Climate change

Page 2 of 3  
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 10:49:01 -0400, "Mayayana"

That has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. We are getting salt water intrusion because hey are drawing down the aquifer faster than it can be recharged. The same thing is happening in the ogallala but they don't have the sea backfilling into it. That may have as much to do with the mystery earth quakes as fracking. In Florida, the inland aquifers that are drained, become sink holes. The static water level in my well has gone from truly artesian to 32' down in 30 years.
When the salt content gets to the point that it kills the grass, we will not be using as much water. That is where most of the water goes. Bottled water is more about taste. Florida water always sucked. (sulfur, high mineral content etc). You either get used to it, you get an R/O that most of us have or you buy bottled water.

You may start seeing different animals but it won't happen in either of our lifetimes. We are still talking about things that will happen in 100 years or more ... assuming nothing changes and that the models are right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| You may start seeing different animals but it won't happen in either | of our lifetimes. We are still talking about things that will happen | in 100 years or more ... assuming nothing changes and that the models | are right.
That's already happening, though I'm not sure any of it has to do with global warming. The latest import is stinkbugs. There are moths killing the maple trees. Grasshoppers and bumblebees were plentiful when I was young. Now I see neither, but carpenter bees have moved in. The monarchs have all but disappeared. That's said to be mainly caused by loss of habitat on their migration route. We have hummingbirds now, which we didn't used to. We're getting occasional bears in Metro Boston while we have opposums, wild turkeys and woodchucks in our yard. I never saw any of those animals when I was young. But that, too, may have nothing to do with warming. Maybe it's loss of woods? I don't know.
My personal experience is not so much of warming but of erratic climate as compared to 50 years ago. One Winter's cold, the next isn't. This Winter we've had -15F and 65F. I don't remember either of those extremes when I was young. But one thing I'm certain of: I used to play pond hockey from December through to March when I was in high school. These days the ponds rarely freeze. There's no place to skate in the Boston area except commercial rinks. Yet 100 years ago, before refrigerators, we were a big exporter of block ice cut from local ponds.
That also affects my work. When I started my business in 1985 I would never expect to be able to work outside after about the first week of November. It was just too cold. Paint wouldn't dry. Fingers couldn't work without gloves. Below freezing was just too cold for being out all day. I had to plan jobs accordingly. Today I don't rule out anything. January/February is iffy, but an extended warm spell is not unusual even in those months. And if it's up around 45F there's no reason I can't work outside.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 12:30:43 -0400, "Mayayana"

Colony collapse has been happening for a long time and less hysterical people are blaming it in a particular mite, insecticides and other more rational things. Bees do just fine in hot climates. Invasive insects are more the result of the global economy than global warming. Again, this is nothing new, it is just worse now that we have containerized freight coming here from all over the world. The increase of wildlife in urban areas may have more to do with the decline of hunting than anything else. Again, nothing new. I have seen deer in down town Washington DC and the place is lousy with raccoons and possums. They are simply increasing faster than their decreasing habitat can sustain.

I think we are just paying more attention to the weather. I remember very mild winters in DC where we were riding bikes in T shirts on Christmas day. The next year we might have a foot of snow.
I have never said CO2 levels are not on the rise but it is as easy to blame that on total population as anything else. The trend is 8000 years old. Maybe guys like Paul Erlich who were warning about our exploding population in the 70s were right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mayayana wrote: ". In New England it's likely to be the other way around. We have plenty of water and expect more with global warming. Our problems are more likely to be extreme species strain, as we move up one or two temperature zones. But water shouldn't be a problem. So order now before I put the price up. :) "
Hate to break it to ya, but #1 it's CLIMATE CHANGE NOT "global warming" and #2: the 30 year prognosis for New England is longer, colder, snowy winters and summers 1-2F deg. COOLER than normal. CT through Maine are bucking the trend.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Hate to break it to ya, but #1 it's CLIMATE | CHANGE NOT "global warming" and #2: | the 30 year prognosis for New England is | longer, colder, snowy winters and summers | 1-2F deg. COOLER than normal. CT | through Maine are bucking the trend.
Links? I haven't heard that. I've only heard a general prediction about more rain. (And what's the difference between climate change and global warming? Are you saying that you think climate change is happening but that it's not connected to global warming?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 21:36:17 -0400, "Mayayana"

The climate is always changing. It is simply arrogant for this generation to believe it will always be the way they like it.
If people are worried about climate change and actually believe all of these things will happen in their lifetime. plan for it. Buy some beach front property in Highlands county Florida for a song now and be a millionaire in a few years. Personally I think that in 100 years you will still be 60 miles from the beach but that is just me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/11/2016 9:52 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

