After thinking about it, I'm sorry if I offended you by my simplification. I should've stuck to the original argument of sunspots on temperature. If I recall correctly, based on the trend from the previous cycle to the current, by the mid 21st we should see ~0.5C increase. Small but not negligible.
As for global warming, if the predictions are right from the pro-camp, we'll know shortly. I personally don't think its a matter of warming as much as it is maintain current temps.
Human Caused Global Warming Will Not Happen
Skipjack -
The way I look at it is this...
Humans are pretty resourceful, adaptable critters. We're everywhere from the Arctic Circle to Tierra Del Fuego, and all land in between.
Animals and vegetation are adaptable, also. I know of no animal that, when faced with a 2 degree change in its habitat temperature, will go "OH NOES too hot I die *croak*" - they'll move to cooler/warmer climes or change their habits. And it won't take long for them to do so.
Humans do better when it's warm than when it's cold. The concept that a 1-2 degree difference will wreak havoc on the world economy seems an odd conceit to me, because (as I said) we're adaptable. BCGlorf's family shifts crops from winter wheat and rye to corn - and they're good to go. The corn belt expands, all is good.
I think we'd see a lot more damage come from cold, myself.
The way I look at it is this...
Humans are pretty resourceful, adaptable critters. We're everywhere from the Arctic Circle to Tierra Del Fuego, and all land in between.
Animals and vegetation are adaptable, also. I know of no animal that, when faced with a 2 degree change in its habitat temperature, will go "OH NOES too hot I die *croak*" - they'll move to cooler/warmer climes or change their habits. And it won't take long for them to do so.
Humans do better when it's warm than when it's cold. The concept that a 1-2 degree difference will wreak havoc on the world economy seems an odd conceit to me, because (as I said) we're adaptable. BCGlorf's family shifts crops from winter wheat and rye to corn - and they're good to go. The corn belt expands, all is good.
I think we'd see a lot more damage come from cold, myself.
When opinion and reality conflict - guess which one is going to win in the long run.
Maybe I'm calloused, but I don't consider that a 'new' problem for places like New Orleans or the Maldives. When you are a coastal town below sea level, or an island that is on average 4ft above sea level, you are ALREADY in dire straights. You should ALREADY have dikes and Tsunami preparations and infrastructure in place. You should ALREADY have planning for when, not if, your homes get smashed under by the next big wave. If sea levels go up by even 6 inches, those areas need to add 6 inches onto all their dikes, infrastructure and disaster plans.ScottL wrote:I think there is worry that the increase in temperature will accelerate the melting of the polar ice caps raising sea levels. A 1-2 degree although small to us is significant overall. There's a lot of concern by coastal towns and low-lying islands or island nations.
I don't think it's exactly honest to count the costs to such areas as absolute since it's an expense that those areas aught to be laying out even if sea levels are dropping.
There are islands in the Pacific where indigenous people live and are unaware of such effects or are aware and are actually trying to get the rest of the world to see what they're doing. I wouldn't even begin to argue in favor of New Orleans though, they're aware of their plight, the fact they keep rebuilding in the same place is their own mess.Maybe I'm calloused, but I don't consider that a 'new' problem for places like New Orleans or the Maldives. When you are a coastal town below sea level, or an island that is on average 4ft above sea level, you are ALREADY in dire straights. You should ALREADY have dikes and Tsunami preparations and infrastructure in place. You should ALREADY have planning for when, not if, your homes get smashed under by the next big wave. If sea levels go up by even 6 inches, those areas need to add 6 inches onto all their dikes, infrastructure and disaster plans.
There is no human caused rise to the sea level. The sea level has been going up everywhere the coast is not rebounding from the last ice age faster than those rising coasts displace ocean onto slower rising shores.
There is no measured human caused rise in temperatures or in sequelae. Some humans, however, are inventing the measurements which speak to the contrary.
The notion that humans are measurably raising the global temperature is at best a noble and believed in fraud.
There is no measured human caused rise in temperatures or in sequelae. Some humans, however, are inventing the measurements which speak to the contrary.
