The boogey man of climate change - Page 87 - Survivalist Forum
Survivalist Forum

Advertise Here

Go Back   Survivalist Forum > >
Articles Classifieds Donations Gallery Groups Links Store Survival Files


Notices

Manmade and Natural Disasters Drought, Diseases, Earthquakes, Riots, Wars

Advertise Here
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ashen Horse Update Bret F Books, Movies & Stories 8 06-15-2019 02:49 PM
U.S. Energy Dept balks at Trump request for names on climate change woodzman Political News and Discussion 56 12-22-2016 08:23 AM
trade war starting with Climate Change? Justme11 General Discussion 27 11-21-2016 01:29 PM
Mountain Man you out there? : ) MayDay Books, Movies & Stories 12 10-26-2016 06:07 PM

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-11-2019, 01:44 PM
ajole ajole is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 8,769
Thanks: 6,797
Thanked 19,342 Times in 6,252 Posts
Default



Advertise Here

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiberius View Post
Oh, so the weather is wrong then?
Holy crap. Weather again?


Quote:
Originally Posted by tiberius View Post
About an inch every 8 years.
More of a long term problem, or a medium-term one, if you live in Florida.
Bull crap. And crazy idea....humans can relocate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Old Coach View Post
Between 3 and 9 inches per century, by their own data. Deep down below the noise level if you ask me.
Absolutely. We are still using docks and sea walls built over a century ago. No issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamAshley View Post
Not arguing actually. I have no desire to convince you. Simply sharing information.
No, you’re sharing complete and total BS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loves_Chickens View Post
You're right, and it sucks that we have to choose between denial (R) and economic destruction (D).
It sucks that you really think that’s what the (R) is doing. We aren’t denying change, and it’s an immature strawman argument for you to keep calling it “denial”.
We are saying it’s not as bad as “they” and YOU are saying, and that they/you cannot prove humans are causing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loves_Chickens View Post
but then why say climate change isn't a real thing? It's odd to take credit for progress towards a problem they say doesn't exist. Literally the definition of having you cake and eating it too.
Again...strawman. No one is actually saying that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Loves_Chickens View Post
Do you have any science pointing to Humans having a little influence on the climate?
Do YOU have any? Beyond the extremely biased and questionable inferences made by the climate agenda police?


Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamAshley View Post
Put it to a foot and see what goes blue.
OMG!

Sometime in the next 100 years, someone should DO SUMTHINGGGGGGNG!

Like maybe move their butt off the beach, or put another layer of concrete on top of the docks and breakwaters.

FAR cheaper and FAR more efficient to just handle that, than to FORCE people to change an entire planets’ way of life.

But hey, what would a leftist tool know about freedom or economic efficiency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crackshot View Post
The problem is that you guys sell this as a world wide apocalypse but the truth is that if people are too stupid to move a little further inland over the course of a hundred years then they deserve to be drowned.
Straight up truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiberius View Post
That's the point, millions of people will move elsewhere. Build a sea wall

Another consideration is that many cities, airports, roads etc. have to be built again elsewhere.
Taxes!
See....another silly comment showing “you don’t have a clue about reality”.

Cities, airports and roads are going to be built, rebuilt and changed over the next century, regardless of all of that. Those taxes were going to be collected no matter what.

But you want to reduce the income available to produce those taxes by either taxing for other reasons that may not even do one thing to solve the real issues, or by destroying economies by forcing them to use more expensive fuels and methods that will put them out of business.

All while China, India and other places keep making more of those scary supposedly climate changing products you are so scared of.

