California not suffering, drought?

[elektra]

Elektra, I know this is hard for you to understand, but the drought that has been going on for the past 30 months or so has not been going on in the grape producing regions of California for the past 30 months. The record harvest were in 2013, a year when those grape producing regions were actually wetter than the prior year during the early months of the year. They were not in a drought.

Since you have failed to respond to this point (I do not count ignoring it and reposting "But we hads record grapes harvest!!" as a response), there is really nothing more to say. You have chosen to remain ignorant, and nobody with a brain will take you seriously.

Post the relevant drought monitor maps for the exact periods you speak of.

I already did. Multiple times. Refer to post 87.

A link to the LA Times? That covers you, hardly!

You are stating that certain periods got more rain. The Drought Monitor is not reporting rain, not at all.
Linking to the LA Times is propaganda, ShakledNation is making a claim comparing the rain totals for a very specific region in California, you can not use something as vague as the LA Times posting colored pictures to make the claim that one period was wetter than the other in a specific region.

Is that how you think, you see the LA Times article and determine by that colored pictures what the specific precipitation totals are.

The Drought Monitor is propaganda, so much so I started a thread showing specifically how and why.

Drought Monitor Is Propaganda US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

My claim is the regions were not in drought for the first half of 2013. Those claims are supported. Sorry, you fail again.

Bullshit, you specifically stated, "wetter", further you were vague, you never stated which months, which weeks, nothing. You spoke of specific regions without saying specifically when, you just said, "significantly wetter"

But either way, you validate the OP, California is not suffering, you can buy cheap grapes from the region you said lost 80% of the Grapes.

You bring this other bull up, to distract, from the obvious.

You can not have fat cheap grapes from a state that is suffering extreme drought.

 

[ShackledNation]

California is suffering from drought, sorry. Not going to debate the obvious any further.

 

[elektra]

California is suffering from drought, sorry. Not going to debate the obvious any further.

ShackledNation, you have yet to debate,

ShackeledNation, how come we get Grapes from the County you claim lost 80% of the crop, Kern County.

Thanks for telling all that ShackeledNation will now run from all posts ShackeledNation made within this thread.

California is not suffering, least of all our horses.

 

[Crick]

I don't see anyone debating the flatness of the Earth either. Cowards.

 

[jc456]

I don't see anyone debating the flatness of the Earth either. Cowards.

Can you say 'Tard'?

 

[Crick]

I could, but it is a term I choose not to use. It's use is cruel and offensive to a group that have nothing to do with this discussion.

My point was that debating whether or not California is currently in a drought is just as meaningful as debating whether or not the Earth is flat - that is, not at all. My use of the term "cowards" was intended to be facetious - that people were afraid to discuss whether or not the Earth was flat. But "coward" is also a term whose use is rarely if ever justified and even though I was not addressing it to you, I should not have used it. My apologies if I offended you (or anyone else with it). Obviously there are folks here of whom I am not fond, but I do not feel any of you are cowards.

 

[elektra]

I could, but it is a term I choose not to use. It's use is cruel and offensive to a group that have nothing to do with this discussion.

My point was that debating whether or not California is currently in a drought is just as meaningful as debating whether or not the Earth is flat - that is, not at all. My use of the term "cowards" was intended to be facetious - that people were afraid to discuss whether or not the Earth was flat. But "coward" is also a term whose use is rarely if ever justified and even though I was not addressing it to you, I should not have used it. My apologies if I offended you (or anyone else with it). Obviously there are folks here of whom I am not fond, but I do not feel any of you are cowards.

The thread is about suffering, drought is subjective, the drought map is pure propaganda.

Crick does not debate, just dictates, as those in power dictate.

Post the suffering crick, that is easy, right

California is fighting a political water war.

I have shown the facts, agriculture in california is fat and rich, historic levels.

 

[Crick]

Do you have precipitation data that disagrees with the state' drought maps? That parts of the state have done well in years past growing grapes - the only "facts" I've seen come from you - is hardly sufficient justification to call the state's water data false.

I've collected a number of data graphics below from as many different sources as I could find in a quick Google search. Do you really want to claim that all these different people are lying to the public? Consider the consequences of such a choice on their part. They'd risk their jobs. They'd risk going to jail. And for what?

Show us a precipitation map of southern California that does NOT show a precipitation shortfall. If you have no such thing, have the decency to admit it.

 

[jc456]

Do you have precipitation data that disagrees with the state' drought maps? That parts of the state have done well in years past growing grapes - the only "facts" I've seen come from you - is hardly sufficient justification to call the state's water data false.

I've collected a number of data graphics below from as many different sources as I could find in a quick Google search. Do you really want to claim that all these different people are lying to the public? Consider the consequences of such a choice on their part. They'd risk their jobs. They'd risk going to jail. And for what?