The notion that humans are measurably raising the global temperature is at best a noble and believed in fraud.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
The fact they keep rebuilding in the same place is inevitable. The Mississippi River and Drainage Basin is THE critical import-export transportation artery-capillary network of North America. Without it, American power does not exist, because capital costs skyrocket. That main artery MUST have a port servicing it, and that port MUST be more or less where New Orleans is located.ScottL wrote:I wouldn't even begin to argue in favor of New Orleans though, they're aware of their plight, the fact they keep rebuilding in the same place is their own mess.
Vae Victis
You're saying this is the only main port for import/export into the U.S.? Clarifying before I say anything further, but there are certainly better ways to manage this problem.The fact they keep rebuilding in the same place is inevitable. The Mississippi River and Drainage Basin is THE critical import-export transportation artery-capillary network of North America. Without it, American power does not exist, because capital costs skyrocket. That main artery MUST have a port servicing it, and that port MUST be more or less where New Orleans is located.
N.O. handles about 1/3rd of the nation's shipping, more than any other port. Before the Depression a few years ago, SanDiego was I think next largest.
N.O. is built (the old part of it) on the highest and most solid ground for about 50 miles in any direction. That's where the port needed to be with pre 1950's earth moving capabilities. Most of the docks are now far upriver.
The thing is even with current earthmoving capabilities, it would take years and be drastically expensive to prepare a new shipping channel out to sea in the Atchafalaya channel, where the Mississippi is now trying to go. As long as the river control structures the Corps put into place continue to be likely to work and we use ships, N.O. will be maintained as the port at the mouth of the Mississippi.
The equivalent problem would be if all of Holland and Belgium were all a conventionally unbuildable swamp and one country and Antwerp didn't exist. Suddenly, the Rhine wanted to go to sea where Antwerp is instead of Brussells.
N.O. is built (the old part of it) on the highest and most solid ground for about 50 miles in any direction. That's where the port needed to be with pre 1950's earth moving capabilities. Most of the docks are now far upriver.
The thing is even with current earthmoving capabilities, it would take years and be drastically expensive to prepare a new shipping channel out to sea in the Atchafalaya channel, where the Mississippi is now trying to go. As long as the river control structures the Corps put into place continue to be likely to work and we use ships, N.O. will be maintained as the port at the mouth of the Mississippi.
The equivalent problem would be if all of Holland and Belgium were all a conventionally unbuildable swamp and one country and Antwerp didn't exist. Suddenly, the Rhine wanted to go to sea where Antwerp is instead of Brussells.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria
But we are currently coming out of an ice age! Of course the polar caps will melt!ScottL wrote:I think there is worry that the increase in temperature will accelerate the melting of the polar ice caps raising sea levels. A 1-2 degree although small to us is significant overall. There's a lot of concern by coastal towns and low-lying islands or island nations.
AFAIK: Frozen water at the poles of this planet is the exception, not the norm. We are IN an ice age.. (at least, the tail end of one)... and at some stage in the future won't be any more!
You should read some of the history of the major European ports, and engineering them.TDPerk wrote:N.O. handles about 1/3rd of the nation's shipping, more than any other port. Before the Depression a few years ago, SanDiego was I think next largest.
N.O. is built (the old part of it) on the highest and most solid ground for about 50 miles in any direction. That's where the port needed to be with pre 1950's earth moving capabilities. Most of the docks are now far upriver.
The thing is even with current earthmoving capabilities, it would take years and be drastically expensive to prepare a new shipping channel out to sea in the Atchafalaya channel, where the Mississippi is now trying to go. As long as the river control structures the Corps put into place continue to be likely to work and we use ships, N.O. will be maintained as the port at the mouth of the Mississippi.
The equivalent problem would be if all of Holland and Belgium were all a conventionally unbuildable swamp and one country and Antwerp didn't exist. Suddenly, the Rhine wanted to go to sea where Antwerp is instead of Brussells.
San Diego was not the west coast hub, it is Long Beach. Seattle also does a healthy trade.
The East coast Baltimore/Philly hub and NY, New Jersey Hubs are massive. Yes New Orleans completes the access chain to the Midwest and Central states, via the river, but do not underestimate the east/west rail and roads system. The amalgamate as a whole is what has allowed the US to dominate economically. The US built a fully integrated infrastructure well ahead of anyone else. I personnally think that New Orleans relevance as a major shipping port is losing ground. Its usefullness today lays in regard to the nation's total ability to move containers versus bulk cargo (dry or wet).