Polar Bear Expert's Opinions "Unhelpful" to GW

[davew]

Originally Posted by hcap

Faie enough although "extreme weather" can stem from abrupt climate change. Although humans will survive environmental change the unprecedented increasing rate of change over the last century indicates the increasing change will make it difficult for certain populations to adapt easily

https://www.epa.gov/arc-x/climate-ad...sea-level-rise

You mean like populations of Detroit and Chicago? it seems they are not adapting very well.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by davew

You mean like populations of Detroit and Chicago? it seems they are not adapting very well.

Maybe the Dork-in-chief can send 'em to some "shithole country" ?
And maybe the schmuck-in-chief can adapt to being a stable genius?

[tucker6]

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/...treme-weather/


storm activity in Iceland over the past 1,200 years and finds storminess and extreme weather variability was far more common during the Little Ice Age in comparison to the Medieval Warm Period and the 20th century.

From 2014 but still relevant today. The Alarmists feel that if they say something a million times that it must be true. Fact is that extreme weather is no more likely now than in the past, and recent studies on tropical and tornado activity actually shows a significant decline in activity over the last 150 years.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Maybe the Dork-in-chief can send 'em to some "shithole country" ?
And maybe the schmuck-in-chief can adapt to being a stable genius?

I thought Detroit and Chicago, as liberal meccas, already qualified as such. Our remarkable president is working on debuttholing those two cities, as well as others in order to make America Great Again.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I thought Detroit and Chicago, as liberal meccas, already qualified as such. Our remarkable president is working on debuttholing those two cities, as well as others in order to make America Great Again.

Why are the dems against making America great again? Why is it more important to take care of illegal immigrants than it is Americans? Two simple questions.

[davew]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Why are the dems against making America great again? Why is it more important to take care of illegal immigrants than it is Americans? Two simple questions.

Because the dims are the party of HATE and they need future voters for their party to survive.

[xtb]

Originally Posted by hcap

Quote:
Rising sea levels amplify the threat and magnitude of storm surges in coastal areas. Water infrastructure, often located along the coast or tidally-influenced water bodies, can be vulnerable to greater changes in storm surge intensity. The threat of flooding and damage to water infrastructure will continue to increase over time as sea levels rise and the magnitude of storms increase.

I wish Sam Kinison was still around. He could do a coastal bit, similar to his "get out of the desert" routine.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Why are the dems against making America great again? Why is it more important to take care of illegal immigrants than it is Americans? Two simple questions.

That's simple: Because like their anointed one, they want to transform the face of America via their policies of globalization. Can't globalize a country unless you import as many freeloaders as possible, thereby creating a permanent underprivileged, victimized, justice-deprived underclass. And we know without doubt this is what leftists want to do because, as has often been discussed recently, the Dems ignore the underclass people who are actually citizens of this country (see downtown LA as but one example). The Dems have no interest whatsoever in actually making people's lives better -- only worse or at best maintaining the status quo; for they believe dependence upon the state is their only path to perpetuating their power and their rhetoric of empty promises and all the so-called evils of capitalism.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by hcap

And to hell with damage and deaths from rising sea levels and extreme weather.

Human beings have been relocating due to climate, safety, resources, food, jobs, economics, and a bunch of other factors for thousands of years.

It's not a big deal. You are underrating our ability to deal with change.

If (and this is still an unknown) ocean levels rise and current coastal areas are not ideal, we'll slowly move inland, north...whatever and build newer better cities. Perhaps cities will become obsolete anyway due to technology and we are all going to spread out no matter what the coasts are like.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I thought Detroit and Chicago, as liberal meccas, already qualified as such. Our remarkable president is working on debuttholing those two cities, as well as others in order to make America Great Again.

The dork-in-chief could send Chicago and Detroit residents to a much more liberal bastion, Norway one of his favorite white countries. Whiteface for them all.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

The dork-in-chief could send Chicago and Detroit residents to a much more liberal bastion, Norway one of his favorite white countries. Whiteface for them all.

Norway is too good for them. But Cuba or North Korea would do...

[davew]

Originally Posted by hcap

The dork-in-chief could send Chicago and Detroit residents to a much more liberal bastion, Norway one of his favorite white countries. Whiteface for them all.

That is a novel idea, send away all those wanting reparations and the chronic criminals, a one way ticket to the country of their choice...

[hcap]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Human beings have been relocating due to climate, safety, resources, food, jobs, economics, and a bunch of other factors for thousands of years.

It's not a big deal. You are underrating our ability to deal with change.

If (and this is still an unknown) ocean levels rise and current coastal areas are not ideal, we'll slowly move inland, north...whatever and build newer better cities. Perhaps cities will become obsolete anyway due to technology and we are all going to spread out no matter what the coasts are like.

Yes we will adapt but the increasing RAPID rate of warming present problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrupt_climate_change

Abrupt climate change


and it has occurred before
https://www.nap.edu/read/10136/chapter/4

Evidence of Abrupt Climate Change

Researchers first became intrigued by abrupt climate change when they discovered striking evidence of large, abrupt, and widespread changes preserved in paleoclimatic archives. Interpretation of such proxy records of climate—for example, using tree rings to judge occurrence of droughts or gas bubbles in ice cores to study the atmosphere at the time the bubbles were trapped—is a well-established science that has grown much in recent years.

and
https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0623100414.htm

During the last glacial period, within only a few decades the influence of atmospheric CO2 on the North Atlantic circulation resulted in temperature increases of up to 10 degrees Celsius in Greenland -- as indicated by new climate calculations from researchers at the Alfred Wegener Institute and the University of Cardiff. Their study is the first to confirm that there have been situations in our planet's history in which gradually rising CO2 concentrations have set off abrupt changes in ocean circulation and climate at "tipping points." These sudden changes, referred to as Dansgaard-Oeschger events, have been observed in ice cores collected in Greenland. The results of the study have just been released in the journal Nature Geoscience.

So there are multiple examples of "tipping points." Rate ol change has a major effect

[jocko699]

Originally Posted by xtb

I wish Sam Kinison was still around. He could do a coastal bit, similar to his "get out of the desert" routine.

Yea it's sand. Do you know what it'll be in a thousand years? SAND!!!!! Hire some u-hauls and move them to where the food is!!!

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by hcap

Yes we will adapt but the increasing RAPID rate of warming present problems.

All change presents a problem.

Robots will present a challenge, AI will present a challenge, spending on entitlements and changing demographics will present a problem....

I'm not saying we should purposely dump CO2 into the atmosphere. I never have. I am saying if we respond to the risks you are concerned about we should at least do it in a way that doesn't create more problems than it may or may not even solve.

This is just one thing on a long list of potential problems that we'll deal with. Before it's all over, we may find out the risks were much lower than feared by activists. There could even be some offsetting benefits.