<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><i><font size="+1"><b>October 30, 2020</b></font></i></p>
[time to vote]<br>
<b>Gen Z, Millennial voters embrace activism and voting, as youth
turnout surges ahead of Election Day</b><br>
By Michelle Ye Hee Lee<br>
Oct. 29, 2020<br>
- -<br>
Major social movements driven by young activists around climate
change, gun safety and Black Lives Matter protests have led to an
explosion of civic awareness among younger Americans, who are on
track to turn out to vote in record numbers this election and could
play a pivotal role in some key battleground states.<br>
<br>
Data on early voters and recent polling suggest eligible voters
under 30 could break their historic 2008 turnout, when it peaked at
48 percent when Barack Obama was elected as president. New data
suggest they may be on track to sustain their dramatic turnout in
the 2018 midterms, when they more than doubled their rate of voting
compared to the prior midterm election...<br>
- - <br>
Drew Galloway, executive director of the nonpartisan youth voter
turnout group MOVE Texas, said his group is “helping new voters
understand that civic life is a cycle: protest, testify, vote, back
out to protest, back out to testify, back out to vote.”...<br>
- -<br>
“Although your vote might not directly affect you, it might directly
affect somebody else,” she said. “And when those of us who are
marginalized get hit the hardest, we all feel the effects of that,
because we truly are all connected — and that’s why it’s so
important to vote.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/youth-early-vote/2020/10/29/506db1b6-1889-11eb-aeec-b93bcc29a01b_story.html">https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/youth-early-vote/2020/10/29/506db1b6-1889-11eb-aeec-b93bcc29a01b_story.html</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[well known]<br>
<b>Climate Change Is Central to California’s Wildfires</b><br>
Conservative pundits who tout land management as the main issue fail
to see the big picture<br>
<br>
By Rebecca Miller, Katharine Mach, Chris Field on October 29, 2020<br>
<br>
As the toll from California’s wildfires grows higher year after
year, the state’s future appears fiery and hazy with smoke. For
conservative columnists like Ben Shapiro, Niall Ferguson and Tyler
O’Neil, it’s clear who is responsible: California Democrats. In
recent opinion pieces, they acknowledge that climate change might
play a role in these fires, but they blame Democratic leadership for
exacerbating fuel buildups through poor land management. As proof,
they reference a study from early this year in Nature
Sustainability.<br>
<br>
We wrote that study. These columnists are wrong.<br>
<br>
Their opinion pieces represent a dangerous form of climate
denialism, one that recognizes the value of climate
adaptation—adapting to life under a changing climate—but
purposefully misdirects by refusing to acknowledge the critical
importance of limiting the amount of future climate change.<br>
<br>
The science is clear. Climate change plays an undeniable role in the
unprecedented wildfires of recent years. More than half of the acres
burned each year in the western United States can be attributed to
climate change. The number of dry, warm, and windy autumn
days—perfect wildfire weather—in California has more than doubled
since the 1980s.<br>
<br>
Without aggressive reduction of greenhouse gasses, forests in
Northern California, Oregon and Washington could experience an
increase of more than 78 percent in area burned by 2050. Governor
Gavin Newsom correctly characterized recent wildfires as a “climate
damn emergency.” It’s almost unfathomable to imagine a situation in
which the 2020 wildfire season becomes a regular occurrence or even
a mild year, but that’s exactly what could happen in our future.<br>
<br>
We must dramatically reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Otherwise,
in a few decades, we might recall the more than four million acres
of California burned so far this year—that have already shattered
the prior record, set in 2018—as a relatively light wildfire season.