Show us a precipitation map of southern California that does NOT show a precipitation shortfall. If you have no such thing, have the decency to admit it.

hmmm...I thought there was a three drought. Your first graph doesn't show a drought in 2013. How can that be?

And your graph shows dry in January in northern Illinois and we had record snow fall. how can that be? Dude, you're being duped.

 

[jc456]

I could, but it is a term I choose not to use. It's use is cruel and offensive to a group that have nothing to do with this discussion.

My point was that debating whether or not California is currently in a drought is just as meaningful as debating whether or not the Earth is flat - that is, not at all. My use of the term "cowards" was intended to be facetious - that people were afraid to discuss whether or not the Earth was flat. But "coward" is also a term whose use is rarely if ever justified and even though I was not addressing it to you, I should not have used it. My apologies if I offended you (or anyone else with it). Obviously there are folks here of whom I am not fond, but I do not feel any of you are cowards.

The fact is you don't have enough facts. Do you even know what the definition is?

 

[Crick]

What the fuck are you talking about? The gigabytes of precipitation, temperature, soil moisture and crop data that the Drought Monitor folks collect and maintain tell us that southern California is in a drought. What facts do you have exactly? A good grape crop in Napa valley? Give us a fooking break.

 

[jc456]

What the fuck are you talking about? The gigabytes of precipitation, temperature, soil moisture and crop data that the Drought Monitor folks collect and maintain tell us that southern California is in a drought. What facts do you have exactly? A good grape crop in Napa valley? Give us a fooking break.

Dude, what is the usual climate?

 

[KissMy]

Many California residents have run out of tap water. They now must haul in drinking water.

Due to the lack of water to flush toilets or operate sewer systems, California has the highest number of housing units using outhouses or privies (67,865) of any state.

 

[elektra]

What the fuck are you talking about? The gigabytes of precipitation, temperature, soil moisture and crop data that the Drought Monitor folks collect and maintain tell us that southern California is in a drought. What facts do you have exactly? A good grape crop in Napa valley? Give us a fooking break.

Napa Valley?

Napa Valley is a tiny percentage of total grape production in california.

Less than 5% of California Wine is produced in Napa Valley. Crick, you have so little understanding of this, my posts always referenced the entire state, not the cherry picked points you make about the tiniest percentage that Napa Valley accounts for.

Yep, you see red looking at the propaganda, which the drought monitor is, California us getting another record setting day in rain, a record august and september, yet the weekly snapshot of this, reflects zero, how can weekly records not be reflected in a drought monitor.

Colored pictures is all you got, hardly facts.

 

[Crick]

God are you stupid.

 

[Old Rocks]

Understatement concerning Elektra.

 

[elektra]

What the fuck are you talking about? The gigabytes of precipitation, temperature, soil moisture and crop data that the Drought Monitor folks collect and maintain tell us that southern California is in a drought. What facts do you have exactly? A good grape crop in Napa valley? Give us a fooking break.

Gigabytes of data?

A small mind you have, crick. The data available to collect is infinite.

Hence the smallness of your idea.

 

[Crick]

Again, the Drought Monitor folks have gigabytes of data that indicate a drought is in progress - rather a de facto determination given the nature of the data and the definition of the term "drought". You have the spurious fact that portions of the California grape harvest have been good. How, exactly, does that refute the precipitation data?

 

[elektra]

God are you stupid.

Again, the Drought Monitor folks have gigabytes of data that indicate a drought is in progress - rather a de facto determination given the nature of the data and the definition of the term "drought". You have the spurious fact that portions of the California grape harvest have been good. How, exactly, does that refute the precipitation data?

Portions? You are the one who addressed a tiny portion, Napa Valley.

Either way, this is an above average year, I think only two years were comparable, last year and the year before, despite the propaganda of the drought monitor.

above average grape crop, I bet they will not even be able to sell all those grapes, want to bet?

 

[Old Rocks]

Do you have precipitation data that disagrees with the state' drought maps? That parts of the state have done well in years past growing grapes - the only "facts" I've seen come from you - is hardly sufficient justification to call the state's water data false.

I've collected a number of data graphics below from as many different sources as I could find in a quick Google search. Do you really want to claim that all these different people are lying to the public? Consider the consequences of such a choice on their part. They'd risk their jobs. They'd risk going to jail. And for what?

Show us a precipitation map of southern California that does NOT show a precipitation shortfall. If you have no such thing, have the decency to admit it.

hmmm...I thought there was a three drought. Your first graph doesn't show a drought in 2013. How can that be?

And your graph shows dry in January in northern Illinois and we had record snow fall. how can that be? Dude, you're being duped.

Damn, you can not only not read english, you cannot read a simple graph. Dark brown is severe drought, light brown is moderate drought, and yellow abnormally dry. The whole of California was in drought situation in 2013. You are beyond stupid, Elektra.