Members banned from this thread: tinfoil


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: even some global warming doubters want preparations for stronger storm surges

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Lompoc, Ca
    Posts
    8,430
    Thanks
    1,286
    Thanked 1,472 Times in 1,090 Posts
    Groans
    475
    Groaned 278 Times in 249 Posts

    Default even some global warming doubters want preparations for stronger storm surges

    it is past time to prepare our coastlines against stronger storms and rising sea levels

    Some still insist that climate change is a hoax, but the vast majority of Americans believe the globe is warming, a new survey finds — and they want to prepare for the worst.
    In fact, even 60 percent of climate-change doubters favored preparations, the survey found. Researchers collected opinions between March 3 and March 18 via an online questionnaire, using a nationally representative sample of 1,174 American adults, both English and Spanish speaking.
    The survey asked about climate-change beliefs and support for adaptation strategies to help coastal areas cope with the rising sea levels and frequent, intense storms that a warmer world could bring. The results showed that 82 percent of Americans are in favor of preparation.
    "Few people believe these preparations will harm the economy or eliminate jobs," survey director Jon Krosnick, a senior fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University, said in a statement. "In fact, more people believe that preparation efforts will help the economy and create jobs around the U.S., in their state and in their town than think these efforts will harm the economy and result in fewer jobs in those areas.
    "But people want coastal homeowners and businesses that locate in high-risk areas to pay for these measures," he said.
    The survey found high levels of belief in global warming, with 82 percent of respondents agreeing that Earth's temperatures have risen over the last century. People tended to see efforts to hold back Mother Nature as futile, Krosnick said. Instead, they preferred preparation strategies that would reduce exposure to risk. For example, 48 percent of respondents supported sand dune restoration, and 33 percent favored replenishing eroding beaches with sand.
    At the same time, 37 percent said structures should be moved inland to protect them from flooding and storm surges, and 33 percent supported the construction of sea walls. [Weather vs. Climate: Test Yourself]
    The most popular policy suggestions were the strengthening of coastal building codes to minimize damage from storms and flooding (supported by 62 percent of respondents), and the prevention of new construction close to the coast (supported by 51 percent).
    "The question is, how does public support for preparation translate to action?" said Meg Caldwell, executive director of the Center for Ocean Solutions, which co-commissioned the survey.
    "Our impulse is to try to move quickly to put communities back together the way they were after devastation. But that impulse often leads to doubling down on high-risk investments, such as rebuilding in areas likely to experience severe impacts," Caldwell said in a statement. "To move toward long-term resiliency for coastal communities, we need to seize opportunities to apply new thinking, new standards and long-term solutions."
    Krosnick presented the results of the survey March 28 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

    http://news.yahoo.com/even-doubters-...203510651.html
    I pledge allegiance to the constitution of the United States of America as amended by the legislative and executive branches and interpreted by the Supreme Court

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Realville
    Posts
    31,850
    Thanks
    1,475
    Thanked 6,520 Times in 5,217 Posts
    Groans
    779
    Groaned 2,477 Times in 2,299 Posts

    Default even some global warming doubters want preparations for stronger storm surges

    If you want to prepare move inland. Problem solved. You don't have a right to live where you want at others expense. And it is a hoax. You have been played. But it is easier for you to continue to believe a lie rather than admit you were duped.

    It isn't as bad as you think. I finally realized that for years I was duped by the GOP. They aren't conservative constitutionalists. They are no better than the democrat party.

    If I can do it so can you

  3. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,784
    Thanks
    35,467
    Thanked 50,285 Times in 27,093 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Quixote View Post
    it is past time to prepare our coastlines against stronger storms and rising sea levels

    Some still insist that climate change is a hoax, but the vast majority of Americans believe the globe is warming, a new survey finds — and they want to prepare for the worst.
    In fact, even 60 percent of climate-change doubters favored preparations, the survey found. Researchers collected opinions between March 3 and March 18 via an online questionnaire, using a nationally representative sample of 1,174 American adults, both English and Spanish speaking.
    The survey asked about climate-change beliefs and support for adaptation strategies to help coastal areas cope with the rising sea levels and frequent, intense storms that a warmer world could bring. The results showed that 82 percent of Americans are in favor of preparation.
    "Few people believe these preparations will harm the economy or eliminate jobs," survey director Jon Krosnick, a senior fellow at the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University, said in a statement. "In fact, more people believe that preparation efforts will help the economy and create jobs around the U.S., in their state and in their town than think these efforts will harm the economy and result in fewer jobs in those areas.
    "But people want coastal homeowners and businesses that locate in high-risk areas to pay for these measures," he said.
    The survey found high levels of belief in global warming, with 82 percent of respondents agreeing that Earth's temperatures have risen over the last century. People tended to see efforts to hold back Mother Nature as futile, Krosnick said. Instead, they preferred preparation strategies that would reduce exposure to risk. For example, 48 percent of respondents supported sand dune restoration, and 33 percent favored replenishing eroding beaches with sand.
    At the same time, 37 percent said structures should be moved inland to protect them from flooding and storm surges, and 33 percent supported the construction of sea walls. [Weather vs. Climate: Test Yourself]
    The most popular policy suggestions were the strengthening of coastal building codes to minimize damage from storms and flooding (supported by 62 percent of respondents), and the prevention of new construction close to the coast (supported by 51 percent).
    "The question is, how does public support for preparation translate to action?" said Meg Caldwell, executive director of the Center for Ocean Solutions, which co-commissioned the survey.
    "Our impulse is to try to move quickly to put communities back together the way they were after devastation. But that impulse often leads to doubling down on high-risk investments, such as rebuilding in areas likely to experience severe impacts," Caldwell said in a statement. "To move toward long-term resiliency for coastal communities, we need to seize opportunities to apply new thinking, new standards and long-term solutions."
    Krosnick presented the results of the survey March 28 at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

