HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 7:17 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBruin View Post
Nobody in this forum, to my knowledge, is an expert on the climate. So we are all just giving our opinion.
Everyone, including experts, is just giving their opinion.
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 8:38 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Everyone, including experts, is just giving their opinion.
Nice try but if it's based on proper science it's not just someone's opinion. Uneducated people tend to dismiss things they don't understand but that's why we call people like that 'stupid'.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 8:55 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
The denialists are hoping that the coastal cities get flooded out which would make those states more red, since any excuse to gain an electoral advantage is all that matters.
"Denialist"...I'll take them over insane statements like that. What does that even mean? Do you just dislike some people so much that making sense gets thrown out the window?

It's not like all those liberals will die in one epic flood lol they will just move to make other places bluer.
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 8:56 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
^ plants can adjust to warmer climates but many places will face intensive desertification we which is harder for plants to adapt with. Anyway it's a weird question to ask since of course even the most reprehensible actions have positives. If we murdered 10% of people at random I'm sure many douchebags would be killed, for example.
Yes, college is not the right place to think about all aspects of everything. We must just follow the script and get in line.
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:00 PM
jtown,man jtown,man is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Norfolk, Va
Posts: 2,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by SIGSEGV View Post
This is because 0.1% of people wondering about the positives of climate change are interested in rational debate on the topic and the other 99.9% are disingenuous denialists.

Yes climate change will make some currently uninhabitable places more habitable at the cost of making many currently intensely inhabited places uninhabitable. Woohoo? I guess everyone from Jakarta can move to Whitehorse and we'll rebuild Manhattan in Yakutsk.

Sure it's possible to do an economic analysis of the issue. We can start with the costs of inaction: https://eiuperspectives.economist.co...inaction_0.pdf
Since you are talking about my question, I'll explain why I asked:

First, the professor had a full day of us just asking him questions about climate change. People ran out of question as most students don't give a damn, they just want to pass.

Second, the professor pretty much said there is very little we can do as one nation so a lot of what we can do is retrofitting and changing the way we currently live here in the US(we consume too much etc. etc.). So it got me thinking...it will hurt places like the US, but what positives could it bring to other places.

My question was entirely academic. In an academic environment, no question or thought should be off the table. For the record, my professor is a good friend of mine. We are working on a paper together. I'm not some "denialist" or whatever else people here brand anyone who doesn't just follow in step 1000% everything that is said to them.
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:02 PM
Reverberation's Avatar
Reverberation Reverberation is offline
disorient yourself?
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Houston's Urbs
Posts: 3,823
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
Yeah, it's pretty bad and some of the most expensive homes are on or near waterways or within a mile or so. That doesn't bode well when we get a lot of rain. I am about 2 miles from the river and that's close enough. Homes that were within that range flooded during Harvey. If you're house is built up a little; higher elevation by just a few feet than the street, you're also fairly safe. Galveston gets the brunt of the storm surge and winds but we just flood.
I think Houston is in a unique situation that has little to do with climate change. It’s been flooding here since people moved to the area and I suspect the recent troubles have more to do with heat island effect and impervious cover than they do with man-made climate change.

There is a (very true) saying about Texas, that it’s a “land of ongoing drought punctuated by spectacular floods”. Earlier this summer it didn’t rain in my part of the city for more than 2 months. Last Wednesday, it rained more than 5 inches in less than one hour. If you look at early maps of the area on thing that is notable is the lack of small creeks and tributaries feeding the larger bayous. Given the flat terrain and inconsistent rain patterns, much of the area drained by sheetflowing. Ditches were installed to channel the sheetflow runoff and as the city grew and more impervious surfaces replaced grassland, the ditches filled faster and couldn’t keep up. This is something that the region has been working on fixing for a while now. Tropical systems (which dump rain very quickly) have always stalled over Texas. They run into high pressure over the desert to the west and get stuck until prevailing winds carry them north or east.
__________________
RT60
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:18 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverberation View Post
I think Houston is in a unique situation that has little to do with climate change. It’s been flooding here since people moved to the area and I suspect the recent troubles have more to do with heat island effect and impervious cover than they do with man-made climate change.
Related to a point I made earlier in this thread, climate change could also be speeding up these flooding events, even though they would eventually happen under "normal" conditions.
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 9:29 PM
SFBruin SFBruin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Everyone, including experts, is just giving their opinion.
Yes, this is true.

So, the statement "97% of climate scientists believe that the earth is warming" is really 97% of scientists hold the opinion that the earth is warming due to human activity. I'd like to see some of them explain why they feel that way, so that I can make my opinion better.
__________________
I don't read. I apologize in advance.
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 10:23 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
The denialists are hoping that the coastal cities get flooded out which would make those states more red, since any excuse to gain an electoral advantage is all that matters.
Literally nobody said this.

Besides, have you even thought about this concept? Do you think flooded cities would end liberal politics? Lol.
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 10:34 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Hill View Post
Yes you did. The denial of anthropogenic climate change is only possible if you think you somehow know better than the world's foremost experts who have devoted their entire academic and professional careers to the study of the climate.



You keep saying this.^ It implies the climate crisis was not caused by human activity and has been naturally occurring for thousands of years. It's a completely bizarre thing to mention in this context and a cringe-worthy display of ignorance.

Have you never seen the goddamned "hockey stick" graph? Here, this just happened to be sitting in my news feed today:
You're inventing stuff that I never talked about. There is no solution to warming. It's all about redirecting money. That's all it's always been about.

