As a dude who grew up in the evangelical church that literally had sermons that told children the world was about to end in a fiery inferno I beg to differ. Let’s not equate scientific evidence and yes… some activism with actual apocalypse cults. I’ve seen it firsts hand. There’s no evidence that the four horseman are coming down tomorrow and the Euphrates is about to dry up so the army of the antichrist can cross to start the battle for Middle Earth. But there is evidence that life will be very hard for most of the planet if temperatures rise a few more degrees. Mocking people who care is really kind of immature and comes off as entitled as well. Yes some go too far in their activism but behind a bit of silliness is actually some pretty devastating science. I’d recommend less immature mocking and more mature factual research. Especially from someone who claims to live in Florida of all places.
These right wingers right now I also know are also likely consuming all this stuff going around about a UFO crash and an apparent “siting” of an alien in some Las Vegas backyard where endless amounts of right winger tik tokers etc are parsing through grainy video and saying “OMG do you see these eyes right there!!” Acting like the left has the true nuts because of scientific evidence has driven some activism while most of you guys are probably watching these aliens are here!! Videos at the same time is pretty rich.
Yes this is someone who is likely paying greater rates for insurance, higher property taxes and fees to deal with salt water infiltration and beach erosion that all are affecting Florida.
You'd better be aware of what you're getting in to if you buy a beach house these days. I have a 40yo friend who has a family beach house in Surfside, TX, and he said it was 3rd row when he was a kid and now it's front row on the beach. I'm loosely in the market (waiting for a deal to pop up) and have been watching the market for a while, and they still sell like hotcakes. But the prospect of owning a house that may be it's own island in 20 years does give me pause.
allegedly her tweet If it was, she made up that quote. It was not in the article referenced in the tweet.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/canadi...al-forest-d8bff3b6?mod=hp_opin_pos_5#cxrecs_s Canadian Wildfires Came From Rotten Luck, Not Climate Change Extreme weather results from a combination of random factors in a complicated system. By Clifford Mass June 12, 2023 at 6:24 pm ET An extreme environmental event struck New York last week. The city experienced some of the worst air quality in the world—and the worst to hit the city in at least a half-century—as dense wildfire smoke surged south from the province of Quebec. Headlines suggested that the primary culprit was climate change, but these claims are inconsistent with peer-reviewed science, the observational record and our growing understanding of the meteorology associated with wildfire events. I have published extensively on the meteorology of major wildfires, studied the effects of climate change on atmospheric circulation, and received funding from the National Science Foundation and U.S. Forest Service for research dealing with wildfire meteorology. An unusual atmospheric circulation resulted in wildfire ignition and rapid growth, with an intense low-pressure area pushing undiluted smoke into the New York area. Global warming was only a minor player in this event. The recent wildfires occurred in the boreal forests of northern Quebec. Fire isn’t rare in that region. The ecology of these forests relies on fire for the release of seeds and forest health. Many of the major boreal fires occur during a narrow temporal window from mid-April through early June, just after the winter snow has melted and before grasses and other small plants grow, reducing flammability. During this short window, the dead vegetation from the previous year can dry out sufficiently to burn if there is an ignition source such as lightning or errant human activity. Many of the great Quebec fires have occurred during the spring, such as the May 2010 fire that spread massive amounts of smoke into New England and the May 1870 Saguenay fire, which spread smoke as far as the British Isles. Large boreal forest fires during the spring in Canada are neither unusual nor a sign of climate change. The fires this month began on June 2, as hundreds of lightning strikes ignited vegetation dried by nearly a week of unusually warm weather. The weather prior to the warm spell wasn’t unusually dry, with the Canadian drought monitor showing normal moisture conditions and temperatures near or below normal. Starting on May 27, an area of high pressure built over south-central Canada, warming and drying the area for several days into early June. With the light surface fuels, such as grasses ready to burn, all that was needed to start a fire was an ignition source, which occurred in early June with a lightning storm associated with low pressure. The lightning ignited numerous fires and the low-pressure center’s circulation produced high winds that stoked the fires, resulting in rapid uncontrolled growth. Even worse, as the low center pushed south and intensified east of New York, it produced persistent strong winds from the northwest, moving the Quebec smoke into the New York metropolitan area. It was the perfect storm for smoke in New York, with several independent elements occurring in exactly the right sequence. It’s difficult to find any plausible evidence for a significant climate-change connection to the recent New York smoke event. The preceding weather conditions over Quebec for the months prior to the wildfire event were near normal. There is no evidence that the strong high pressure over southern Canada that produced the warming was associated with climate change, as some media headlines claim. In fact, there is a deep literature in the peer-reviewed research that demonstrates no amplification of high- and low-pressure areas with a warming planet. The long-term trend in Quebec has been for both precipitation and temperature to increase. Temperatures have warmed about 2 degrees Fahrenheit over the past half-century. Even assuming that this warming is entirely human-induced, it represents only a small proportion of the excessive heat during the event, in which Quebec temperatures climbed to 20 to 25 degrees above normal. The number of wildfires in Quebec is decreasing; there is no upward trend in area burned, which would be expected if global warming was dominant. The recent intense New York smoke event is a good illustration of the underlying origins of many extreme environmental and weather events. The atmosphere is a chaotic system, dominated by random natural variability. Such variability is like a game of cards—rarely, by the luck of the draw, one is dealt a full house or a straight flush. Climate change’s effects on weather are relatively small compared to random variations inherent in a hugely complex system. Mr. Mass is a professor of atmosphere sciences at the University of Washington. Appeared in the June 13, 2023, print edition as 'Rotten Luck, Not Climate Change'.
Largest investment in red state Indiana manufacturing in decades and its all thanks to biden... funny how the trillions in tax cuts Republicans have passed over the 2 decades havnt done anything close to what is happening under biden in terms of manufacturing
https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcast-michael-gerrard-held-v-montan By Jen Patja Howell Friday, June 16, 2023, 5:01 AM On Monday, 16 young plaintiffs—between the ages of 5 and 22—walked into a packed courtroom in Helena, Montana, to sue their government. At issue is a 1972 amendment to the state constitution guaranteeing that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.” 22-year-old Rikki Held and her co-plaintiffs allege that state officials violated that constitutional right. The case, Held v. Montana, now over a decade in the making, is truly historic—the first-ever constitutional climate lawsuit to reach trial in the United States. …
All those batteries.. there’s more electric cars, windmills, etc. today than ever before.. less pipelines, refining, etc.. It has had the opposite effect the left said it would.. yikes
Are you saying temp is going up and still going up beside all of the electric cars, windmills, etcs, implying it has been useless and actually have the opposite effect? If so, that's wrong. Global temp are correlated to CO2 level. The CO2 level is still going up. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/