    http://news.yahoo.com/even-doubters-...203510651.html
    I think state government leadership in Florida still believes global warming is a hoax, and they would rather spend their time banning school textbooks and trolling liberals than spend time on governance and oversight of the state's infrastructure and climate preparedness

  4. The Following User Groans At Cypress For This Awful Post:

    ExpressLane (10-07-2022)

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (10-21-2022), ThatOwlWoman (10-08-2022)

  6. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    38,037
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 18,923 Times in 13,192 Posts
    Groans
    3
    Groaned 832 Times in 791 Posts

    Default

    I think that Ian was just one of those storms, much like the Fukushima earthquake and tsunami, that occurs periodically over a long period of time that isn't predicted or planned for. It exceeds what's expected.

    That has nothing to do with Gorebal Warming, and everything to do with human hubris and not looking at things in terms of decades and centuries rather than the last few years, if that.

    Florida is much like the Netherlands in many areas. The state could start to construct dykes and levees to prevent storm surge and flooding, but hasn't because of the infrequency of these situations in many areas. If you look at the storm damage from Ian, it's mostly from storm surge and flooding, not wind and rain. Buildings mostly survived the intense winds and rain only to succumb to flooding and storm surge.

    This is really little different that what Japan experienced with the Fukushima earthquake and following tsunami. The earthquake was survived with little really serious damage. The massive tsunami overwhelmed the in-place systems to prevent it.

    This is in stark contrast to Puerto Rico where substandard building code and poorly installed infrastructure overwhelmed the island.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to T. A. Gardner For This Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  8. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Philly, PA
    Posts
    3,296
    Thanks
    590
    Thanked 1,229 Times in 809 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 176 Times in 163 Posts

    Default

    For we old timers I don't need anyone to tell me climate is changing, we have lived part of it and hopefully for our grandkids life is still nice as it was for us.

    'Book review: Bad science and bad arguments abound in 'Apocalypse Never' by Michael Shellenberger

    'A new book that critiques environmentalism is 'deeply and fatally flawed.'

    https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2...calypse-never/
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to midcan5 For This Post:

    evince (10-21-2022)

  10. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,784
    Thanks
    35,467
    Thanked 50,285 Times in 27,093 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Exxon scientists knew in the 1970s that burning fossil fuels and pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere would result in global warming.

  11. The Following User Groans At Cypress For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (10-21-2022), ThatOwlWoman (10-08-2022)

  13. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ravenhenge in the Northwoods
    Posts
    88,289
    Thanks
    145,699
    Thanked 82,519 Times in 52,737 Posts
    Groans
    1
    Groaned 4,657 Times in 4,376 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Exxon scientists knew in the 1970s that burning fossil fuels and pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere would result in global warming.
    There's little difference between that and the tobacco industry knowing that cigarettes are deadly, but playing it down. Except this time it is the whole planet that is being affected. The puzzling thing is why the Reichtards continue to deny deny deny. Why? It's not as though anything will be expected of them, unless of course they live in an area that will be affected by wildfire, drought, storms, flooding, heat waves.
    "Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals." -- Mark Twain

  14. The Following User Groans At ThatOwlWoman For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThatOwlWoman For This Post:

    Cypress (10-08-2022), evince (10-21-2022)

  16. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,784
    Thanks
    35,467
    Thanked 50,285 Times in 27,093 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    There's little difference between that and the tobacco industry knowing that cigarettes are deadly, but playing it down. Except this time it is the whole planet that is being affected. The puzzling thing is why the Reichtards continue to deny deny deny. Why? It's not as though anything will be expected of them, unless of course they live in an area that will be affected by wildfire, drought, storms, flooding, heat waves.
    People in general, and Rightwingers in particular, are reticent to admit they were wrong.
    .
    You can barely find a Republican on this board who will admit anti-war liberals had good judgement about the folly of the Iraq invasion.

    We have been talking about global warming since the late 1980s, and even though it is obvious now there are still those who would rather see harm come to their grandchildren than openly admit they had been wrong.

