So Where will you go? The coming mass migrations due to Anthropogenic Climate Change

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
115,252
Reaction score
27,753
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
Just WOW...

The last 20 years has been flat in temperature rise... ZERO RISE... At this pace we will fry in about.......


What I find amusing is they are prediciting a 5 deg C rise over the next 5 years.. No way in hell that happens in our buffered based climactic system without the sun increaseing by about 50 W/m^2...
In the last 40 years, we have had at least a 4 degree temp increase and a severe droop in rainfall. The repercussions of that to other states that depend on our water is severe. Don't let a little fact get in the way of your delusion.
LOL!

4 degrees? LOL!

Based on what?
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
Freedom and govt have NOTHING to do with Climate change. WHY? Because the scary projections that play on people's fears have been DOWNGRADED for DECADES now.. You should have spent your time NOT researching "where ya gonna go" and instead -- follow the science..

Sea level rise projected DOWN by a factor of 3 to 6 since 1985.. Temperatures DOWN in 2100 by a factor of 2 to 4.. At the current rate of sea level rise for example -- the water at the shore will be 6 to 8 INCHES higher in 2060... And Antarctica MAY MELT a bit -- but just in the past 8 years or so the "Science Says" -- it would more likely be from ACTIVE VOLCANIC ACTIVITY under the West Ant. Ice shelf than by Global Warming..

And the NYTimes playing on your FEARS with that opening pic of the Cali fires? -- GW plays almost no role.. MORE important factors are LAND USE issues -- causing MORE PEOPLE and infrastructure to live in proximity to fire prone areas and BAD non-scientific theories of forest management purveyed by leftist lunatics that want NO "forest/wilderness management"...

LOTS of reasons why the GW circus train is stalled on the tracks.. Because the "level of crisis" is NOWHERE NEAR what the original hysteria and hype predicted.. But old outdated scary shit on the internet and bad public school indoctrination, and shady moronic politicians like AOC telling kids they have 12 years to live have been LARGELY REJECTED as the hype they are.. And excuses for BIGGER GOVT programs that have zilch to do with the environment or GWeirding..

You can sit on the train.. But it aint going anywhere fast these days...
You may wish to listen to an old High Country Rancher on this one. Yes, Mother Nature does have her way. And we have to cooperate with her. But we can also help her. On the flip side, we can do things to harm her. When things are going bad, like they do, we can eccellerate things or lessen the impact just by our actions. We call it God's Country and we don't own it, we are the caretakers. And we aren't doing a very good job lately. And Mother nature is pissed.
AND WORLD SOCIALISM IS THE ONLY THING THAT WILL APPEASE HER YOU ALL MUST PAY YOU GO AHEAD IM A LITTLE SHORT THIS WEEK
So we go back to allowing the Corporations to rape the World. I remember the mess the 50s were. In just 50 short years, we screwed things up pretty bad. Had we continued in that path, I don't even wish to think about the mess we would be in today.
Socialism has been an utter failure wherever it's been tried. Only an absolute moron would want it on a global scale.

If you're feeling your toes stepped on -- you should.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
NUH UH is not a critique.
So you can't name even one. That's not a critique, that a bold statement.
So, in summary:

COMMUNISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED AND IT'S THE ONLY THING THAT CAN SAVE US

You're retarded.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
"So where will you go?"

Well, if you're a wealthy, powerful liberal, you'll buy a beach house.


Miami New Construction Condos



NameNeighborhoodMin PriceMax PriceSales
1000 Museum 1000 Biscayne Blvd. Miami, F ...Downtown Miami$4,390,000$18,800,000Sales (12)
57 Ocean Miami Beach 5775 Collins Ave. M ...Miami Beach$2,575,000$35,000,000Sales (6)
Alton Bay Miami Beach 3900 Alton Rd. Mia ...Miami Beach$0$0Sales (0)
Aria on the Bay 1770 N. Bayshore Dr. Mia ...Edgewater$350,000$5,900,000Sales (83)





Don't forget the hundreds of millions being spent on international airports all over the Maldives which are supposed to be under water in 10 years. Nobody spends that much money on an investment that could never pay itself off.
And don't forget the island countries that are having to move because they are now under water.






Oh? Name them. The Maldives are one of those supposed island countries and yet they are investing hundreds of millions of dollars to bring people TO their supposedly sinking islands. A thinking person would wonder why do that if they are going to be under water soon.
The Leaders of These Sinking Countries Are Fighting to Stop Climate Change. Here's What the Rest of the World Can Learn

Great article from Time Mag. Below is just the first paragraph bit it's well worth the read.