Sorry....the real world doesn’t work like you think. Or you know better, and you are a troll.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to ajole For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 02:04 PM
Crackshot's Avatar
Crackshot Crackshot is offline
Joe McCarthy was Right!
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Alabama by choice
Posts: 4,583
Thanks: 7,100
Thanked 8,799 Times in 2,817 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tiberius View Post
That's the point, millions of people will move elsewhere. Build a sea wall

Another consideration is that many cities, airports, roads etc. have to be built again elsewhere.
Taxes!
The thing here is that it is natural for people and even cities to move through the course of history. Just look at Detroit if you need an example. IF the earth heats up that will create more usable land as well. It isn't all negative and it isn't the apocalypse people have been conditioned to think it is.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to Crackshot For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 02:23 PM
Loves_Chickens's Avatar
Loves_Chickens Loves_Chickens is offline
Prepared
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 351
Thanks: 102
Thanked 298 Times in 164 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajole View Post



It sucks that you really think that’s what the (R) is doing. We aren’t denying change, and it’s an immature strawman argument for you to keep calling it “denial”.
We are saying it’s not as bad as “they” and YOU are saying, and that they/you cannot prove humans are causing it.



Again...strawman. No one is actually saying that.




Do YOU have any? Beyond the extremely biased and questionable inferences made by the climate agenda police?


When did I say it was going to be a huge giant catastrophe? It's not up to me to prove anything, you shouldn't be looking to me for answers. If I make a claim I'll provide science with it.

They're not saying that? What are they saying then? Everyone is all over the place with their opinion here.

Please, point out where I made "extremely biased and questionable inferences made by the climate agenda police".
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2019, 02:43 PM
WilliamAshley WilliamAshley is offline
Birds of a Feather
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,425
Thanks: 93
Thanked 787 Times in 477 Posts
Default

Quote:
it’s an immature strawman argument for you to keep calling it “denial”.
We are saying it’s not as bad as “they” and YOU are saying, and that they/you cannot prove humans are causing it.
OK so you accept that climate change is happening but what we are experiencing is totally natural. Further you are saying humans have had no impact on the worlds climate. Further you are saying that humans should take no steps to keep coastal cities functioning, further humans should make no attempt to save areas that will be subjected to drought. Further you are saying that the ecosystem, wildfires, hurricanes and earthquakes should not be sought to reduce in frequency.



Quote:
Sometime in the next 100 years, someone should DO SUMTHINGGGGGGNG!
We are feeling impacts now actually, however I think the wakeup point and call to action will be closerto 2040 or 2050.


Quote:
Like maybe move their butt off the beach, or put another layer of concrete on top of the docks and breakwaters.
How much is that going to cost? Western ports are being sold to the Chinese take Athens for instance the largest merchant marine country in the world, and the Chinese own their port. Western ports have so much debt they can't afford to do those fixes. Western cities are declaring bankruptcy they can't afford to rebuild their entire infrastructure. Also what is your assumption that past infrastructure was even built to withstand the additional weight of simply building ontop?


Quote:
FAR cheaper and FAR more efficient
Is it though? Are those even fixes.


Quote:
to just handle that, than to FORCE people to change an entire planets’ way of life.
Where has anyone here made an argument for people to change their way of life? If we don't do anything we are forcing people to change their way of life.
Doing something is actually to maintain the status quo for the common person, tons of the worlds population lives in coastal areas. Not doing anything is forcing them to change their way of life.



This is a few years ago but believe you me this trend has not reversed.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshe...oing-to-china/

If you control the ports and if they are upgraded you control global trade.

Don't think the US is immune
https://amac.us/with-acquisition-of-...n-us-commerce/
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 03:57 PM
franklin franklin is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eastern US
Posts: 6,930
Thanks: 1,687
Thanked 12,942 Times in 4,487 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamAshley View Post
Put it to a foot and see what goes blue

https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/#/layer/s...h/midAccretion

New Orleans and Baton rouge,you are taking trillions of dollars lost, Miami likewise major port city most of the cities effected are the major US shipping ports. Think about a US economy that can't export products. Not going to do anything, it is a big deal.

Coastal infrastructure would be severely hindered, sewage systems might cease to function in oceanfront cities, and desalination systems and nuclear plants could be put at risk.

For example



the 1ft rise is not storm surge or high tide either. Storm surge events would be much higher. with increase hurricanes storm surge would also become more common.

Without a plan to build many billion dollar costing sea walls coastal cities would neutered.
The seas have been rising for the past 13,000 years or more. During this time man has adapted. Why would modern man all of a sudden think the world would stabilize and he would no longer need to adapt?

