More Than 400 U.S. Cities May Be 'Past The Point Of No Return' With Sea Level Threats

a reply to: DBCowboy

Then we have a nice beach-front apartment for you in South Miami Beach.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

This is bull#. All I'm asking you to do with this thread is to believe the evidence I'm presenting here. I've said several times already that I'm not presenting solutions. Just evidence. There is no "obey or die" here. That is a false narrative that you are painting because your confirmation bias refuses to let you honestly analyze the evidence presented to you.

You show evidence I'm supposed to take as certified fact. Others provide evidence I'm supposed to take as certified fact. The pro warming crowd threatens, suggests jail time, people here even said "drown the non-believers".

I've never seen a group so against skepticism. It's as if you HAVE to convince us. Which makes me distrust ANYTHING you pro warmers say or do. Because you all have been conditioned to believe any story about man made warming.

I will say that you do certainly obey very well.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: johnwick

The point is that WE are causing these changes. The climate wouldn't be DOING the things its doing if it weren't for human society and its emission wastes.

There is no proof of this besides models built by those getting paid to make these claims.

Uh... Yes there is TONS of proof of this... If you'd bother to read the link I provided on how those models are created, you'd know that those models are created BASED on the evidence we have for climate change. They aren't just pulled out of thin air.

Historic data fully refutes all these claims.

No it doesn't.

As it has happened many times before man was even here.

This isn't the same thing as what happened before.

As i said only models.

Models in fact created by folks getting paid to make that shows man is causing it.

They arent getting paid to just model the evidence and see where it leads.

They are specicficalky modelling it as a man caused event.

In fact 99% of all public monies for AGW go only to proving nan is the cause, not to just research and see what the evidence says.

It is all built from the premise man is the cause.

This is counter to the scientific method btw.

You dont research towards a preplanned outcome, you research and see where it takes you.

Yes this has all happened many times before.

The only evidence it is " different" this time is once again, models built to prove it not built to just look at the data in an unbiased way.

Models, built by agenda driven people, to show an agenda driven cause.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: DBCowboy

Then we have a nice beach-front apartment for you in South Miami Beach.

So you'd force me to move because I don't obey your masters?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well then, what do you think will cost less: building adequate levees and dikes for 414 cities to maintain their populations and then even more on the subsequent cities that fall underwater as nothing is done

Oh dear, Krazy!
You may have just given The Donald his new 'talking point'! All the walls will say TRUMP on them, too!!!! And he'll have PRISONERS build them!!

a reply to: DBCowboy

You are ridiculous.
You'd be FORCED TO MOVE if your town goes under water, dude. If you don't want to participate in harm reduction, then you can just go live there now and continue to spew your filthy carbon footprint all over the place, while the rest of us carry on with trying to prevent the event, or at least slow it down.

If you don't want to play along, take your stinky CO2 ball and move somewhere else.
The rest of us - ALL OF US - are doing this.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

This is bull#. All I'm asking you to do with this thread is to believe the evidence I'm presenting here. I've said several times already that I'm not presenting solutions. Just evidence. There is no "obey or die" here. That is a false narrative that you are painting because your confirmation bias refuses to let you honestly analyze the evidence presented to you.

You show evidence I'm supposed to take as certified fact. Others provide evidence I'm supposed to take as certified fact. The pro warming crowd threatens, suggests jail time, people here even said "drown the non-believers".

I haven't seen a single poster in this thread post ANY evidence against Climate Change. Don't lie.

I've never seen a group so against skepticism. It's as if you HAVE to convince us. Which makes me distrust ANYTHING you pro warmers say or do. Because you all have been conditioned to believe any story about man made warming.

Maybe because disbelief NOW is going to severely harm many humans down the road? It's not like evolution where disbelief just makes you look like an idiot. Disbelief is going to lead to many more problems for all of us down the road.

I will say that you do certainly obey very well.

