It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 9:07 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 8:41 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member

Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:05 pm
Posts: 548
Location: North Jersey
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 39 times
Interesting Doomsday article in the current edition of New York. I don't subscribe to the mag but Read the whole thing while purchasing some books at the Barnes and Noble. The cover art had grabbed me. Basically about global warming and discusses the daisy chain of related events that would/will unfold as global temps rise.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html

Excerpt from beginning of the article.

"Peering beyond scientific reticence.

It is, I promise, worse than you think. If your anxiety about global warming is dominated by fears of sea-level rise, you are barely scratching the surface of what terrors are possible, even within the lifetime of a teenager today. And yet the swelling seas — and the cities they will drown — have so dominated the picture of global warming, and so overwhelmed our capacity for climate panic, that they have occluded our perception of other threats, many much closer at hand. Rising oceans are bad, in fact very bad; but fleeing the coastline will not be enough.

Indeed, absent a significant adjustment to how billions of humans conduct their lives, parts of the Earth will likely become close to uninhabitable, and other parts horrifically inhospitable, as soon as the end of this century.

Even when we train our eyes on climate change, we are unable to comprehend its scope. This past winter, a string of days 60 and 70 degrees warmer than normal baked the North Pole, melting the permafrost that encased Norway’s Svalbard seed vault — a global food bank nicknamed “Doomsday,” designed to ensure that our agriculture survives any catastrophe, and which appeared to have been flooded by climate change less than ten years after being built."

_________________
A person should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog,. .., build a wall, set a bone, take and give orders, cooperate, analyze & solve problems, fight efficiently, die gallantly RH
http://johnfoberg.blogspot.com/


Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on TumblrShare on Google+
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 9:43 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Posts: 3751
Has thanked: 1544 times
Been thanked: 467 times
Little did they realize they were speaking of themselves and the rest of the media over-hyping their clickbait.

"...the underlying story was considerably less alarming than the headlines"

Do they feel ashamed for fear-mongering? No.

"But no matter how well-informed you are, you are surely not alarmed enough.""

_________________
Most of my adventures are on my blog http://suntothenorth.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My Introduction With Pictures: http://zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopi ... 10&t=79019" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Graduated with honors from kit porn university


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:00 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:01 pm
Posts: 7883
Has thanked: 168 times
Been thanked: 284 times
I rarely comment on Religious posts but....

A 'study', purportedly from MIT, was recently released that takes on the climate hysteria...
( https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com ... 062717.pdf)

I post this link as using Google to find anything contrarian to the AGW creed is all but impossible, it's as though they manipulate the search data.....

enjoy

_________________
TacAir - I'd rather be a disappointed pessimist than a horrified optimist
**All my books ** some with a different view of the "PAW". Check 'em out.
Adventures in rice storage//Mod your Esbit for better stability


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 10:18 am 
Offline
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 15644
Location: Greater New Orleans Area
Has thanked: 845 times
Been thanked: 473 times
This is a very political topic fraught with hyperbole, disinformation, misinformation and downright wrong information.

Please keep your discussion limited to the article and not the politics surrounding the hyperbolic errors.

Yes I know that is hard, face palms abound. :D

_________________
Duco Ergo Sum

Link to ZS Hall of Fame Forum
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 12:07 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 3:56 pm
Posts: 964
Location: Possum Kingdom, East Coast
Has thanked: 2295 times
Been thanked: 185 times
Interesting read. Thanks Jack. Also, for the Scientists that challenge the magazine story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/12/scientists-challenge-magazine-story-about-uninhabitable-earth/?utm_term=.5a6c92b478b8

I tend to stay in a concerned mindset somewhere in the middle.

_________________
It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.
Henry David Thoreau


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:00 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member

Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:05 pm
Posts: 548
Location: North Jersey
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 39 times
Asymetryczna wrote:
Interesting read. Thanks Jack. Also, for the Scientists that challenge the magazine story:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/07/12/scientists-challenge-magazine-story-about-uninhabitable-earth/?utm_term=.5a6c92b478b8

I tend to stay in a concerned mindset somewhere in the middle.