The journey to the Fijian village of Vunidogoloa is arduous. It requires a flight across the Pacific to the nation’s remote international transit hub, a 140-mile connection on a rickety 19-seat plane to a smaller island, an hourlong drive past other rural villages and finally a short walk guided by a man with a machete to reach a ghost town forced into retreat by climate change and the rising seas that come with it.





Name one that has had to move. "Fighting " against "climate change " consists of stealing money from 1st world countries to inflate their bank accounts.
Ah, Gas Lighting, Deflecting and "hey, look over there" all at the same time. Damn, you the gifted child.





No, I happen to know that not a single island country has gone under. Not one in 20 years of telling the world that it was imminent.

I also know that they are always at the IPCC conferences with their begging bowls out. For two decades they have been doing that.

The result, because I actually travel to these places, is the people still live in poverty, but oh boy, those leaders mansions have suuuuure gotten nice.
Had you read the times article, you wouldn't type the first sentence. Sorry about presenting facts to you. I must have been lacking in judgement in thinking it would do any good. You keep saying the same lie over and over. No matter how many times you say it, it's still a lie.

And nice Gaslighting and Red Herring.






I DID read the Times article. DID you? The only island they talk about being inundated is by THE FOREST!

Go back and read it again. SLOWLY.
They you lack the ability to understand it.




More like you lack it. I read the article. It didn't mention a single island disappearing under the waves. It did mention people leaving their island and the forest reclaiming it. That's called natural.

Something you anti science types have a very hard time understanding.
And yet I have seen reports of island nations having to move from outlying islands because they were flooded by the ocean and they could no longer live there. They are moving into what little Mainland they have. You are hopeless. Argue with yourself.
Name them.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
It's also admitting that Marxism as implemented results in wholesale murder.

That's what leftists want.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Excerpts from the link:


“... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem......”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

“The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north”.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
Snow is a thing of the past

Obama lowered the seas
gore polar bears.jpg
 

Daryl Hunt

Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
19,863
Reaction score
3,098
Points
290
Location
O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.
 

daveman

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
61,055
Reaction score
11,002
Points
2,030
Location
On the way to the Dark Tower.
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.
Name one island that's had to be abandoned due to "rising oceans".
 

Daryl Hunt

Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
19,863
Reaction score
3,098
Points
290
Location
O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
Just WOW...

The last 20 years has been flat in temperature rise... ZERO RISE... At this pace we will fry in about.......


What I find amusing is they are prediciting a 5 deg C rise over the next 5 years.. No way in hell that happens in our buffered based climactic system without the sun increaseing by about 50 W/m^2...
In the last 40 years, we have had at least a 4 degree temp increase and a severe droop in rainfall. The repercussions of that to other states that depend on our water is severe. Don't let a little fact get in the way of your delusion.
LOL!

4 degrees? LOL!

Based on what?
These people are called Meteorologists. You know, the kind of people that keep historical records are are smarter than you are?
 

Daryl Hunt

Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
19,863
Reaction score
3,098
Points
290
Location
O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.
Name one island that's had to be abandoned due to "rising oceans".
Nuatambu island
Micronesia
Marshal Islands

And that was from a simple google search.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
67,196
Reaction score
20,202
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.





How about you get back on topic and name one your mythical islands you heard of.
 

Daryl Hunt

Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
19,863
Reaction score
3,098
Points
290
Location
O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.





How about you get back on topic and name one your mythical islands you heard of.
I already named 3. I don't make it a habit of answering your Vinnie Barberino routine.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
67,196
Reaction score
20,202
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.





How about you get back on topic and name one your mythical islands you heard of.
I already named 3. I don't make it a habit of answering your Vinnie Barberino routine.



You did? Where?
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
67,196
Reaction score
20,202
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.
Name one island that's had to be abandoned due to "rising oceans".
Nuatambu island
Micronesia
Marshal Islands

And that was from a simple google search.





And not one of those places has lost an island.

Try again
 

Daryl Hunt

Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2014
Messages
19,863
Reaction score
3,098
Points
290
Location
O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.

And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
Climate change should never be political.
The whole concept is political.

For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.
calling for a "real Marxist" country is a cop out, all socialist countries are modeled on Marx's theories, and thus are Marxist. Calling the past attempts at it "not real marxism" is either dodging the question, or admitting that true Marxism is impossible to implement.
Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.





How about you get back on topic and name one your mythical islands you heard of.
I already named 3. I don't make it a habit of answering your Vinnie Barberino routine.