Many of those seaports you reference were actually under water or right at water level prior to being built. All of a sudden we are going to loose our civil engineering knowledge?

We were told that NYC and Miami would already be under water by 2020. What happened?
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to franklin For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 05:46 PM
Ankylus's Avatar
Ankylus Ankylus is offline
Listen to the ghosts
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Texas Gulf Coast
Posts: 4,722
Thanks: 4,955
Thanked 8,216 Times in 3,136 Posts
Default

Well, somebody is going to be flayed for letting the Left's mask slip on the real reason behind the whole AGW movement.

The Instapundit excerpted this article in the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3094609b3381

Money shot:

Quote:
Chakrabarti (AOC's chief of staff) had an unexpected disclosure. “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal,” he said, “is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all.” Ricketts (candidate for Dem presidential nomination) greeted this startling notion with an attentive poker face. “Do you guys think of it as a climate thing?” Chakrabarti continued. “Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing.”
Damn if that notion hasn't been floated before on these boards.
Quick reply to this message
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Ankylus For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 06:09 PM
The Old Coach The Old Coach is offline
Militant Normal
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Western West Virginia
Posts: 8,054
Thanks: 2,376
Thanked 16,537 Times in 5,671 Posts
Default

Yes indeedy. Club of Rome. Maurice Strong. Paul Ehrlich. Neo-Malthusian Theory (yes, it's now A Thing. Did AOC take the AP course?).
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 06:25 PM
franklin franklin is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eastern US
Posts: 6,930
Thanks: 1,687
Thanked 12,942 Times in 4,487 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ankylus View Post
Well, somebody is going to be flayed for letting the Left's mask slip on the real reason behind the whole AGW movement.

The Instapundit excerpted this article in the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3094609b3381

Money shot:



Damn if that notion hasn't been floated before on these boards.
And when it was the libs on here said it was just rumor mongering.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 06:34 PM
franklin franklin is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eastern US
Posts: 6,930
Thanks: 1,687
Thanked 12,942 Times in 4,487 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loves_Chickens View Post
Do you have any science pointing to Humans having a little influence on the climate? You sound confident and I want to believe you.

Positive or not, that's not the question. We're trying to just find out if humans play a roll in climate change. You say we do a little, how do you know?
We can deduce human impacts by observing natural impacts of similar but greater affect. We also have a basic understanding of the energy transfer cycle but not well enough to make accurate predictions and likely not account for all other influences. There is no question man contributes but maybe such a small amount it's not measurable compared to greater influences.
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to franklin For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 07:28 PM
WilliamAshley WilliamAshley is offline
Birds of a Feather
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,425
Thanks: 93
Thanked 787 Times in 477 Posts
Default

just wow the sheer ignorance but I will try to provide a reply that I am sure will be over your head due to how little you seem to understand about history or why modern industrialized man, is not going to simply pitch a tent somewhere else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklin View Post
The seas have been rising for the past 13,000 years or more.
post a link to the rise.

You will see very quicky that the rates of sea level rise have increased.




Quote:
During this time man has adapted.

adaption up until very recently was to move. We had mass migration for example the Saxon migration.

Quote:
Why would modern man all of a sudden think the world would stabilize and he would no longer need to adapt?
How so? What is this adaption you speak of? Migrating? Migration isn't adaption it is escape. China already has backup cities built that are ghost towns, the US can't even keep its infrastructure it currently has working let alone build whole new cities. How is the US going to finance when everyone and the US gov is on the verge of default. US already has seen its bonds not being filled.


Quote:
Many of those seaports you reference were actually under water or right at water level prior to being built. All of a sudden we are going to loose our civil engineering knowledge?
Who would think a port built at sea near the ocean. That doesn't fix the problem. There is more cenntralization of skillsets however its not being unable to know how to fix the problem it is that society cannot organize to do so and the money isn't there to do it.

