manage fine...
Nov 8, 2013 at 10:04 AM | Registered Commenter lapogus
When they [the greens] do find out about that dangerous chemical they will want to ban it. Ban CO2, Ban H2O. We'll have to call them browns soon because photosynthesis won't be working for much longer.
woodsy42
Excellent, I endorse that.
In Related Posts under the article:
Are we now to presume that CAGW causes water mains to burst??
@Phillip Bratby
...I wonder why the Romans and people in Medieval times built London on a flood plain containing lots of marshes...
They built on the high bits. As London became more attractive and land prices started going up, people started building on the low bits...
Link : to that excellent post on WUWT
....sums up what I have been thinking for a while and explains the blatant lies
- Media DramaGreening it's all dirty PR .... and stuff the truth
"Thames Barrier not really working as barrier'." runs the headline
..well not it wouldn't would it if it was in the down position ?
...due to this being a normal harmless high tide surge
It's kind of cool.
Well said,
I like to visit ancient settlements and sites of historic interest including sites of Roman towns past and 'present' - always on a defensive position - look to the old town centres - they don't flood, naturally they built them with river peak storm flows in mind, surveying the land and recognizing those past high water marks.
Why do we seem to have lost the old habits and ways?
There is no mystery however.
It's not global warming - it's land use but also, including natural subsidence, post glaciation readjustment and heavy buildings on softer rock formations - clay terrain. Building on unsuitable land, the disappearance of garden plots [affects runoff], population pressure - London has run out of available land - so, build anywhere!..... Also, greed and stupidity, grossly negligent, laxity on behalf of council planning departments - where money and 'presents' are always gratefully received and "I'll be retired by the time the chickens come home to roost."
As usual in Britain, mankind is at fault all the way but it sure ain't the weather's fault.
What is it with flooding and cyclists? Still, at least someone hasn't yet produced a canoe.
As for the Tate Modern: New targeted Thames flood warnings
stewgreen,
With regards to barrier operations, if they rais it to prevent smaller and smaller floods some would interpret that increased activity as proof global warming is drowning London.
The Thames Barrier will outlive the numpty who wrote the Time Out article - it's not planned to replace it until 2070.
Any minor flooding in London is a matter of policy; it's cheaper to let it happen than it is to close the barrier.
The Daily Mash:
Rest of UK excited about underwater London
'We're AAAALL doomed, Captain Mainwaring....!
DOOMED, I tell ye....!'
DRAMAGREENS!!!
Fantastic!!! What a great term, fits perfectly!
'...intrepid cyclist...'
One has to wonder why the *rseh*le is trying to ride along there, when there is a bone dry path just above it..?
Trying to make a point, is he..?
Reminds me of the *rseh*les you see on bikes in Cambridge in the snow... 'We are CYCLISTS and are therefore entitled to wobble along at walking pace in the snow, endangering ourselves and other road users....'
Not being a regular Time Out reader or site visitor - I don't know if it's regular to byline an article with the author(s) name(s).
When I see stuff like this my PR beeper goes off.
In this particular case I'm biased (jaded even...) by having waded through the Environment Agency's press and document releases about the enhancement of London's flood defences that they've had the 350 PR boys 'n girls tootling about for the last couple of months.
I've commented about it elsewhere on BH - but it bears repeating that £100(0?)s millions has been lined up / budgeted for works to enhance the flood defences of London - the big selling point in all the collateral documentation is AGW sea level rise The EA though, AFAIKS (and I've looked) see fit at present - not to make the technical data available and to goose up how they are protecting the capital from global warming... cue Munch's "Scream", with Jaws sountrack.
So I smell a rat here or a bunch of them in Millbank Tower and Horizon House out on an astroturfing expedition after the failure of the original PR twattering on the subject a few weeks back.
@Tomo - I am not paid to do this research , but I can see she doesn't seem to be fulltime Greenpeace, but she has previous EA story- "Give it some welly: Environment Agency warns of London flooding Friday May 24th 2013 in News"
Guess that fits with "we don’t want to scaremonger..."oh and the negative response has caused her to tone down her headline to
- I'll take a couple of extra flights in her honour
stewgreen
thanks for that - the previous article has the expected paw prints :-) - I still can't see any author attribution from here (Firefox browser) - I wanted to run the name against EA<>LinkedIn (where all the corporate communications professionals hang out)
Wish I was paid for research too.... I'm still conducting a desultory hunt for the EA's technical document for London flood defences - like I said - it wasn't directly searchable by title a couple of weeks back - but was quoted across the EA's PR output. The EA withholding data is a sure sign that they're "up to no good" ;-/
Ah - Catastrophic Climate Change Adaption at work. Really a pity only the wealthiest western self-hating nations can afford to toss money around on this nonsense.
I have a vague recollection that some of the tube/underground stations in the lower parts of London have flood barriers. Can anyone confirm or deny? I thought about their presence/absense when New York was flooded by a tidal surge.
Apropos flooding in general. When my parents retired they moved to a small village in Suffolk. Their house, as were all the others, was on the upper side of the appropriately named Low Road. Some bright spark in the local authority decided to approve house building on the low side. When the valley, inevitably, flooded one winter, the water came right to the edge of the road but no further. All the new houses flooded, none of old houses. Observation and experience are funny things.
Philip Bratby: "I wonder why the Romans and people in Medieval times built London on a flood plain containing lots of marshes."
The Romans actually had a bit of a track record, before ever they got to London. The seven hills of Rome were essentially islands in a malarial swamp and the Roman forum, built on one of the low-lying bits, has regularly flooded.