You did? Where?
Okay, Vinnie, argue with yourself. Time to thin out the gene pool. Have a nice life.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,915
Reaction score
14,571
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
"So where will you go?"

Well, if you're a wealthy, powerful liberal, you'll buy a beach house.


Miami New Construction Condos



NameNeighborhoodMin PriceMax PriceSales
1000 Museum 1000 Biscayne Blvd. Miami, F ...Downtown Miami$4,390,000$18,800,000Sales (12)
57 Ocean Miami Beach 5775 Collins Ave. M ...Miami Beach$2,575,000$35,000,000Sales (6)
Alton Bay Miami Beach 3900 Alton Rd. Mia ...Miami Beach$0$0Sales (0)
Aria on the Bay 1770 N. Bayshore Dr. Mia ...Edgewater$350,000$5,900,000Sales (83)





Don't forget the hundreds of millions being spent on international airports all over the Maldives which are supposed to be under water in 10 years. Nobody spends that much money on an investment that could never pay itself off.
And don't forget the island countries that are having to move because they are now under water.






Oh? Name them. The Maldives are one of those supposed island countries and yet they are investing hundreds of millions of dollars to bring people TO their supposedly sinking islands. A thinking person would wonder why do that if they are going to be under water soon.
Point is -- they put THEMSELVES in danger by destroying their OWN environment.. When you asphalt/concrete over 80% to 90% of ANY small island -- every bit of polluted runoff runs to the sea and EROSION IS BOUND to happen on the fringes...

Leftists see these folks as primitive culture carving out faces on coconuts for export and money,.. If they saw how these enviro arsonist treating their precious islands -- then should see them as villains rather then victims..
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,915
Reaction score
14,571
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
:laughing0301: :laughing0301: :auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:

Nothing else is working for Biden so out comes the old Climate Change bull shit.. And the paper cited has no proof of anything they are spouting.... BRAVO!! more baseless propaganda...
All I have to do is watch the 5pm News Weather Report. Guess what, it's warmer by at least 5 degrees, our water table is low, the percipitation below normal and the damned mountains are burning to the ground. We have just had 4 Record Forest Fires this year. And NOW they are saying we are entering into the forest fire season.
The fires aren't caused by an increase in temperature but by an increase in arsonists taking advantage of nut job enviros.
The fires here were caused by natural causes like lighting strikes. One was cause by a car pulling off into the side of the road with a hot exhaust. If we had normal rainfall and temperatures these either would not have set off the blazes or they would not have gone into the raging fires.

As for temperatures affecting, you have never seen a fire at night. A normal Fire will actually go into a form off hibernation at night due to the lower temperatures. These Super Fires do die down a bit but not enough to make a difference because the night time temps are also unseasonably high as well.

As for humans starting them, that does happen and it's not usually done by a pyro. If it's done by a human, it's usually done by a sloppy camper or some idiot tossing a lit cigarette out the window. Or some idiot with fireworks.

Now, exactly who gave you your information or is it the first stupid thought that popped into your mind and you just had to type it out?
I am a lifelong Californian. We have normal temperatures and rainfall. The last two summers have been a bit cool except for ten days or so. We knew. That is ordinary Californians knew from the beginning that the policies of insane environmentalists were going to cause massive wildfires. We always knew that laws prohibiting the removal of dead brush from around homes was dangerous. The bark beetle is NOT endangered. It kills trees.

Two dozen people have been caught so far setting these massive fires. Send them to Gitmo to await execution.
One of the reasons I left. THey AVOID science and academically sound environmental policies.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
59,915
Reaction score
14,571
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Excerpts from the link


... For two years, I have been studying how climate change will influence global migration. My sense was that of all the devastating consequences of a warming planet — changing landscapes, pandemics, mass extinctions — the potential movement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees across the planet stands to be among the most important. I traveled across four countries to witness how rising temperatures were driving climate refugees away from some of the poorest and hottest parts of the world. I had also helped create an enormous computer simulation to analyze how global demographics might shift, and now I was working on a data-mapping project about migration here in the United States.

....... What I found was a nation on the cusp of a great transformation. Across the United States, some 162 million people — nearly one in two — will most likely experience a decline in the quality of their environment, namely more heat and less water. For 93 million of them, the changes could be particularly severe, and by 2070, our analysis suggests, if carbon emissions rise at extreme levels, at least four million Americans could find themselves living at the fringe, in places decidedly outside the ideal niche for human life. The cost of resisting the new climate reality is mounting. Florida officials have already acknowledged that defending some roadways against the sea will be unaffordable. And the nation’s federal flood-insurance program is for the first time requiring that some of its payouts be used to retreat from climate threats across the country. It will soon prove too expensive to maintain the status quo.