Quote:
We were told that NYC and Miami would already be under water by 2020. What happened?
By who? Who and when were you told NYC and Miami would be under water by 2020? It is happeing Miami isbeing eroded but it isn't under water projections still show that it will be underwater over the next few decades. Although it doesn't need to be fully submurged before it is uninhabitable.

The last time we had sea levels this high was around 130,000 years ago.
In terms of human history - recorded human history since the agricultural revolution when the first civilizations in the fertile crescent are known we have not experienced this type of melt. I would dread to think what would happen if we saw melts like the end of the last ice age, that would be catastrophic.


What is your plan for shuttig down industry? All the chemical and nuclear waste? Do you think coastal industry becoming submerged would have no environmental impact? What is your plan? What would you do just let it all sink and pretend nothing happened.

With that type of position or not realizing how much damage coastal industries and coastal waste systems going under water would cause, it just boggles my mind how anyone can not realize the scale of destruction that would have.

Who exactly are you expecting to remove all the hazardous materials from the areas?
What type of timeframe do you think they will need for decomissioning indusry in coastal areas?


======================

Again you seem to have this gap of human time scale, in that we didn't establish ourselves until the glaciers had mostly retreated. They were still retreating in some areas but overall, we had ice caps. What we are seeing now is that our ice caps are melting. Areas that havn't been icefree in millions and millions of years. Humans have never experienced this.


Would you want to fight if all the US coastal cities were going to be nuked by china. Or would you be like, we can just move further inland, nothing to worry about? What if you knew it was going to be nuked but you had 30 years before you lost that war? You had a chance to protect the cities but you'd need to go into total war mode organize industry and combat the problem? Would you want to save the cities or would you just be like, it will effect peoples lifestyles if we try to stop china from nuking our coastal cities, lets just rebuild further inland, no biggie.

Do you see how troubled your position is and that you are suggesting we just standby and let ithappen.
Seriously.

If you don't suggest we standby what are your specific actions to save the USs coastal cities?

Individual cities are going to be pouring billions on their own into for instance the plan to mitigate in Manhattan is priced at 10 billion dollars. This has to be repeated for each and every coastal area. That is going to add up.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/14/1...io-development


This is trillions and trillions of dollars around the US... trillions the US doesn't have with debt ridden cities buckling into bankruptcy.


Whatis happening in New York is exactly the sober realization that others directly effected by climate change will come to.Its not a debate anymore they are being forced to action. This means higher and higher local taxes. This is a bad news story if you are living along the coast in the US.

Most of US industry and economy is located in those areas, yet you don't have a strong federal action plan, although the US Army, FEMA, NOAA etc.. are all showing that it is happening. There is no action plan for the US. What is your action plan? Just ignore it?

Quote:
“We don’t debate global warming in New York City. Not anymore,” wrote de Blasio in a post in New York Magazine. “The only question is where to build the barriers to protect us from rising seas and the inevitable next storm, and how fast we can build them
What is your plan for the millions of Americans that will become homeless if no action is taken?

You don't seem to understatnd nearly half of the US economy and industry is located along the coast. Over 40% of the US economy is in coastal areas. Poof half of the US economy gone washed into the seas. If we get to 2060 on the same level of action as today it would be catastrophe not just a disaster.


It isn't being debated anymore in coastal areas, they are actually doing their plans now.. but these local plans just aren't drawing the mobilization that they will need to save non urban areas.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...trategic-plan/


It isn't about stopping it, it is about reducing the amount of damange it does. Slowing it down so technology has a chance to be developed to address the problems. Geoengineering plans that would have been crazy 10 years ago are now being floated.


Loosing land at a few hundred football fields every hour across the US might not seem like a lot butin places like Louisiana where they are loosing a footballfield everyhour it is having real effect on the local statistics. You know these aren't acres of land that are burning in a fire, they are sinking into the ocean gone forever.

Quote:
Louisiana is losing almost a football field’s worth of land every hour, driven by a combination of rising seas and the nature of its soil, which is subsiding at a fast rate. In the face of repeated hurricanes and flooding, some of the state’s coastal towns saw more than half of their residents leave between the 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census.
They are starting to go down in population. The migration has already started.