That prospect, rooted in science and devastating to life and
property, is unacceptable.<br>
<br>
But we must also prepare for reality with strong measures to reduce
our already heightened and increasing risk. Resilience will require
a broad portfolio of actions, from the household to the federal
level, from emergency preparedness to disaster-resistant building
codes. For wildfires, fuel treatments like prescribed burns have
become a salient example.<br>
<br>
Fuel treatments reduce the buildup of vegetation that has resulted
from nearly a century of fire suppression and from the
criminalization of traditional Indigenous controlled burning. Twenty
million acres of forests across California could now benefit from
fuel treatments like prescribed burns, purposely-set fires intended
to safely reduce fuel overgrowth. However, inadequate funding,
limited prescribed burn crews, and dangerous weather conditions
remain barriers to conducting prescribed burns.<br>
<br>
As the owner of 57 percent of forests in California, the federal
government has an enormous role to play. The U.S. Forest Service
aspires to treat 500,000 acres per year, but is unlikely to reach
that target given limited funding from Congress. However, new
legislation could help: a new bill from Ron Wyden (D–Ore.) could
guarantee $600 million each year for prescribed burns across
federal, state and private lands.<br>
<br>
Meanwhile, legislators in Sacramento have passed dozens of bills to
address wildfire risk in the last few years, including six new laws
on prescribed burns. These laws and recent executive actions address
several of the barriers we found in our study, including the need
for liability protection and programs for training and public
education. Last year, Governor Newsom also declared a state of
emergency to fast-track 35 fuel-reduction projects that would
protect 200 at-risk communities.<br>
<br>
But fuel treatments alone are not the solution; we cannot disregard
that our contributions to climate change continue to aggravate our
risk. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an essential part of
protecting our communities and ecosystems in the future. By
exclusively focusing on fuel treatments, these conservative
columnists ignore the ongoing influence of climate change and
politicize critical action for fuel treatments that protect our
communities and ecosystems.<br>
<br>
In the September 29 debate, two years after recommending that
Californians rake the forest, President Trump deflected on
commenting on the role of climate change in recent wildfires.
Instead, he told us, “Every year I get the call: ‘California is
burning! California is burning!” If that was cleaned, if you had
good forest management, you wouldn’t be getting those calls.”<br>
<br>
Ignoring climate change won’t prevent climate disasters. From
California wildfires to Gulf Coast floods, we already experience
their effects. Arguments that purposefully misconstrue the impacts
of climate change on our ecosystems and communities increase our
peril.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-is-central-to-californias-wildfires/">https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-is-central-to-californias-wildfires/</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
[cough, cough]<br>
<b>Soot particles influence global warming more than previously
assumed</b><br>
by Simone Ulmer, Swiss National Supercomputing Centre<br>
OCTOBER 29, 2020<br>
- -<br>
Burning wood, petroleum products or other organic materials releases
soot particles into the atmosphere that consist mainly of carbon.
This soot is considered the second most important anthropogenic
climate forcing agent after carbon dioxide. In the atmosphere or as
deposits on snow and ice surfaces, soot particles absorb the
short-wave radiation of the sun and thus contribute to global
warming.<br>
<br>
In the atmosphere, soot particles also have an indirect effect on
the climate by altering the formation, development and properties of
clouds. A research team led by Ulrike Lohmann, professor at the
Institute for Atmosphere and Climate at ETH Zurich, has now for the
first time investigated how two specific types of soot particles
influence clouds and, in turn, the climate: on the one hand, soot
aerosols that age due to ozone and, on the other, those that age due
to sulfuric acid...<br>
- -<br>
<b>Changed cloud formation leads to warming</b><br>
<p>Simulations of ozone-aged soot show that when the carbon dioxide
content of the atmosphere doubles compared to the pre-industrial
era, fewer low clouds form. Considerably more cloud droplets are
initially formed by ozone aging of soot. However, their high
concentration leads to more cloud top cooling causing more dry air
being mixed in from above. "These clouds then evaporate more
quickly, especially in a warmer climate," explains Lohmann. "In a
warmer climate, the air mixed in also has a lower relative
humidity". Due to the faster evaporation, less low-lying clouds
remain, and more short-wave radiation reaches the earth and warms
it.</p>
<p>graphic
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2020/1-sootparticle.jpg">https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/hires/2020/1-sootparticle.jpg</a><br>
</p>
The soot particles aged by sulfuric acid, on the other hand, cause
more ice crystals to form and make cirrus clouds optically thicker,
i.e. they are less permeable to radiation. They extend as far as the
tropopause, which is located at an altitude of 10 to 18 kilometers,
and also linger longer in higher regions of the atmosphere. As a
result, cirrus clouds absorb more of the long-wave thermal radiation
emitted by the Earth and allow less of it to escape into space. The
warming effect of cirrus clouds increases and exacerbates global
warming: When the carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere doubles
compared to pre-industrial times, both types of soot aging together
lead to a 0.4 to 0.5 degrees C increase in global warming. As a
result, the water cycle will further accelerate and global
precipitation will further increase, the researchers write.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://phys.org/news/2020-10-soot-particles-global-previously-assumed.html">https://phys.org/news/2020-10-soot-particles-global-previously-assumed.html</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[VICE fashion for the future]<br>
<b>Designers are Already Making Clothes for an Increasingly Hostile
Future</b><br>
Fireproof trousers, Mars-proof jackets and clothes made out of
copper: here's what we might be wearing in the decades to come.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/epddxa/designers-making-clothes-for-increasingly-hostile-future">https://www.vice.com/en/article/epddxa/designers-making-clothes-for-increasingly-hostile-future</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
[extreme doom counter argument]<br>
By Eilidh Duffy<br>
Oct 26 2020<br>
<b>Ok Doomers: Why you don't need to lose faith in fighting the
climate crisis</b><br>
Climate doomism helps absolutely no one. Here two experts respond to
common arguments put forward by those with a fatalistic outlook of
the future. Yes you should be outraged, but there's hope too.<br>
Just this year we’ve seen natural disasters of biblical proportions:
fires and floods, swarms of locusts and, to top it off, one whopping
pandemic. But no, this is not the Wrath of God, it’s the climate
crisis. As we live through this ongoing nightmare, depression and
anxiety are, unsurprising, on the rise. So too is climate doomism, a
growing outlook that sees no hope for avoiding climate catastrophe,
and so no point in fighting it.<br>
<br>
As Timothy Morton explains in his book Hyperobjects: Philosophy and
Ecology After the End of the World, climate change is something
which is so vast and abstract that it is impossible for the human
mind to fully grasp. Because of this many people see the problem as
too large to deal with on a personal level. Among them is
sustainability leadership professor at the University of Cumbria,
Jem Bendell who, in 2018, published the paper Deep Adaptation. In
this, Jem outlines the latest climate science and finds it so
alarming that he sees no hope for humanity, predicting that by 2028
we will see a complete breakdown of human society. It’s pretty
gloomy stuff: “You won't know whether to stay or go. You will fear
being violently killed before starving to death,” he has also
written.<br>
That’s not to say Jem believes in total apocalypse. The academic
believes that this abrupt point, the cliff edge of the climate
crisis, will be the start of real action. But when Jem published
Deep Adaptation, he unwittingly ushered in the newest cult of the
climate crisis, the ‘climate doomers’.<br>
<br>
Climate doomers see no hope for the future. They see no alternative
but climate disaster bringing war, famine and disease. They have
totally given up. And now, it seems, doomism is becoming more
mainstream.<br>
<br>
A call out on Instagram to see who among my own circle of
acquaintances were indulging in doomism showed that a surprising
number of people were, or had, or were beginning to consider it.<br>
But two people who don’t think despair is the answer are author and
activist Alastair McIntosh and scholar and educator Elin Kelsey.
Alastair’s latest book Riders on the Storm: The Climate Crisis and
the Survival of Being interrogates the latest climate science and,
by weaving together science, politics, psychology and spirituality,
discusses alternative ways of dealing with climate change. Elin’s
new book Hope Matters: Why Changing the Way We Think Is Critical to
Solving the Environmental Crisis highlights the importance of
retaining and harnessing hope in tackling the climate crisis.<br>
<br>
Both were kind enough to respond to some common statements made by
climate doomers. While doomism is an understandable reaction to the
crisis we’re faced with, both Alastair and Elin don’t think it’s
particularly useful to humankind.<br>
<br>
“Any hope concerning the future of the climate is delusional.”<br>
Alastair McIntosh: Hope about the climate is not delusional. The
science does not support the view that human beings are likely to go
extinct anytime soon. The science does say that if we act quickly we
can start to reduce impact on the planet and adapt to what is
coming.<br>
<br>
Elin Kelsey: Feelings of hopelessness are caused not only by the
seriousness of this crisis but by the way climate change issues are
covered in the media. Climate change news is almost exclusively
reported as bad news and we are exposed to more of this than at any
other time in human history.<br>
<br>
To counter this feeling, psychologists say it’s important to see how