.... Then what? One influential 2018 study, published in The Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, suggests that one in 12 Americans in the Southern half of the country will move toward California, the Mountain West or the Northwest over the next 45 years because of climate influences alone.....

There are signs that the message is breaking through. Half of Americans now rank climate as a top political priority, up from roughly one-third in 2016, and three out of four now describe climate change as either “a crisis” or “a major problem.”


View attachment 389086

View attachment 389089

The author concludes these states will be the beneficiaries of a hotter climate:

The millions of people moving north will mostly head to the cities of the Northeast and Northwest, which will see their populations grow by roughly 10 percent, according to one model. Once-chilly places like Minnesota and Michigan and Vermont will become more temperate, verdant and inviting. Vast regions will prosper; just as Hsiang’s research forecast that Southern counties could see a tenth of their economy dry up, he projects that others as far as North Dakota and Minnesota will enjoy a corresponding expansion. Cities like Detroit, Rochester, Buffalo and Milwaukee will see a renaissance, with their excess capacity in infrastructure, water supplies and highways once again put to good use. One day, it’s possible that a high-speed rail line could race across the Dakotas, through Idaho’s up-and-coming wine country and the country’s new breadbasket along the Canadian border, to the megalopolis of Seattle, which by then has nearly merged with Vancouver to its north.




**********************************************************************************************
It's coming. You know it is.
So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.

This isn't the movies, climate doesn't change overnight, or even over decade, it takes centuries, and people can adjust.

What we shouldn't do is let watermelons like you define the "only way" to save ourselves.
The author’s prognostications take place within 60 years. You have it backward. There will be more government, less freedom and less quality of of life in the future if we do nothing about anthropogenic climate change NOW.
Freedom and govt have NOTHING to do with Climate change. WHY? Because the scary projections that play on people's fears have been DOWNGRADED for DECADES now.. You should have spent your time NOT researching "where ya gonna go" and instead -- follow the science..

Sea level rise projected DOWN by a factor of 3 to 6 since 1985.. Temperatures DOWN in 2100 by a factor of 2 to 4.. At the current rate of sea level rise for example -- the water at the shore will be 6 to 8 INCHES higher in 2060... And Antarctica MAY MELT a bit -- but just in the past 8 years or so the "Science Says" -- it would more likely be from ACTIVE VOLCANIC ACTIVITY under the West Ant. Ice shelf than by Global Warming..

And the NYTimes playing on your FEARS with that opening pic of the Cali fires? -- GW plays almost no role.. MORE important factors are LAND USE issues -- causing MORE PEOPLE and infrastructure to live in proximity to fire prone areas and BAD non-scientific theories of forest management purveyed by leftist lunatics that want NO "forest/wilderness management"...

LOTS of reasons why the GW circus train is stalled on the tracks.. Because the "level of crisis" is NOWHERE NEAR what the original hysteria and hype predicted.. But old outdated scary shit on the internet and bad public school indoctrination, and shady moronic politicians like AOC telling kids they have 12 years to live have been LARGELY REJECTED as the hype they are.. And excuses for BIGGER GOVT programs that have zilch to do with the environment or GWeirding..

You can sit on the train.. But it aint going anywhere fast these days...
You may wish to listen to an old High Country Rancher on this one. Yes, Mother Nature does have her way. And we have to cooperate with her. But we can also help her. On the flip side, we can do things to harm her. When things are going bad, like they do, we can eccellerate things or lessen the impact just by our actions. We call it God's Country and we don't own it, we are the caretakers. And we aren't doing a very good job lately. And Mother nature is pissed.
Never said man is not the issue.. GWarming tho is not the ANSWER to every enviro question.. It's a political cop-out to ignore man-made policies that CONTRIBUTE to fire/flood in Cali.. And it's a willful DISMISSAL of the science of land mgt and use.

My BIGGEST beef with GWarming -- as an ardent environmentalist -- is that GW has KILLED the overall enviro movement.. Unless you can tie an issue to GW -- you won't get any recognition or traction on it.. Whales and penguins be damned if GW is not the answer..

Those leaking thousands of acre of US Military nuclear waste doesn't even get into the to-do list.. The warmers PURPOSELY CONFUSED "carbon" with "CO2" pollution, in opposition to science, to wrap up a sad story for children into one little fable..

Science and politics should never mix.. Each one starts using the other as a CRUTCH for their OWN FAILURES....
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top