Its not a debate among educated intelligent people anymore. It is what is happening now around the world.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/...fighting-back/

If you read anything read the above link.

Lesson to learn from

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/11/weath...rnd/index.html

If it goes to it
Quote:
The unusual confluence of factors adds up to a forecast that has the river cresting Saturday at 19 feet, a level not seen since February 1950 and about 2.3 feet shy of the record set in April 1922, the weather service said Thursday.

One thing is sure the US government is not functioning economically to spend the trillions required to reduce the economic impacts of climate change you know costs are going to continue to increase until they reach the equivalent of a trillion dollars a year just in climate damage.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/u-s...ises-1.5208619

The US isn't even involved in a major war and it is running a trillion dollar annual deficit. Can you imagine if they had a climate strategy that would probably add another half trillion a year.

Quote:
The Trump administration is forecasting that the deficit for the full budget year, which ends on Sept. 30, will top $1 trillion, up from a deficit of $779 billion last year.
Cause we all know what is rising faster than sea levels.

Spend it if you got it.

https://www.bullionvault.com/gold-ne...debt-121820181


If only the climbing US debt could somehow be used to stop sea level rise

Quote:
U.S. GOVERNMENT debt is rising at its fastest pace since 2012,

It is scary to think if US debt was meltwater both would be rising about the same level. I am sure at some point there will be a newspaper comic that illustrates the link between the rising US debt pool and climate change.. it will happen eventually.

Both are going to drown the US economy.
https://www.usdebtclock.org/


Now back to your program

http://climateye.org/compilation-sea...ate-emergency/
Quick reply to this message
The Following User Says Thank You to WilliamAshley For This Useful Post:
Old 07-11-2019, 08:30 PM
franklin franklin is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Eastern US
Posts: 6,930
Thanks: 1,687
Thanked 12,942 Times in 4,487 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamAshley View Post
just wow the sheer ignorance but I will try to provide a reply that I am sure will be over your head due to how little you seem to understand about history or why modern industrialized man, is not going to simply pitch a tent somewhere else.

post a link to the rise.

You will see very quicky that the rates of sea level rise have increased.







adaption up until very recently was to move. We had mass migration for example the Saxon migration.



How so? What is this adaption you speak of? Migrating? Migration isn't adaption it is escape. China already has backup cities built that are ghost towns, the US can't even keep its infrastructure it currently has working let alone build whole new cities. How is the US going to finance when everyone and the US gov is on the verge of default. US already has seen its bonds not being filled.




Who would think a port built at sea near the ocean. That doesn't fix the problem. There is more cenntralization of skillsets however its not being unable to know how to fix the problem it is that society cannot organize to do so and the money isn't there to do it.



By who? Who and when were you told NYC and Miami would be under water by 2020? It is happeing Miami isbeing eroded but it isn't under water projections still show that it will be underwater over the next few decades. Although it doesn't need to be fully submurged before it is uninhabitable.

The last time we had sea levels this high was around 130,000 years ago.
In terms of human history - recorded human history since the agricultural revolution when the first civilizations in the fertile crescent are known we have not experienced this type of melt. I would dread to think what would happen if we saw melts like the end of the last ice age, that would be catastrophic.


What is your plan for shuttig down industry? All the chemical and nuclear waste? Do you think coastal industry becoming submerged would have no environmental impact? What is your plan? What would you do just let it all sink and pretend nothing happened.

With that type of position or not realizing how much damage coastal industries and coastal waste systems going under water would cause, it just boggles my mind how anyone can not realize the scale of destruction that would have.

Who exactly are you expecting to remove all the hazardous materials from the areas?
What type of timeframe do you think they will need for decomissioning indusry in coastal areas?


======================

Again you seem to have this gap of human time scale, in that we didn't establish ourselves until the glaciers had mostly retreated. They were still retreating in some areas but overall, we had ice caps. What we are seeing now is that our ice caps are melting. Areas that havn't been icefree in millions and millions of years. Humans have never experienced this.