Ad hominem.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: johnwick

Only to someone who wants to consider things so simply. Science doesn't work with such simple answers (plus it also doesn't just assume things are true it proves them first THEN says they are true). If the Ice Age were just ending naturally then the world wouldn't be heating up as fast as it is heating up. This is the problem that scientists identified over 100 years ago when they first hypothesized about global warming. They said that human effects must be contributing to the climate as well. Since then, we've uncovered more and more evidence showing that to be the case. The climate is warming FASTER than it should be.

Funny you mention assumptions...yet assume much, such as " if the ice age were just ending it wouldnt be heating up as much"

Why because you assume so?

Because that is exactly what you are doing here.

There is absolutely no imperical evidence to support your claim.

You are making an assumption.

Here is another false assumption of AGW, " out of control warming"

Which has never happened, even with co2 in the thousands of ppm.

Yet, it is going to hapoen because of ten fold less now?

Even though there is zero proof it can even happen, supported by billions of years of historical data that says even ten fold higher co2 wont cause this.

In fact, the most life on the planet in its history, and its most stable climate hapoened when more than ten fold co2 concebtratiobs were present in its atmosphere.

That is historical evidence backed by hundreds if millions of years.

But ya, this time it is " different" because people paid to say so say so.............

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Isurrender73

Um... Do you know how expansive desalination is? I mean if it were that simple we'd already have DONE that for the looming freshwater crisis we have on the horizon.

The crews are building what boosters say represents California's best hope for a drought-proof water supply: the largest ocean desalination plant in the Western Hemisphere. The $1 billion project will provide 50 million gallons of drinking water a day for San Diego County when it opens in 2016.

Desalinated water typically costs about $2,000 an acre foot -- roughly the amount of water a family of five uses in a year. The cost is about double that of water obtained from building a new reservoir or recycling wastewater, according to a 2013 study from the state Department of Water Resources.

The company will be guaranteed a rate of return between 9 and 13 percent, depending on operating costs.

Nobody disputes that the cost of water will go up. According to Yamada, the average customer's bill, now $71 a month, will rise $5 to $7 to pay for desalination.
www.mercurynews.com...

Desalination is double the cost of current methods.

I'm sure if we put our best scientists to work on this they could get the cost even lower. And double the cost is taking into account that the desalination plant above is a privately owned for profit venture. So I'm positive that publicly owned could be done cheaper without improved technology.

I don't think doubling our water bill to save the planet and ensure adequate fresh water for the generations to come is asking too much.

I don't know how many gallons per year the ice cap melt will produce, but desalination is feasible.

We gave the banks 1 trillion dollars to bail them out of their own stupidity.

We could build 1000 desalination plants for the same trillion dollars, puting many people to work and providing at least 50 billion gallons of water per day to the world.

I promise I don't just sit around and imagine $hit then open my mouth without knowing what I am talking about.

a reply to: DBCowboy

"Lead, follow, or GET OUT OF THE WAY!"

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I will say that you do follow very well.

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: johnwick

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: johnwick

The point is that WE are causing these changes. The climate wouldn't be DOING the things its doing if it weren't for human society and its emission wastes.

There is no proof of this besides models built by those getting paid to make these claims.

Uh... Yes there is TONS of proof of this... If you'd bother to read the link I provided on how those models are created, you'd know that those models are created BASED on the evidence we have for climate change. They aren't just pulled out of thin air.

Historic data fully refutes all these claims.

No it doesn't.

As it has happened many times before man was even here.

This isn't the same thing as what happened before.

As i said only models.

Models in fact created by folks getting paid to make that shows man is causing it.

They arent getting paid to just model the evidence and see where it leads.

They are specicficalky modelling it as a man caused event.

In fact 99% of all public monies for AGW go only to proving nan is the cause, not to just research and see what the evidence says.

False. You clearly don't know how the scientific method works. Plus you are lying. You clearly still haven't read that link. It DEFINITELY talks about how those models are created.

It is all built from the premise man is the cause.

This is counter to the scientific method btw.

Negative. The evidence has already been collected to determine that man made climate change is real. We don't need to start with the premise that it is unknown. That's like saying we have to start with the premise that the earth doesn't orbit around the sun when we further study gravity. No, we've already proved that the earth revolves around the sun. Unless NEW evidence can be presented that shows it isn't the case, there is no reason to assume that it is untrue.