The Earth is warming, as it has for the last 18,000 years. Nobody has a solution on how to cool the Earth. Nobody. Nobody has determined at what temperature the Earth should cool to. What is the baseline? Nobody has established this.

Isn't it extremely unfair to have the Earth warm to a certain point, allowing some nations to reap the benefits of a warm world, while leaving other lands too cold to grow crops? When will we have that discussion? Or is that even a discussion to consider? Think about how much land is too damn cold to do anything with on this planet.

Land on Earth is about 29% of the surface, and human settlements are on about 1%.

Most of Canada, Alaska, most of Asia, Nordic nations, all of Antartica, all of Greenland -- it's so damn cold to use the land, live, or grow crops.
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 11:03 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Everyone, including experts, is just giving their opinion.
Some still think cigarettes don't cause cancer either. (Lots of industry dollars went into the deception, just like this one).

The sum total of scientific knowledge, and near-unanimous conclusions that humans are causing climate change....vs. random people and industry shills. Some opinions aren't like others.
__________________
"Alot" isn't a word.
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 11:10 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Some still think cigarettes don't cause cancer either. (Lots of industry dollars went into the deception, just like this one).

The sum total of scientific knowledge, and near-unanimous conclusions that humans are causing climate change....vs. random people and industry shills. Some opinions aren't like others.
Ciggs and Global Warming. Boy O' Boy, now that's an analogy!

Humans are not causing Climate Change, lol.
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 11:17 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,494
Maybe you weren't paying attention 30 years ago. The pattern was similar: Billions of industry dollars one one side, the public health and medical fields on the other. Industry caused confusion, people got suckered, and cigarette regulations were set back by decades. Only later did industry fess up and pay hundreds of billions in penalties for the lies that helped kill millions of people (smokers and the innocent).

Back then, industry stooges called talk radio shows and wrote letters to the paper. Today they spam social media and hang out on bulletin boards. As do the suckers who believe them, or want to believe them.

The difference is that climate change might kill a lot more people. But the lies (and suckers) are the same.
__________________
"Alot" isn't a word.
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2019, 11:59 PM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Maybe you weren't paying attention 30 years ago. The pattern was similar: Billions of industry dollars one one side, the public health and medical fields on the other. Industry caused confusion, people got suckered, and cigarette regulations were set back by decades. Only later did industry fess up and pay hundreds of billions in penalties for the lies that helped kill millions of people (smokers and the innocent).

Back then, industry stooges called talk radio shows and wrote letters to the paper. Today they spam social media and hang out on bulletin boards. As do the suckers who believe them, or want to believe them.

The difference is that climate change might kill a lot more people. But the lies (and suckers) are the same.
End result: people still smoke because it's still legal, they pay higher taxes though and now marijuana smoking and vaping* is legal. Great analogy.

*Vaping might not be legal in some states now that people have died.
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 12:22 AM
accord1999 accord1999 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
The difference is that climate change might kill a lot more people.
Because climate didn't kill people in the past?



Cigarettes are a simple recreational drug, but energy forms the foundation of modern civilization, and is overwhelmingly provided by carbon fuels. Cut off all oil, coal and natural gas and after the first local winter most of the world's population would be dead.
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 12:24 AM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 2,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Some still think cigarettes don't cause cancer either. (Lots of industry dollars went into the deception, just like this one).

The sum total of scientific knowledge, and near-unanimous conclusions that humans are causing climate change....vs. random people and industry shills. Some opinions aren't like others.
Absolutely. The scientists who have made their career out of studying the climate are in nearly 100% agreement that the climate is changing rapidly, and humans are causing it.
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 12:37 AM
Obadno Obadno is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Nice try but if it's based on proper science it's not just someone's opinion. Uneducated people tend to dismiss things they don't understand but that's why we call people like that 'stupid'.
Its literally completely acceptable to question scientists, in fact it is the duty of the scientific duty to do so.

The notion that there is a "consensus" on any scientific theory is wrong.
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 12:41 AM
Obadno Obadno is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Absolutely. The scientists who have made their career out of studying the climate are in nearly 100% agreement that the climate is changing rapidly, and humans are causing it.
(Some) scientists who have made their career out of studying the climate (many) are /in nearly 100%/ (remove for inaccuracy) in agreement that the climate is changing rapidly (delete rapidly) , and humans MAY BE CONTRIBUTING to it.

** there is very little agreement on what should or even can be done about climate change.

I edited it to make it accurate.
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 12:59 AM
Sun Belt's Avatar
Sun Belt Sun Belt is offline
Love it or leave it : )
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: The Envy of the World
Posts: 4,920
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
Absolutely. The scientists who have made their career out of studying the climate are in nearly 100% agreement that the climate is changing rapidly, and humans are causing it.
Humans are not causing climate change, lol.
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2019, 1:17 AM
SIGSEGV's Avatar
SIGSEGV SIGSEGV is online now
>~< , QED!
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: South Loop, Chicago
Posts: 1,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtown,man View Post
My question was entirely academic. In an academic environment, no question or thought should be off the table.
There is only so much brain bandwidth available. You may have asked your question in good faith (I have no reason to doubt you), but from the perspective of the professor, your question, which was was essentially "what are the advantages of climate change?" may have set of his/her bad faith argument alarm (i.e. it may have sounded like a young-earth creationist asking a question about the eyes of the coelacanth in a lecture on evolution). If you meant to ask "what groups stand to benefit from climate change" that would be a less loaded way to ask the question since it doesn't have the implied value judgement .
__________________
And here the air that I breathe isn't dead. Trump delenda est.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:36 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.