Would you want to fight if all the US coastal cities were going to be nuked by china. Or would you be like, we can just move further inland, nothing to worry about? What if you knew it was going to be nuked but you had 30 years before you lost that war? You had a chance to protect the cities but you'd need to go into total war mode organize industry and combat the problem? Would you want to save the cities or would you just be like, it will effect peoples lifestyles if we try to stop china from nuking our coastal cities, lets just rebuild further inland, no biggie.

Do you see how troubled your position is and that you are suggesting we just standby and let ithappen.
Seriously.

If you don't suggest we standby what are your specific actions to save the USs coastal cities?

Individual cities are going to be pouring billions on their own into for instance the plan to mitigate in Manhattan is priced at 10 billion dollars. This has to be repeated for each and every coastal area. That is going to add up.

https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/14/1...io-development


This is trillions and trillions of dollars around the US... trillions the US doesn't have with debt ridden cities buckling into bankruptcy.


Whatis happening in New York is exactly the sober realization that others directly effected by climate change will come to.Its not a debate anymore they are being forced to action. This means higher and higher local taxes. This is a bad news story if you are living along the coast in the US.

Most of US industry and economy is located in those areas, yet you don't have a strong federal action plan, although the US Army, FEMA, NOAA etc.. are all showing that it is happening. There is no action plan for the US. What is your action plan? Just ignore it?



What is your plan for the millions of Americans that will become homeless if no action is taken?

You don't seem to understatnd nearly half of the US economy and industry is located along the coast. Over 40% of the US economy is in coastal areas. Poof half of the US economy gone washed into the seas. If we get to 2060 on the same level of action as today it would be catastrophe not just a disaster.


It isn't being debated anymore in coastal areas, they are actually doing their plans now.. but these local plans just aren't drawing the mobilization that they will need to save non urban areas.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2...trategic-plan/


It isn't about stopping it, it is about reducing the amount of damange it does. Slowing it down so technology has a chance to be developed to address the problems. Geoengineering plans that would have been crazy 10 years ago are now being floated.


Loosing land at a few hundred football fields every hour across the US might not seem like a lot butin places like Louisiana where they are loosing a footballfield everyhour it is having real effect on the local statistics. You know these aren't acres of land that are burning in a fire, they are sinking into the ocean gone forever.



They are starting to go down in population. The migration has already started.


Its not a debate among educated intelligent people anymore. It is what is happening now around the world.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/...fighting-back/

If you read anything read the above link.
Your all over the map here but I'll see if we can educate you.

Sea levels have been rising for the past 13,000 years or so. Much more quickly early one. Some centuries saw dramatic increases. Ice pack has continually decreased. Sea levels have risen about 400 feet since the peak of the ice age.


None of the IPCC predictions on ocean level increase or temperature rise have come to pass. And the current one predicts large sea level increases regardless of cuts to CO2 releases. The good news is none of their past predictions have been accurate.


As to coastal development. Many US coastal cites have large tracts of industrial development on reclaimed land. Land that has been either flood plain or actual river/sea bottom. Many people have built homes on flood plain and reclaimed land. We have encroached on the sea. Not the sea encroaching on us. Some of them may be threatened by the natural increase in sea levels. (BTW these are generally affluent people able to fund protective measures.) You seem to be watching too many Al Gore movies and taking them to heart.


Now to the article on NYC. You are referring to De Blasio's plan. He's one of those who bought into the religion. I would expect him to be buying into a radical socialist plan the he can manage. His plan should single handedly destroy the real estate market in NYC and drive most business out.


Now Louisiana, they are not loosing land because of global warming. They are loosing land due to channelization and reductions of sediment flow. Also much of the land in the area is sinking.

Now stop insulting people who actually have science degrees and listen. You might learn something.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 08:30 PM
The Old Coach The Old Coach is offline
Militant Normal
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Western West Virginia
Posts: 8,054
Thanks: 2,376
Thanked 16,537 Times in 5,671 Posts
Default

The Louisiana thing has to do with the way the delta is being managed to optimize shipping channels. Nothing to do with William's precious "sea level rise", despite what alarmist BS you may have read to the contrary.