I think that arrogance is when certain people think that we can affect climate change with freon, driving big cars, etc.
--
.
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 4/11/16 9:52 PM, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Big One Earthquake is a better bet and you not only get waterfront property as part of Cali falls into the sea, but the Quake also takes care of the needed demo prior to redevelopment. Win/Win.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mayayana wrote: "| Hate to break it to ya, but #1 it's CLIMATE | CHANGE NOT "global warming" and #2: | the 30 year prognosis for New England is | longer, colder, snowy winters and summers | 1-2F deg. COOLER than normal. CT | through Maine are bucking the trend.
Links? I haven't heard that. I've only heard a general prediction about more rain. (And what's the difference between climate change and global warming? Are you saying that you think climate change is happening but that it's not connected to global warming?) "
Look at winters 2013-14 and 14-15. Record cold and snowfall at least here in CT. Plus the last couple summers we barely broke 80F in July and August.
The difference between global warming and climate change is that one of them is a myth: Global warming implies that temperatures of both sea and air, worldwide are gradually rising. That's just not true.
Climate change suggests that certain regions of the world are seeing lower average temperatures, and other regions, higher. Ditto precipiatation patterns. Change implies that the whole world is not getting uniformly warmer over time. Rather, some parts are getting cooler, some parts hotter, some parts wetter, some parts drier.
Global warming is a media misnomer, so it has ZERO connection to climate change.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
|| the 30 year prognosis for New England is || longer, colder, snowy winters and summers || 1-2F deg. COOLER than normal. CT || through Maine are bucking the trend. | | Links? I haven't heard that. I've only heard | a general prediction about more rain. (And | what's the difference between climate change | and global warming? Are you saying that you | think climate change is happening but that it's | not connected to global warming?) " |

| cold and snowfall at least here in CT. Plus | the last couple summers we barely broke | 80F in July and August. |

But you were talking about a 30 year prediction. That would need to be issued by some kind of scientific group, based on some kind of evidence. I haven't heard any such prediction. If you make that claim isn't it reasonable to ask for the evidence?
The past two years don't mean anything. This Winter has been very warm and the Summer of 3 years ago was a scorcher. So what? What's that got to do with longterm predictions of colder climate?
| The difference between global warming and | climate change is that one of them is a myth: | Global warming implies that temperatures of | both sea and air, worldwide are gradually | rising. That's just not true. |
So you reject the climate scientists measurements showing that the dozen or so hottest years on record, worldwide, have been in the last 15-or-so years? Surely you must have seen those claims.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_temperature_record
I think it would be surprising if there were not at least some change in the past 100 years. The big question is what's coming, whether we're causing it, and whether that's bad. What I see is global warming scientists and activists on one side who seem to fudge the data in order to fit their sense of emergency. The numbers are always changing and we simply don't have the technology to figure it all out for sure. It's simply not realistic for them to be as certain as they are. On the other side I see lazy ostrich mentality -- people who don't want to know anything that might cause inconvenience and will use any half-baked argument to deny any possibility of global warming.
What about a reasonable middle? Why not just try to act sensibly, live sustainably, reduce pollution, reduce greenhouse gases, regardless of whether global warming is a problem? We *are* the environment. We have to live that way.
In my lifetime our lifestyle has become less tenable rather than more, despite environmentalism. Very few people compost. Nearly everything I buy comes in a useless plastic blister pack. People drive and fly more than they ever have. A popular pastime in rural areas is to drive ATVs back and forth through the woods. Whole Foods tries to shame people for wanting a paper receipt, yet they're phasing out bulk goods and selling juice drinks in tiny six-packs, with each kiddie container having it's own built-in straw. All "disposable". They also stock a great deal of produce from S. America, which has to be flown in by jet. Cellphones have a typical lifespan of 2 years, maximum. Coffee makers that use a plastic cup per serving have become very popular. Less cleanup. But we dispose of a plastic cup for every cup of coffee! Could it get more idiotic than that? Garbage disposals put food into the sewer system. All of those things should be illegal -- crimes against common sense. But that would conflict with unfettered consumerism and the religion of convenience.
The way I see it, many of the people on both sides of the issue are more nuts than not. :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, April 12, 2016 at 10:36:02 AM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:

Yes I have - but, we certainly have not felt the effects of such change here in southern CT. Like I said, human activity is causing CHANGES to regional climates around the world. And these changes are not all rising temperatures. Some places are getting cooler, some places are getting windier, some are getting less windy, some are getting more precip, etc etc. But all of those aspects of climate change are not all moving in one direction globally - as the phrase "global warming" does imply.

I agree entirely!! It's just that I'm trying to impart what's really happening to the planet. Sustainable living, reduced pollution and greenhouse gas are good not only for the planet but for the human and other animal species we share it with.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and it was all predicted by Rod Serling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Midnight_Sun
wait for the trick ending as usual.
Mark
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

Don't worry. I am sure both Mother Nature and the bioweapons engineers of a dozen countries are working on a rhinovirus that's as lethal as ebola or AIDS. Even in a pond, bacteria 'know' when they've reached the edge and suddenly stop multiplying. It would be sad if we are, on the whole, no smarter than pond scum.
--
Bobby G.