Thanks Asyme..
I agree the original article seems full of hyperbole and their predictions are broad and skewed to the very dire. But it does get you thinking...
In the recent past we've made efforts and local actions to reduce our family's carbon emissions.

As for the purported "MIT" study, it's very heavily laden with statistical analysis I have difficulty interpreting and following

_________________
A person should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog,. .., build a wall, set a bone, take and give orders, cooperate, analyze & solve problems, fight efficiently, die gallantly RH
http://johnfoberg.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 1:17 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:41 pm
Posts: 3239
Location: Central Cascadia
Has thanked: 134 times
Been thanked: 268 times
TacAir wrote:
I rarely comment on Religious posts but....

A 'study', purportedly from MIT, was recently released that takes on the climate hysteria...
( https://thsresearch.files.wordpress.com ... 062717.pdf)

I post this link as using Google to find anything contrarian to the AGW creed is all but impossible, it's as though they manipulate the search data.....

enjoy


Read through the whole study they did, seems interesting. They are taking the number of days OVER a temp, like 95 or 100. One of the things I did was take a look at the extremes, over all extremes have gone down, so say Chicago they took days over 100, they've had fewer days over 100, but they've had more days in the 90's but the study didn't take that into account. Another one they did was days over 95 (nyc I think?) while those had gone down the days from 90-94 had broke records.

While agree that a lot of these reports over play the hysteria we really don't know what's going to happen. We are in new territory so I don't think its going to be mad max or waterworld, but increasing drought and famine could cause some issues in the near future

_________________
JeeperCreeper wrote:
I like huge dicks, Halfapint, so you are OK in my book.... hahaha
Spazzy wrote:
Tell ya what... If Zombies attack and the world ends I'll hook tandem toddlers to a plow if it means I'll be able to eat...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:29 pm 
Online
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2147
Has thanked: 1087 times
Been thanked: 302 times
So this is NOT about new magazine restrictions in NY? Glad to hear!

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:39 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:01 pm
Posts: 7883
Has thanked: 168 times
Been thanked: 284 times
Brings this to mind

Image

The above is fiction


This is real NY today. Doomsday has already arrived....for far too many people.
Image

_________________
TacAir - I'd rather be a disappointed pessimist than a horrified optimist
**All my books ** some with a different view of the "PAW". Check 'em out.
Adventures in rice storage//Mod your Esbit for better stability


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 3:32 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Posts: 3751
Has thanked: 1544 times
Been thanked: 467 times
raptor wrote:
This is a very political topic fraught with hyperbole, disinformation, misinformation and downright wrong information.

Please keep your discussion limited to the article and not the politics surrounding the hyperbolic errors.

Yes I know that is hard, face palms abound. :D


It is difficult to get to the core of the issue without running afoul of the politics that infuse every discussion. Best we can do here is to adjust our preps for what we think impacts our area of operation.

_________________
Most of my adventures are on my blog http://suntothenorth.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My Introduction With Pictures: http://zombiehunters.org/forum/viewtopi ... 10&t=79019" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Graduated with honors from kit porn university


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 5:41 pm 
Offline
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 15644
Location: Greater New Orleans Area
Has thanked: 845 times
Been thanked: 473 times
teotwaki wrote:

It is difficult to get to the core of the issue without running afoul of the politics that infuse every discussion. Best we can do here is to adjust our preps for what we think impacts our area of operation.


Exactly.

The issue is actually simple. Things change. These can be jobs, health, financial condition, personal conditions, risks, etc. ... a wide variety of things.

The reason for the change is actually irrelevant they only really relevant point is how to cope with the change.

You should ask yourself: Am I prepared for changes I am likely to encounter? If the answer is no then you need to decide how you can change the answer to yes.