  17. The Following User Groans At Cypress For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    evince (10-21-2022), ThatOwlWoman (10-08-2022)

  19. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2022
    Posts
    1,834
    Thanks
    44
    Thanked 266 Times in 213 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default

    It seems more likely than not that CO2 emissions are impacting climate. To what degree is basically impossible to know. We saw the many failures of early predictive models that likely, at least partially, necessitated the change from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change".

    There's no reasonable way to cut CO2 emissions in the near or even distant future, so all we can do is prepare for the changes: storms, rising sea levels, etc.
    "If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide that proves they should value evidence."

  20. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,784
    Thanks
    35,467
    Thanked 50,285 Times in 27,093 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZenMode View Post
    ...necessitated the change from "Global Warming" to "Climate Change".
    It has been called 'climate change' at the highest levels of government and science for more than 40 years, at least since before 1988, when the world's foremost scientific consortium on the issue was established, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, established 1988).

    It was conservative political pundits who wanted to emphasize climate change over global warming, because aesthetically it didn't sound as bad.

  21. The Following User Groans At Cypress For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Cypress For This Post:

    ZenMode (10-21-2022)

  23. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    Anchorage, AK. Waikoloa, HI
    Posts
    18,756
    Thanks
    6,477
    Thanked 11,419 Times in 7,538 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 270 Times in 253 Posts
    Blog Entries
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    It has been called 'climate change' at the highest levels of government and science for more than 40 years, at least since before 1988, when the world's foremost scientific consortium on the issue was established, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, established 1988).

    It was conservative political pundits who wanted to emphasize climate change over global warming, because aesthetically it didn't sound as bad.
    Global warming is a more accurate description although not accurate. ‘Regional warming’ is better. There has been no change in the Köppen climate classification of any region in the world for centuries to my knowledge.

  24. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Exxon scientists knew in the 1970s that burning fossil fuels and pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere would result in global warming.
    That's been known about since the time of Arrhenius, shit for brains. However the effect is quite small and well known, it has been gossly exaggerated by alarmist scientists and the UN. Prof. Richard Lindzen stated it best in 2012 in a presentation given in the House of Commons.

    Stated briefly, I will simply try to clarify what the debate over climate change is really about. It most certainly is not about whether climate is changing: it always is. It is not about whether CO2 is increasing: it clearly is. It is not about whether the increase in CO2, by itself, will lead to some warming: it should. The debate is simply over the matter of how much warming the increase in CO2 can lead to, and the connection of such warming to the innumerable claimed catastrophes. The evidence is that the increase in CO2 will lead to very little warming, and that the connection of this minimal warming (or even significant warming) to the purported catastrophes is also minimal. The arguments on which the catastrophic claims are made are extremely weak – and commonly acknowledged as such. They are sometimes overtly dishonest.


  25. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    57,784
    Thanks
    35,467
    Thanked 50,285 Times in 27,093 Posts
    Groans
    22
    Groaned 2,975 Times in 2,692 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    Exxon scientists knew in the 1970s that burning fossil fuels and pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere would result in global warming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Primavera View Post
    That's been known about since the time of Arrhenius, shit for brains.
    But you have a long history of predicting global cooling, so it wasn't self evident to you.

    --> https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...46#post5333346

  26. The Following User Groans At Cypress For This Awful Post:

    cancel2 2022 (10-23-2022)

  27. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    There are some forces more powerful than the entire ingenuity and drive of humanity........mother nature being the most significant. We have as much chance of stopping, or at least minimizing, storm forces as we did in trying to create new coral reefs using tied together old tires and dumping them in the ocean......which was a very stupid idea to begin with.

    preparedness certainly is a positive, however, most people are unable to accept that level of responsibility for themselves, preferring instead to have government do it, and we all know that government has a very ugly history of managing things.

    We also have to look at the emotional weakening of the maturity level of humanity. 50 years ago hurricane Ian would have been accepted and then afterwards, the damage and recovery dealt with afterwards like just another serious storm. Nowadays we have the chicken littles of the world/country demanding that people do what they are told or suffer the consequences, that we are too weak and frail to undergo such a massively devastating storm because of climate change........it's almost like they are trying to fear monger and whip up hysteria for a political agenda.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  28. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    108,120
    Thanks
    60,501
    Thanked 35,051 Times in 26,519 Posts
    Groans
    47,393
    Groaned 4,742 Times in 4,521 Posts
    Blog Entries
    61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress View Post
    But you have a long history of predicting global cooling, so it wasn't self evident to you.

    --> https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...46#post5333346
    Again you just can't being an arsehole! Do you even know who Arrhenius is and what he was famous for, probably not.

Similar Threads

  1. Global warming?
    By Cancel 2018. 3 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-17-2012, 02:30 PM
  2. Global warming II
    By wiseones2cents in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-26-2012, 09:37 AM
  3. Global warming did this....
    By Cancel 2016.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-15-2011, 01:22 PM
  4. Global warming
    By wiseones2cents in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 12-23-2009, 06:29 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-28-2009, 10:52 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •