One of the biggest climate change threats -- Rain

I don't hide, because I don't need such a thing. I argue based on common sense. You, instead, hide behind claims of what scientific research has found, without providing a single bit of evidence for this.

Thanks for admitting your defamation is routine. (The funny justification for this disposed of.)

I will not stop writing 2+2=4 simply because you name this "standard and stereotypical US corporate rightwing propaganda line". Even if 2+2=4 would be "standard and stereotypical US corporate rightwing propaganda line".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You keep pretending that the identification of your sources - by argument from evidence - never happened.

As noted many times now, it's the common errors that identify the common source.
Your insistence on writing 2+2 = 5, or 13, or wallpaper paste, or whatever Fox News or some Republican politician says it equals this week,
like them in synchrony with the US corporate rightwing media feed, same vocabulary and framing and "logic" and everything,
is how we know that feed is your source. If you had posted 2+2=4, there would have been no way to tell where you got it - that's common reality.

For example: Nobody else on this planet calls the findings of published and peer reviewed AGW research "alarmism", namecalls the researchers "alarmists", and so forth. Only that rightwing corporate media feed and its parrots use that language for those people and that research.

"Hiding" behind scientific research?
Once again you admit to knowing nothing about AGW.
If you don't believe my claims, check them.

No, you don't. Ignorance is not common sense. You argue based on ignorant presumptions; the presumptions are wrong, the arguments are foolish, and we can see where they came from - the US rightwing corporate media feed, Republican propaganda.

Like all AGW denial.

And so you are unable to recognize the implications of the research and analysis finding that the extra rainfall precipitation predicted from AGW is likely to fall as torrential addition to existing storms - damaging to agriculture and infrastructure alike, and with increasing frequency disastrous.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Finally, we get down to what we can control---
pollution.

As for controlling the climate------NO------we can no more control the climate than King Canute could hold back the tides.

..............
meanwhile: Plant a tree(or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 or...) for every year you live on this planet.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

See, the difference is that King Canute could not hold back the tides. We can make the planet warmer - and have done so.

Why?

 

symbiosis

 

If that's your goal, surely growing e.coli would be wiser.

 

Every once in a while, your sense of humor delivers the unexpected.

 

The statement of "You can't adapt if you already dead" is not about alarmist rhetoric. It was posted in response to your belief that there is time in which the world's agricultural regions can adapt to the changes that are occurring.

The coral bleeching, if it continues annually or frequently, which it appears to be doing will prevent any useful adaptation from occurring, the only "adaptation" available under such short time scales is dead coral..as the region adapts to a less coral sustainable capacity.

btw the Barrier reef has just a few days ago had it's official status amended from "Poor" to "very Poor" by the Government.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08...ng-term-outlook-downgraded-very-poor/11464294

You seem to fail to acknowledge the reality that a short (eg. 20 minute ) burst of extreme weather can destroy a year or more of human investment and if occurring annually affords little to no regional ability to adapt.
I used the example of peak heat and how a 20 odd minute exposure can lead to significant mortality rates thus the phrase "Adaptation is impossible for those who are dead" came into the discussion.

It was simply the use of a logical statement ( axiom?) to demonstrate the fallacy you were expressing whether it be human life or agriculture or other... and was NOT intended to intimidate or other wise inspire fear.
I may be wrong. If so, please correct me...and explain how it is so..

 

I hope you are not on the coast... King tides expected apparently...

 

Strawman.

The AGW researchers and reporters and like folks - the people you call "catastrophists" and others call "alarmists" and so forth - have been there for fifty years, and trying to make it happen all that time. That was the point of Al Gore's little movie, for example.

 

West coast - the storm has shifted north east so things have changed greatly. But, I fear the most for the Bahamas. That’s heart breaking

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

terrible news, so far... cat5 Dorian, strongest in their History. and that is only the start, we have to wait until it turns into a rain depression, probably over the states. Currently Georgia and Carolinas...according to news outlets..

edit: media reports are also suggesting that it is 2nd strongest or equal strongest in history...

 

not even close
the strongest was the 1935 labor day hurricane

 

A beat up then....

 

Nope. Strongest by peak pressure was Wilma in 2005. Strongest winds was Allen in 1980. You are probably talking about "strongest winds in a hurricane when it made landfall" which is currently a tie - that 1935 hurricane you mentioned and Dorian.

 

My heart breaks for those suffering in the Bahamas right now. Absolute devastation.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Storm surges up to 23 feet. Some neighborhoods are literally under water.

 

Either way this storm is massive...

Gosh... what has Trump been saying?

 

A quick question for Schmelzer...,

How should people of the Bahamas be adapting right now?

 

You're right, of course.
OOPS
I was only looking at storms that made landfall in the us
..............................................
meanwhile:
If you build in a floodplain, you should expect flooding.
If you live where hurricanes are common, you should expect storms.
If you live in tornado alley, you should expect the winds.
If you live in active earthquake zones you should expect the shaking
...etc...etc...
.......................
meanwhile, we tend to think that we have free will, however, how many of us really carefully choose where we will live?

 

The footage of the Bahamas coming in to the weather stations is unreal...the entire area looks devastated.

I wonder when people will take global warming seriously - is this storm enough? How many storms do the naysayers need to start believing that we have to do something?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!