Florida mayors write to GOP presidential hopefuls demanding action on climate change


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Florida mayors write to GOP presidential hopefuls demanding action on climate change because the state’s POS governor is doing everything he can to make it worse.

Fixed it.


#3

I wonder if it would be less expensive to try to cool the planet or to build walls, dams, and dykes to hold back the sea?


#4

Reality is encroaching on our wallets, please send subsidies!


#5

I wonder if this and / or this had anything to do with it.


#6

And, if so, what would the economies-of-scale look like from building Just One Big Wall (to hold them all out us all in it all back…)


#7

Don’t know why they are bothering. We all know JAYSUS! is coming back soon and will fix all of this!!


#8

I’m surprised this doesn’t concern more red blooded American men.


#9

Just read a New Yorker article, about the increasingly common flooding in Miami and not just during high tides. Folks come out of their houses complaining about their expensive palm trees being flooded by saltwater, or apartment dwellers complaining to their landlord “what are you going to do about the water?” and yet Gov Rick Scott gave an order that no one mentions the words “climate change” rather they call it “nuisance flooding”. (and of course he and Rubio and Bush still deny climate change)

The reality though is that most of Florida is doomed, because building dykes would be useless since so much of the land is porous limestone, the water will just seep through underground.


#10

Good thing that water pumps were one of the first parts of the industrial revolution to be coal powered, so the technology is nice and mature! As long as they can stick someone else with the bill, all sorts of zany engineering ‘fixes’ become possible!


#11


#12

The Reds are invading!


#13

Man made or not, the earth is going to go through warm and cool cycles. This means we may need to move BACK from the water. Much of early civilization is currently under seas and oceans from the ice age ending and other rises in sea level, as well as ground sinking lower. (Example below) Remember we also just came out of a little ice age not that long ago.

So while we should still strive to keep pushing for cleaner energy and cars etc, I think one should focus also on the practical problems of maybe we need to move. This is nothing new. Man has been migratory to a degree for most of his entire existence. Even after the advent of agriculture and cities, great civilizations died out and/or abandoned great places because of shifts in climate, rain patterns, etc. Maybe we should stop moving to the desert (looking at you, Arizona). It’s time to think that some places like New Orleans can fight nature only so long before we need to move back some. Cliff erosion like we saw in CA recently is going to happen, climate change or not. There will be no magic bullet to save some places. It makes more sense to move back.


#14


#15

I agree that there are going to need to be some major relocations, unfortunately it isn’t a small percentage of the human population that lives on land that is predicted to be underwater in the next 100 years. We are talking a pretty major global relocation.

Carbon dioxide is the major driver of this warming cycle and we know the role humans have had in CO2 levels, so it isn’t really a question of IF humans are responsible for this time. We know it.

There is near universal scientific consensus around human impact on climate change, the temperature is directly linked to CO2 in the atmosphere and we know how much of that CO2 humans have contributed.

The entire existence of humanity has been in a very narrow temperature range on the tail end of the last mini ice age. interglacial period is what we are in now (and the only period we can effectively survive in), the mid-way point between an ice age and a green age. Humans have never been through an ice age nor a green age, and the habital zones for humans in either is quite small, and could only support a minute fraction of the current population. The main problem is not rising sea levels, but rather what percentage of land can support which flora and fauna, which we’ve doubly screwed by reducing biodiversity. We shouldn’t be in such a rush to find out if we can innovate ourselves out of extinction. Humans are innovative primates, and I’m sure we most likely survive, but only a very small percentage.

So yes we will need to move back from the rising waters, and yes we damn well better stop our current trajectory. :slight_smile:

(oh and the video you posted was a super fun watch, thank you so much!)


#16

The 0.1% are way ahead of you. They’ve been preparing to move for years…
https://www.google.com/search?q=commercial+space+flight


#17

Convert the flooded land to aquaculture — seaweed, oysters, shrimp, conch — and tax that.


#18

As far as Florida is concerned, the “wall to hold back the sea” has a major problem in that the subsurface geology of Florida is highly porous. Water doesn’t seep through it, it downright races through it. We’re talking ginormous sump pumps for the entire tip of the State. And of course, if they ever fail …


#19

I’d like to take Jebby back out into the Everglades and leave his ass there, fucken asshole. One might think that if you’re tasting saltwater while you’ve got your head stuck in the ground, there’s a distinct problem. And between Jebby’s political machinations to crush the Florida environmental movement, and Boss Sugar destroying anything of the Everglades that’s left, well, I guess I’m back to telling Jebby to go lick alligators, the peckerwood.


#20

Not at all, because that map is generated by those lowly scientists, with their numbers and fancy talk about weather and shit. Which we all know is a vast librul conspiracy to allow Obummer to sell out the US to the United Nations so he and Michelle can move to Sharialand and open a mosque.