Here is an area of Florida that seems to have done some things right: Babcock Estates, near Ft. Myers. (The neighborhood is most known for being the first all solar neighborhood in Florida.) All houses supposedly have to be designed to handle 145 mph winds, and are on land that is built up so the houses are 30' above sea level. The neighborhood sustained almost no damage during Cat 5 Hurricane Ian. It is inland from Ft. Myers, but not by much. The houses are a little expensive ($400-700k), but not overly so for south Florida. Why aren't all heavily-populated, coastal areas of Florida set up this way?
Death of corals in the Florida Keys is approaching 100% in some areas. Researchers devastated by worrisome discovery in Florida’s ultra-hot oceans: ‘What we found was unimaginable’
So according to this scientist global warming/climate change is a UN hoax. I knew it! but we still need to stop deforestation in a huge way. Scientist admits the 'overwhelming consensus' on the climate change crisis is 'manufactured'
If you live in Florida, drink your Zephyrhills water while you still can. They're running out. The fault is not necessarily global warming, but a large influx of residents. Zephyrhills is expected to run out of water in less than 20 years. The largest use for water in central Florida? Landscape irrigation. It also seems like peninsular Florida (outside the panhandle) is getting less rain than it used to. Florida's aquifers have been under stress for some time now. This city famous for its water is now at risk of running out — here’s how things changed so quickly
It is interesting how we’ve come full circle. Men of antiquity lived their lives in fear of the weather, and they did silly superstitious things to convince themselves that they could control the weather. And here we are again living in fear of the weather doing silly superstitious things trying to convince ourselves that we can control the weather.
Judith Curry is an OG denier. She was a go-to in our old exchanges I referenced earlier. Can’t remember if you specifically were in them, but Gray and C&G had a little circle of about a half-dozen actual scientists, and I myself consider her an actual scientist (unlike hacks like Anthony Watts and that ilk.) But she is what is called a neo-denialist. She has published research confirming the warming, the CO2 role, and the anthropogenic idea. She separated herself from the rest of that bunch because they fought for decades about the mere idea of documented warming and pushed the more CO2=more food!! canards. In retirement she pivoted hard to the ludicrous side, which is not entirely irrational since there is big money in it. When cornered she will always go to the “unaffordable” talking point. As in, OK, it is real and it is anthropogenic, but there is just NO WAY to change because it can’t be financed. So while I disagree with her (which means she and I both disagree with her, as it turns out), and you, I’ll give you credit for finding an actual functional scientist instead of the bozos usually trotted out. Also agree with your deforestation point, although not sure what that has to do with this separate issue. I am praying to all seven of those GOT gods that it isn’t the cloaked CO2GUUUD baloney.
We could be 16 years into a methane-fueled 'termination' event significant enough to end an ice age We could be 16 years into a methane-fueled 'termination' event significant enough to end an ice age By Sascha Pare published about 15 hours ago Methane emissions from tropical wetlands have been soaring since 2006. Large amounts of methane wafting from tropical wetlands into Earth's atmosphere could trigger warming similar to the "termination" events that ended ice ages, replacing frosty expanses of tundra with tropical savanna, a new study finds. Researchers first detected a strange peak in methane emissions in 2006, but until now, it was unclear where the gas was leaking from and if it constituted a novel trend. Euan Nisbet, a professor emeritus of Earth sciences at Royal Holloway, University of London, told Live Science. "These repeated changes have taken the world from ice ages into the sort of interglacial we have now."
BR is 20 miles inland and 30 miles plus from the coast. It is built on ground that is 25 -30 feet above sea level before construction. BR was funded by long term money, mostly west coast pension money, so it has a much longer ROI time horizon. That same funding came with some green investment requirements. The size and long investment horizon and some political juice allowed them to create their own electric company. All houses are built to wind codes now. Some higher than 145 depending on wind zone
So the OP claims a gas company had some weathermen that predicted the future summers will be hot and winters would be cold, and in some areas the leaves would change. Holy Crap! Stop the presses. If “climate change” caused by humans is an actual thing…a global, life ending event for the planet….then explain why the loudest people with influence such as Al “internet inventor” Gore, John Kerry, 95% of Hollywood and so many others live in giant mansions, fly private jets, drive giant SUVs? Are these people lying sphincters or just hypocrites trying to kill the rest of us? If you want the truth and the speaker’s actions do not coincide with the speaker’s voice, always trust the actions….
I would think that new houses in coastal areas would be required to be built on stilts to give them some protection from storm surge, but I don't think that is happening in the areas around Tampa - St. Pete - Ft Myers. They are building single story ranch homes at grade within a short distance of the water. Expensive homes that become disposable when a hurricane hits, with the insurance companies paying to rebuild them. And people inland have to payer higher insurance premiums so these people can live their luxurious life and not have to pay the cost for their decisions. They should build up the land 5' or more before they build the house (using retaining walls if needed), but I don't think they do that, either. If people can't afford to build their coastal dream home properly, then they shouldn't build. Short of taking these steps, they should keep coastal property insurance totally separate from inland property insurance. Let the coastal people pay $20k a year for insurance, and the inland people can go back to paying $2k/yr. I don't feel like I should be paying for their irresponsible decisions, or the inability of the state to regulate their irresponsible decisions.
Here’s the problem, Rick: Even if there are 5, 10, or 100 climate scientists coming out and saying this (and Curry might be the only of which I’m aware), why should we just immediately take their word over the thousands of scientists saying anthropogenic climate change is real?
They're whistleblowers climate scientists that know the whole deal... they're not new to this subterfuge.
I’m not sure this really answer our question. What if there were whistleblower climate skeptics that came forward to explain that the deniers weren’t honestly seeking truth? Would you then immediately switch back to believing in climate change?
First of all I never said there were that many just a few, and I have no idea why the one that works at Vanderbilt decided to come out and tell the world what she knows. Still looking for that article and video of she talking about the fake UN climate Change agenda.