_________________
Duco Ergo Sum

Link to ZS Hall of Fame Forum
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:11 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11347
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 574 times
My biggest take away from it is that the amount of pollutants in the atmosphere are increasing. In quantities greater than "X" adverse effects begin. Those close to the climate change issue will even falsely dramatize well known, validated, quantifiable and observed effects to get try to scare people in to believing things that are not true.

Lying to achieve goals is not very "sciencey" and tends to turn off a huge segment of the population that is responsible for making the every day decisions in society. It casts a shadow over whatever message is being sent.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 7:27 pm 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member

Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:05 pm
Posts: 548
Location: North Jersey
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 39 times
Stercutus wrote:
My biggest take away from it is that the amount of pollutants in the atmosphere are increasing. In quantities greater than "X" adverse effects begin. Those close to the climate change issue will even falsely dramatize well known, validated, quantifiable and observed effects to get try to scare people in to believing things that are not true.

Lying to achieve goals is not very "sciencey" and tends to turn off a huge segment of the population that is responsible for making the every day decisions in society. It casts a shadow over whatever message is being sent.


Nicely said!

_________________
A person should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog,. .., build a wall, set a bone, take and give orders, cooperate, analyze & solve problems, fight efficiently, die gallantly RH
http://johnfoberg.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2017 9:31 pm 
Offline
ZS Moderator
ZS Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 10:18 pm
Posts: 15644
Location: Greater New Orleans Area
Has thanked: 845 times
Been thanked: 473 times
One thing to remember. People with something to gain from the existence any condition will almost always claim that condition exists. The truth will be irrelevant in this case.

Another thing to remember is that people fearful of that same condition are more prone to believe the claims that the condition exists.

If you put the ones with something to gain together with those who have a deep fear, you create an group willing to do and say anything to address the condition.

In this instance the truth becomes irrelevant and actually inconvenient.

_________________
Duco Ergo Sum

Link to ZS Hall of Fame Forum
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:04 am 
Offline
* * * * *

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:50 am
Posts: 1629
Location: Midwest
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 39 times
Stercutus wrote:
My biggest take away from it is that the amount of pollutants in the atmosphere are increasing. In quantities greater than "X" adverse effects begin. Those close to the climate change issue will even falsely dramatize well known, validated, quantifiable and observed effects to get try to scare people in to believing things that are not true.

Lying to achieve goals is not very "sciencey" and tends to turn off a huge segment of the population that is responsible for making the every day decisions in society. It casts a shadow over whatever message is being sent.

Speaking as a family deeply involved in the hard sciences:

In almost every case, and definitely including climate change, the scientists aren't the ones making news off the most extreme claims. The scientists do good work and say "Our prediction is X with an uncertainty of Y", meaning that the truth is somewhere between X-Y and X+Y. This is because, unlike basically every other field of human experience, admitting how wrong you might be and taking huge steps to minimize the amount of potential being wrong, is at the very core of science. Then some dumbass in a PR department sees the paper, doesn't understand it but realizes they make the most impact if they state X+Y as the "answer" rather than the most extreme case. Sometimes it's PR at the university, sometimes it's PR at the first paper/magazine to see the paper, but it's very, very rarely the scientists. In the case of AGW, the scientists are pretty worried about X (god knows the moderate/probable impacts are horrid enough) but the damned media is still harping on and on about X+Y.