William is using, as his "facts", citations from an entire industry devoted to monetizing the KlimateChange (nee AGW) scenarios, which at the bottom all rest on the bedrock principle of destroying Western Civilization. Whether he is simply a fool, a fellow traveler, or a finger of the claw of Sauron is open to discussion. The veracity of his theology is, well........"never try to change another man's religion".
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 09:29 PM
WilliamAshley WilliamAshley is offline
Birds of a Feather
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,425
Thanks: 93
Thanked 787 Times in 477 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklin View Post
Your all over the map here but I'll see if we can educate you.
None of the IPCC predictions on ocean level increase or temperature rise have come to pass. And the current one predicts large sea level increases regardless of cuts to CO2 releases. The good news is none of their past predictions have been accurate.
The bad news is: They are too conservative with new studies showing 2x to 6x rise. Due to errors in calculating the rate of West Antartica and Greenland both of which are melting faster than expected.


Quote:
As to coastal development. .. Many people have built homes on flood plain and reclaimed land.
Really? That isn't news to me.

Quote:
We have encroached on the sea. Not the sea encroaching on us.
Seriously. This is a joke. No sorry man, we aren't building in the sea, except for oil platforms.


Quote:
You seem to be watching too many Al Gore movies and taking them to heart.
I havn't watched an al gore movie in my life.



Quote:
His plan should single handedly destroy the real estate market in NYC and drive most business out.
And what do you suppose Manhattan sinking into the ocean would do to real estate values?


Quote:
Now Louisiana, they are not loosing land because of global warming.
No, they are definitely loosing land due to climate change. Lousiana coastlines are eroding under the rising sea level.


Quote:
Now stop insulting people who actually have science degrees and listen. You might learn something.
Where are the people that will be learnt from, the climate change deniers. I will outright refuse to even consider these people to be educated if they can't see the evidence. It is simply irrefutable what is happening. Absolutely no basis to deny it. No educated person would deny climate change is happening and that sea levels are threatening coastal cities around the world. There is no debate there is no education coming from you to me. You are spreading lies and misinformation and misdirecting the issues.

I'll happily keep calling you out at your lies and laughing at how ridiculous your denials based in a fantasy reality are.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 09:34 PM
Moccasin's Avatar
Moccasin Moccasin is offline
Mod Certified PITA!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 10,792
Thanks: 30,862
Thanked 18,390 Times in 7,055 Posts
Default

Always a pleasure to pop back in here and see how little progress you all are making. Meanwhile, I'm planting fruit trees, have figured out how to double my garden space, how to install a solar power system (the panels are easy, the battery system I've given up on, I'll hire that done), saving up money, diversifying the stock portfolio, laying in supplies, getting ready for what I see as the coming end of the world as we know it. You all can continue to do as you wish. Talking's done for me, it's time for action.

As a side note, I see FEMA's struggling. There are being more disasters, faster, than they can manage. The smart thing to do would be to expand it, but the Republicans can't do that, it would be a tacit admission that something's going on. So they 'solve' this by treating each problem as if it were unique. "The central US is being hit with unprecedented flooding each year! But each is a once in a lifetime event! No need to worry, we'll just spend huge amounts to keep everything exactly as it has been, no matter how many times that causes disaster! Yeah!"

And people wonder why I urge individual action...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crackshot View Post
The thing here is that it is natural for people and even cities to move through the course of history. Just look at Detroit if you need an example. IF the earth heats up that will create more usable land as well. It isn't all negative and it isn't the apocalypse people have been conditioned to think it is.
So you have no objections if Mexico City and all its inhabitants move to the US. How liberal of you.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 09:35 PM
The Old Coach The Old Coach is offline
Militant Normal
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Western West Virginia
Posts: 8,054
Thanks: 2,376
Thanked 16,537 Times in 5,671 Posts
Default

I'm putting WA on ignore. He's comedy gold, but I just can't justify the wasted bandwidth anymore.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-11-2019, 11:12 PM
The Old Coach The Old Coach is offline
Militant Normal
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Western West Virginia
Posts: 8,054
Thanks: 2,376
Thanked 16,537 Times in 5,671 Posts
Default