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mayayana posted for all of us...

There is money to made on this, follow the $$$ just ask Al Gore.
--
Tekkie

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

Agree - but heat is not the main problem and is fairly easily mitigated. What's damning Florida and New York City real estate owners, among others, is the rising cost of insurance in areas subject to coastal flooding. If Big Insurance and climate experts both fear global sea rise, I tend to believe in it no matter where Al Gore or anyone else stands.
http://www.google.com/search?q=large+premium+increases+coastal+flooding
Serious problems are coming but since this got politicized, we'll drown long before we start fixing things. Sandy was but a wakeup call for NYC, NJ and other places rarely hit by large hurricanes. A respectable percentage of *valuable* US real estate is in fairly low elevations.
http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/critical-issues-sea-level-rise/
<<Most predictions say the warming of the planet will continue and likely will accelerate. Oceans will likely continue to rise as well, but predicting the amount is an inexact science. A recent study says we can expect the oceans to rise between 2.5 and 6.5 feet (0.8 and 2 meters) by 2100, enough to swamp many of the cities along the U.S. East Coast. More dire estimates, including a complete meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet, push sea level rise to 23 feet (7 meters), enough to submerge London.>>
Now we know one reason cities have been abandoned many times in the ancient world.
As for climate change making new places uninhabitable, IIRC, they were talking about Dubai and the Middle East, which are already well-near uninhabitable anyway. Soon they will be even more so. So? (-:
--
Bobby G.



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:17:33 -0400, "Robert Green"

If you actually look at those hits, you see the rate increases are just because the value of the buildings on the beach are much higher. People are not building beach shacks anymore, they are building houses worth a million dollars and up.
New York was just in denial because they had not actually had a storm since the 30s and they were way overdue. New Orleans was the same way as was South Florida before Andrew.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I would not be so quick to say it's all value-based. In fact, I strongly disagree with that assertion. Underwriting assumptions change after major payouts. If what you say it true, rates shouldn't have risen after Andrew but we both know they did. If I had the time I'd cite specific articles. But even in that Google search list I posted has articles that say insurers are factoring in near-sea level elevation properties as much higher risks because of the inexorable sea rise of recent years.
Perhaps the articles you find with this search will more accurately make the point of increasing premiums due to predicted sea rise (and other climatic threats):
http://www.google.com/search?q=insurers+believe+coastal+flooding+will+increase
I worked for a major insurer in the actuarial dept. my first job out of college. Actuaries look ahead to the future and determine the risks that can affect their policyholders and adjust rates accordingly. Is it possible they're scamming their clients? Of course. But the rate of sea rise is increasing nearly every year and lots of prime real estate could become like Venice.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/
Insurers know that and are sticking lots of coastal customers with enormous rate increases because of the perceived increase in risk, not the increase in value of their property. Value increases just don't match up with the rate increases - and that's what has people in coastal areas so pi$$ed off.
--
Bobby G.



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 01:35:36 -0400, "Robert Green"

Andrew was not a big flood event nor were Charley and Wilma Andrew prompted insurance companies to simply pull their business from Florida until they instigated separate windstorm policies to get them back. That still had nothing to do with flood. FEMA is raising flood rates to reflect the fact that they have been artificially low forever and the amount of money they lose, even in relatively minor storms like Sandy (a weak Cat 1) just points put that the amount of exposure near the water has been underestimated. You also can't ignore the amount of million dollar housing, right on the beach, in places that were sea oats 15 years ago.

That is pure hyperbole to sell more expensive policies. You only have to look at coastal tide stage monitor data to see that if sea level is rising, the amount in minuscule. The real risk, is what is being built and where it is being built. We have never had this level of development at the beach in Florida before. I suppose I could get you aerial photos since just 1944 to show that or you could go to labins and get them yourself. (a compilation of Florida aerials going back to 1944 and some earlier than that)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

Depends on your perspective. The rise in 100 years could be catastrophic if the speed estimates of previous climatic/sea level changes throughout time are considered.
http://climate.nasa.gov/system/charts/12_15_seaLevel_left.gif
--
Bobby G.



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 15 Apr 2016 09:01:51 -0400, "Robert Green"

MAN-MADE climate warming/change is junk science used by big-government tax and spend politicians and special interest groups to justify massive new taxes and government control (e.g. gas cans, light bulbs and carbon taxes). Indeed, many of the UN-IPCC input data assumptions used in the Global Warming Climate Change computer models are egregiously unrealistic, e.g. CO2 uptake via the global ocean/air interface, effects of solar activity, very limited data sampling, sub-surface ocean current movement changes, chronic underestimate of methane effects, variability of volcanic ash and CO2 ejection, methane overestimation, etc. There are many others. As the developers of computer models like to say: "Garbage in, garbage out".
--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.