our individual actions make a collective positive impact. Research
demonstrates that when the news focuses on success stories about
actions ordinary<br>
people are taking in local contexts we can relate to, we feel more
enthusiastic and optimistic about our capacity to tackle climate
change.<br>
<br>
“Because we're already past multiple tipping points and positive
feedback loops have begun, soon there will be shortages of resources
and large areas of the world will become uninhabitable. We’ll have
more and more extreme weather scenarios, which will then lead to
mass migration. Countries will begin to enforce borders in more
extreme ways that will look like some form of zombie apocalypse.”<br>
AM: This is partly true [in terms of being past multiple tipping
points] but such speculation exceeds the science of the IPCC (The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). There is a danger in
exceeding the science and claiming, for example, that migration or
conflict is caused by climate change when in fact this is only one
factor. By allowing a single issue such as climate change to colour
the multiple other issues that drive migration and conflict leads us
into unreality.<br>
<br>
What is needed in such situations – where multiple factors, of which
climate change is one, are driving these threats to our humanity –
is a deepening of that humanity. The greatest priority is that as a
society we learn compassion for one another so we can support each
other in whatever is to come.<br>
<br>
EK: Framing climate change as an impending catastrophe stokes the
fires of “climate doomism”. Acceptance of what is, is not the same
as fatalism about what comes next. Fatalistic forecasts are being
co-opted and used for ulterior motives. Climate doom, according to
Michael Mann, is the new climate war – and it’s just as dangerous as
the old one, which focused on the denial of the science. In a 2019
interview for the Guardian, Mann says that propagating frightening
environmental narratives “leads people down a path of despair and
hopelessness and finally inaction, which actually leads us to the
same place as outright climate-change denialism.”<br>
<br>
“People are indoctrinated into a system of capitalism, particularly
in the West, which plays on people's greed. Most people don't think
about community and the greater good of humanity, only themselves.”<br>
AM: I see capitalism as a system that is imposed upon us but also as
an emergent property of our own greed and lack of connection. You
cannot blame only the system without looking at the components of
the system. We all contribute to capitalism whenever we invest in a
pension, have savings in the bank or shop around for the best deal.<br>
<br>
We must look at the wider system in which we are held and start to
create space for alternatives. This brings us back to our humanity.
We must be willing to behave in ways (and adjust our buying
behaviour in ways) that ceases to give capitalism what it needs to
survive.<br>
We can envisage a world that is different but in order to bring it
into being, we must take action. So where do you start? You start by
taking action from where you stand. You start by going down and
helping out your local food bank. You start by getting involved in
your local nature reserve. If in doubt in what to do with your life,
feed the hungry – literally, or metaphorically.<br>
<br>
EK: This statement simply isn’t true. In response to mounting anger
and frustration with social injustice, inequality, economic
disparity and inaction on the climate emergency, ordinary people are
coming together in unprecedented numbers and are actively changing
global political cultures. Many of them are young. Almost 42% of the
world’s population is 25 or under. In Asia and Latin America (where
65% of the world’s people live) a quarter of the population is under
15, and in Africa, that figure rises to 41%. Young people are rising
up against extreme social and political inequalities to fight
together for justice and equality in numbers never before seen. 2019
will be remembered as the year youth-driven climate justice marches
spread around the world. Those marches sparked so many climate
emergency declarations that by the end of that same year, one in ten
people on the entire planet were living in a place that had
committed to decreasing greenhouse gas emissions.<br>
<br>
Feeling furious and upset at deforestation, coal-fired power plants
and politicians who fail to lead urgently needed climate reforms, or
angry that you’ve inherited a screwed-up situation from previous
generations, is justified. Outrage shows you know what’s going on
and you know what absolutely must change. Reaching the point of
‘enough is enough’ spurs us to stand up for the things we believe
in.<br>
<br>
“To switch over to any energy consuming system that is more
environmentally friendly would cause so much pollution that it is
pointless to even try.”<br>
AM: Here’s an example which counters this narrative: We live in a
Victorian terraced house in Govan, Glasgow and our domestic carbon
footprint used to be 5.4 tonnes per year. In 2013 we installed solar
panels on the roof and<br>
an air source heat pump to heat the house and consequently our
carbon footprint has fallen by 63% over those seven years. We did
all of that at a cost of £7,000, the cost of a good secondhand car.