My take is that, presuming we manage to not have most of the world go Venezuela as the early impacts of this are felt in the 1st world, any of us under the age of 60 or so need a plan to move north (which for most of us means changing countries). At some point, to keep the same weather you have now, you're going to have to move 300-500-700 miles north. You need a plan for how you're going to facilitate that. You need a plan for how to continue to be one of the guys who can get food when the prime growing land for corn and soy beans moves from Iowa and Illinois up to Ontario and Manitoba and winter wheat production moves from Kansas and Oklahoma on up to the northern border of North Dakota. You need to have a plan for how to survive economically when NYC flooding a la Sandy happens every other year and yet people won't abandon the city because Americans are stubborn.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 9:24 am 
Offline
ZS Member
ZS Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:54 pm
Posts: 164
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 34 times
The article linked by the OP is about outcomes that are wildly unlikely; about as unlikely as nothing bad happening due to climate change in the next 100 years. Given that the latter is often bandied about as a 'valid viewpoint' here and elsewhere, I wouldn't go too far in skewering the article. Especially given that the author of the article, in the article, acknowledges how unlikely these outcomes are. If you're going to say, "hey, I hear there's uncertainly in the data; that means there's a chance nothing bad will happen", you need to recognize that the uncertainty goes both ways, and there's also a chance it could be the freaking climate change apocalypse. The cynic in me says the skeptics don't actually care either way, because they will be safely dead of old age by 2100.

Overall, I am cautiously optimistic on this topic, as solar and wind power are continuing to grow exponentially. They have been for decades, and if they can maintain that growth rate, global emissions will peak in the next 10 years or so. Mind you, that doesn't mean no climate change, just a bit less than we are expecting. Even if you don't care about climate change, less mercury emissions, less smog, less particulate in the air is great news.

_________________
The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” -Isaac Asimov


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 3:17 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11347
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 574 times
Wind power will eventually (by eventually I mean very likely within a decade) become the prime means of electricity production in Texas and then likely most of the Midwest where it is most viable.

Cars are the big sticking point. China plans on switching to all electric cars within a decade. They bought Volvo (auto division) and Volvo will soon make only electric cars. If China can eliminate pollution from automobiles they will have a whole different country.

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 4:08 pm 
Online
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2147
Has thanked: 1087 times
Been thanked: 302 times
I have a lot of sympathy with the "climate change" crowd. My issue, based on what I have read and videos I have watched, is the disagreement on how much humans are actually contributing to it.

The article gives this:

Quote:
The Earth has experienced five mass extinctions before the one we are living through now, each so complete a slate-wiping of the evolutionary record it functioned as a resetting of the planetary clock, and many climate scientists will tell you they are the best analog for the ecological future we are diving headlong into. Unless you are a teenager, you probably read in your high-school textbooks that these extinctions were the result of asteroids. In fact, all but the one that killed the dinosaurs were caused by climate change produced by greenhouse gas. The most notorious was 252 million years ago; it began when carbon warmed the planet by five degrees, accelerated when that warming triggered the release of methane in the Arctic, and ended with 97 percent of all life on Earth dead.


So it's not like this is the first time we have faced this. In all likelihood no humans were polluting the world 252 million years ago, so its not like humans are required for this sort of thing.

I buy into the "planetary cycles of climate change" idea. I also buy into the idea that it is getting warmer. Where I see disagreement in the scientific community is on how much *humans* are responsible for climate change.

I"ll link to a video that summarizes my feelings and observations.

http://youtu.be/OwqIy8Ikv-c

What gets me is that the current climate change started long before humans could have had an impact, and that we see evidence of climate change and climate disasters previously in the Earth's history. Changing human activity might change the course of climate change, but who really knows.

So for me the answer is to support those who are seeking to colonize other planets and realize "we didn't start the fire, it was always burning since the world's been turning."

And reduce/eliminate the number of plastic bags and plastic water bottles I use. I hate finding that stuff littered all over. I hate the islands of that garbage out in the ocean. I also try to get things with less plastic packaging.

But we may simply be in for an extinction. I'd prefer not, but since things started a long time ago and IF humans really don't have an impact, there may not be much to do but grab our ankles and maybe get onto another planet.

I certainly don't wish us to continue to live irresponsibly. I"m just not sure we can have much of an impact on global climate change one way or the other.

Feel free to PM me with any responses that would fall too solidly into "Politics." Quality educational material is also always welcome.

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 4:19 pm 
Online
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 3:45 pm
Posts: 2147
Has thanked: 1087 times
Been thanked: 302 times
Stercutus wrote:
If China can eliminate pollution from automobiles they will have a whole different country.