Hmmmm.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

Paper's title: NO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE

Those nasty, nasty Finns!
Quick reply to this message
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to The Old Coach For This Useful Post:
Old 07-12-2019, 02:51 AM
TRyan's Avatar
TRyan TRyan is offline
Survivor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: California
Posts: 7,870
Thanks: 6,023
Thanked 26,510 Times in 6,328 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Old Coach View Post
Hmmmm.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.00165.pdf

Paper's title: NO EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FOR THE SIGNIFICANT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE

Those nasty, nasty Finns!
Dammit! You beat me to it.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...exist-practice

Quote:
A new scientific study could bust wide open deeply flawed fundamental assumptions underlying controversial climate legislation and initiatives such as the Green New Deal, namely, the degree to which 'climate change' is driven by natural phenomena vs. man-made issues measured as carbon footprint. Scientists in Finland found "practically no anthropogenic [man-made] climate change" after a series of studies.

“During the last hundred years the temperature increased about 0.1°C because of carbon dioxide. The human contribution was about 0.01°C”, the Finnish researchers bluntly state in one among a series of papers.

This has been collaborated by a team at Kobe University in Japan, which has furthered the Finnish researchers' theory: "New evidence suggests that high-energy particles from space known as galactic cosmic rays affect the Earth's climate by increasing cloud cover, causing an 'umbrella effect'," the just published study has found, a summary of which has been released in the journal Science Daily. The findings are hugely significant given this 'umbrella effect' — an entirely natural occurrence — could be the prime driver of climate warming, and not man-made factors.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-12-2019, 08:15 AM
Loves_Chickens's Avatar
Loves_Chickens Loves_Chickens is offline
Prepared
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 351
Thanks: 102
Thanked 298 Times in 164 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by franklin View Post
We can deduce human impacts by observing natural impacts of similar but greater affect. We also have a basic understanding of the energy transfer cycle but not well enough to make accurate predictions and likely not account for all other influences. There is no question man contributes but maybe such a small amount it's not measurable compared to greater influences.
Sounds like you don't believe it's possible to know if humans have a significant impact, and the little impact is inferred, not directly measured.

They say CO2 from natural sources and CO2 from burning fossil fuels are different isotopes and it's possible to directly measure what humans contribute compared to natural sources.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-12-2019, 08:23 AM
BusterEdwards BusterEdwards is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 20 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Old Coach View Post
I'm putting WA on ignore. He's comedy gold, but I just can't justify the wasted bandwidth anymore.
Tiberius and WA are pure comedy gold, I only frequent this thread to enjoy their stupidity being highlighted time and time again. It doesn't matter how wrong they are proven they fail to see it.
Tiberius showed the reason why in another thread where I showed him he was factually incorrect in his opinions. He literally admitted having no knowledge of the facts but knowing the narrative that is popular he felt it a good idea to promote the incorrect narrative, after all doing so gains you kudos with the other fools.
To these people facts are not only irrelevant but dangerous, after all should you learn facts that counter the narrative your opinion would be changed and this would change them into one of us, the hated far right Nazi's that commit the most vile crime of hate speech.
Quick reply to this message
Old 07-12-2019, 08:47 AM
The Old Coach The Old Coach is offline
Militant Normal
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Western West Virginia
Posts: 8,054
Thanks: 2,376
Thanked 16,537 Times in 5,671 Posts
Default

Posted this on another thread, but it's worth duplicating:

Quote:
Debate and discussion with any of the manifestations of the left is a non-starter since the left does not debate or discuss. It adheres to a rigid orthodoxy that will allow no reconsideration or reflection on the putative axioms it regards as sacred. (*snip*) Its mind is deadbolted shut.
From an essay by David Solway
Quick reply to this message
Reply

Bookmarks



Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Survivalist Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:
Gender
Insurance
Please select your insurance company (Optional)

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © Kevin Felts 2006 - 2015,
Green theme by http://www.themesbydesign.net