Your Worst Nightmare
Gold Supporting Member
- Oct 22, 2014
- Reaction score
- O.D. (Stands for Out Dere
I stated that the average increase was 10mm. What you showed was that the average since 2009 was between 2.9 and 5mm. But still, since 1949, that's a 10mm average per year increase rise. Do the math. And what that doesn't show is the intensity of the storms that are driving the waves further and further inland destroying habitats and eroding the shores at a much higher rate than normal. In a perfect world, the sea leaves as much sand and rocks as it takes. Today, it takes more than it leaves meaning the islands are shrinking.You should have kept Googling, Klimate Kultist.Nuatambu islandName one island that's had to be abandoned due to "rising oceans".Comon, name one. And we can discuss it. You game? it's like me saying that there are Democratic Countries.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.Wow, again, name one real Marxist country that has ever exited on the earth. But remember I get to critique your answer.The whole concept is political.Climate change should never be political.And the only cure is more government, less freedom, and lower quality of life.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.So the only solution is more government, less freedom, and less quality of life.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.
Millions will be displaced in the coming decades by fires, hurricanes, extreme heat and rising seas. Where will they go?www.nytimes.com
It's coming. You know it is.
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.
And of course Marxism, lots and lots of Marxism.
For AGW alarmists the only cure is Marxism.
And that was from a simple google search.
Busted claim: data shows that climate induced sea level rise didn't wipe out five Solomon Islands