That's called Occam's Razor buddy.

You dont research towards a preplanned outcome, you research and see where it takes you.

I'm not sure you research at all. At least not science. Maybe right wing propaganda sites.

Yes this has all happened many times before.

Are you a record? You keep repeating this. Doing that doesn't make your point any more valid than before. Though I still haven't seen any links from you.

The only evidence it is " different" this time is once again, models built to prove it not built to just look at the data in an unbiased way.

Models, built by agenda driven people, to show an agenda driven cause.

Care to address this evidence that shows that Climate Change denial is actually the side of the debate that is funneling money to get the results they desire?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know. We are just expected to believe anything you provide from your masters because you have been conditioned to obey.

And remember that the Pentagon was just talking about contingencies for Global Warming and everything that entails, like making sure their military bases aren't going to be flooded, making sure they're ready to respond to hotspots/minor wars instigated by drought and famine and mass migrations, renewable energy in case of oil shortages etc and ....the geniuses in congress told them to shut up because...we have snowballs in new england. I'm paraphasing a little but you get the drift!

a reply to: DBCowboy

I will say that you do follow very well.

And you don't - so - go live with everyone else who doesn't want to do their share, and do it in South Florida.

I'm a month away from 57 years old, and I've been concerned about environment issues all my life.

This crap is happening. Whether humans are 'causing it' or merely 'contributing to it' MAKES NO DIFFERENCE.

If we can do SOMETHING to slow it down - ANYTHING - (and we have identified how to do at least something) then why should we not?

a reply to: DBCowboy

So you are just going to run full steam with the shill argument huh? Ad hominems like that are against the T&C buddy. Stick to the topic.

Though I'm not asking you to believe it just because. You need to actually READ it and come to that conclusion yourself. Though I highly doubt that you've read even the full article in the OP, let alone any of the other links I've provided in this thread.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know. We are just expected to believe anything you provide from your masters because you have been conditioned to obey.

And here's a serious question for you...how do you or we know that you haven't been conditioned to obey by your fossil fuel/talk radio masters?

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I know. We are just expected to believe anything you provide from your masters because you have been conditioned to obey.

And here's a serious question for you...how do you or we know that you haven't been conditioned to obey by your fossil fuel/talk radio masters?

Hey! Quiet with your reason and logic; we all know that right wing rhetoric only works one way!

Florida

During much of Florida's geologic history, it was covered by the ocean.

academic.emporia.edu...

New York
Watch Manhattan’s Boundaries Expand Over 250 Years
New Yorkers have spent the past four hundred years changing the coastal island they call home. It’s easy to forget (or not even realize) that Manhattan—or Mannahatta—was once a thin, marshy outcropping that protected the mainland from the ocean.
gizmodo.com...

New Orleans

Venice

Come on these coastal cities shouldn't be there.

It is just that some genius figured out how to tax nature.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: DBCowboy

You are ridiculous.
You'd be FORCED TO MOVE if your town goes under water, dude. If you don't want to participate in harm reduction, then you can just go live there now and continue to spew your filthy carbon footprint all over the place, while the rest of us carry on with trying to prevent the event, or at least slow it down.

If you don't want to play along, take your stinky CO2 ball and move somewhere else.
The rest of us - ALL OF US - are doing this.

If by " all of us" you mean the only idiots dumb enough to want to save rot pits like newyork or LA....ya, " all of us" except us country folk who welcome the end of the depravity these POS pits of human suffering and despair cause.

Because i for one champion the end of the idiots on both coasts.

Never seen a coastal American city that wasnt a pit, and deserved to be removed from humanities existence.

Most of the dwellers there need to die with them as well.

Funny, it is these giant coastal mega cities with all the problems, yet us rural " fly over" state types get on just fine without them leeching off of our labors.

We dont need them, they do need us.

I say let these monuments to mans darkest side die, and most of their inhabitants....the rest of us wouldnt even notice.