That is the kind of thing that is possible if the will and means are
there. So no, even on a small scale switching to a more
environmentally friendly system is possible and is not going to make
the environment less well-off.<br>
<br>
EK: This statement lacks specificity and context and without these
vital criteria it only serves to make us think the situation is
hopeless. It creates the daunting sense that all of the hard work
lies ahead. It’s important to focus on specific contexts,
time-stamped content and emerging evidence-based trends. We are in
the midst of a global energy transition. For example, on 7 October,
2020 Bloomberg Green reported: “NextEra Energy Inc., the world’s
biggest provider of wind and solar energy, is now more valuable than
oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp., once the largest public company on
Earth.”<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://i-d.vice.com/en_us/article/epdgwk/climate-doomism-is-on-the-rise-but-heres-why-to-still-hope">https://i-d.vice.com/en_us/article/epdgwk/climate-doomism-is-on-the-rise-but-heres-why-to-still-hope</a><br>
- - <br>
[author Elin Kelsey]<br>
<b>Hope Matters: Why Changing the Way We Think Is Critical to
Solving the Environmental Crisis</b><br>
Hope Matters boldly breaks through the narrative of doom and gloom
to show why evidence-based hope, not fear, is our most powerful tool
for change. Kelsey shares real-life examples of positive climate
news that reveal the power of our mindsets to shape reality, the
resilience of nature, and the transformative possibilities of
individual and collective action. And she demonstrates how we can
build on positive trends to work toward a sustainable and just
future, before it’s too late.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.amazon.com/Hope-Matters-Changing-Critical-Environmental/dp/1771647779/ref=sr_1_1">https://www.amazon.com/Hope-Matters-Changing-Critical-Environmental/dp/1771647779/ref=sr_1_1</a><br>
- -<br>
[Author Alastair McIntosh]<br>
<b>Riders on the Storm: The Climate Crisis and the Survival of Being</b><br>
Writer, scholar and broadcaster Alastair McIntosh sums up the
present knowledge and shows that conventional solutions are not
enough. In rejecting the blind alleys of climate change denial,
exaggeration and false optimism, he offers a scintillating
discussion of ways forward. Weaving together science, politics,
psychology and spirituality, this guide examines what it takes to
make us riders on the storm.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.amazon.com/Riders-Storm-Climate-Crisis-Survival/dp/1780276397/ref=sr_1_1">https://www.amazon.com/Riders-Storm-Climate-Crisis-Survival/dp/1780276397/ref=sr_1_1</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[Military in the Arctic]<br>
<b>Can Climate Change Undermine Nuclear Deterrence</b><br>
Oct 28, 2020<br>
Council on Strategic Risks (CSR)<br>
As part of a new series of explainer videos, the Council on
Strategic Risks (CSR) posed a series of questions about the Arctic
region to four leading national security experts with different
perspectives in a recent video interview. Together, their diverse
answers may help us to better understand the complex linkages across
climate change, Arctic sea melt and new sea routes, prospects for
conflict, competition, and cooperation within the global order, and
new risks associated with nuclear weapons. This is the full version
of the video.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsq7lEz7kU8&feature=emb_logo">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsq7lEz7kU8&feature=emb_logo</a><br>
<br>
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
[Digging back into the internet news archive]<br>
<font size="+1"><b>On this day in the history of global warming -
October 30, 2003 </b></font><br>
<br>
The US Senate rejects the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act
of 2003 in a 55-43 vote. The bill failed after an all-out assault on
the legislation aided by ExxonMobil-funded "researcher" Willie Soon.
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/31/us/senate-defeats-climate-bill-but-proponents-see-silver-lining.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/31/us/senate-defeats-climate-bill-but-proponents-see-silver-lining.html</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://youtu.be/eJFZ88EH6i4">http://youtu.be/eJFZ88EH6i4</a><br>
- -<br>
[who is Willie Soon?]<br>
<b>Soon is a prominent climate change skeptic who has received much
of his research funding from the oil and gas industry.</b><br>
<blockquote>"I have received scientific research grants from
Exxon-Mobil Foundation, Southern Company and the Charles G. Koch
Foundation for my work on various topics, including scientific
research on the Sun-climate connection.” <br>
</blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.desmogblog.com/willie-soon">https://www.desmogblog.com/willie-soon</a></p>
<p>- -<br>
</p>
[See also video of Soon]<br>
<b>The Climate Change Hoax, with Professor Willie Soon at Camp
Constitution 7-3-17</b><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk&feature=emb_logo">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YMttEhtgpk&feature=emb_logo</a><br>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>/-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------/<br>
</p>
<br>
/Archive of Daily Global Warming News <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html"><https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html></a>
/<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a><br>
<br>
/To receive daily mailings - click to Subscribe <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request"><mailto:subscribe@theClimate.Vote?subject=Click%20SEND%20to%20process%20your%20request></a>
to news digest./<br>
<br>
*** Privacy and Security:*This mailing is text-only. It does not
carry images or attachments which may originate from remote
servers. A text-only message can provide greater privacy to the
receiver and sender.<br>
By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used for
democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for commercial
purposes. Messages have no tracking software.<br>
To subscribe, email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote"><mailto:contact@theclimate.vote></a>
with subject subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject: unsubscribe<br>
Also you may subscribe/unsubscribe at <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a><br>
Links and headlines assembled and curated by Richard Pauli for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://TheClimate.Vote/"><http://TheClimate.Vote/></a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels. List membership is confidential and
records are scrupulously restricted to this mailing list.<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>