Maybe. But a video I saw a while back on China showed most people don't own cars and most people still heat their homes with coal. Not like in the 1900's, but more modern types of coal heaters. And the article I'm linking to mentions a lot of state industries are still coal based. I think it will take more than electric cars to make China a different country. Just IMO.

The video I saw some years ago said most of California's pollution now comes from China. It goes up across the Bearing Straight and down across Alaska and into California. Makes sense so I just assume it's true.

http://www.chroniclet.com/national-news ... orest.html

Image

Image

Image

_________________
*Remember: I'm just a guy on the internet :)
*Don't go to stupid places with stupid people & do stupid things.
*Be courteous. Look normal. Be in bed by 10'clock.

“It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to.” -Bilbo Baggins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11347
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 574 times
Most people in China don't have passenger vehicles. But there are still 200,000,000 of them in the country. This makes them the second most country in the world with automobiles.

Coal is a big problem.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/285 ... -in-china/

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:39 pm 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am
Posts: 1669
Has thanked: 241 times
Been thanked: 373 times
williaty wrote:
Stercutus wrote:
My biggest take away from it is that the amount of pollutants in the atmosphere are increasing. In quantities greater than "X" adverse effects begin. Those close to the climate change issue will even falsely dramatize well known, validated, quantifiable and observed effects to get try to scare people in to believing things that are not true.

Lying to achieve goals is not very "sciencey" and tends to turn off a huge segment of the population that is responsible for making the every day decisions in society. It casts a shadow over whatever message is being sent.

Speaking as a family deeply involved in the hard sciences:

In almost every case, and definitely including climate change, the scientists aren't the ones making news off the most extreme claims. The scientists do good work and say "Our prediction is X with an uncertainty of Y", meaning that the truth is somewhere between X-Y and X+Y. This is because, unlike basically every other field of human experience, admitting how wrong you might be and taking huge steps to minimize the amount of potential being wrong, is at the very core of science. Then some dumbass in a PR department sees the paper, doesn't understand it but realizes they make the most impact if they state X+Y as the "answer" rather than the most extreme case. Sometimes it's PR at the university, sometimes it's PR at the first paper/magazine to see the paper, but it's very, very rarely the scientists. In the case of AGW, the scientists are pretty worried about X (god knows the moderate/probable impacts are horrid enough) but the damned media is still harping on and on about X+Y.

My take is that, presuming we manage to not have most of the world go Venezuela as the early impacts of this are felt in the 1st world, any of us under the age of 60 or so need a plan to move north (which for most of us means changing countries). At some point, to keep the same weather you have now, you're going to have to move 300-500-700 miles north. You need a plan for how you're going to facilitate that. You need a plan for how to continue to be one of the guys who can get food when the prime growing land for corn and soy beans moves from Iowa and Illinois up to Ontario and Manitoba and winter wheat production moves from Kansas and Oklahoma on up to the northern border of North Dakota. You need to have a plan for how to survive economically when NYC flooding a la Sandy happens every other year and yet people won't abandon the city because Americans are stubborn.


This has been discussed here before with different motivating factors. Moving 300-700 miles north will only put you in direct confrontation with existing people who live there. If that's your plan, expect a lot of resistance to your presence. A much safer plan is to adjust your skill set to how the climate has changed in your area. Instead of winter wheat in KS/ Oklahoma , vineyards and orange orchards for example. It's not like everything south of the Dakotas is going to be uninhabitable.

_________________
As of now I bet you got me wrong


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jul 22, 2017 10:55 pm 
Offline
* * * * *

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:50 am
Posts: 1629
Location: Midwest
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 39 times
flybynight wrote:
This has been discussed here before with different motivating factors. Moving 300-700 miles north will only put you in direct confrontation with existing people who live there. If that's your plan, expect a lot of resistance to your presence. A much safer plan is to adjust your skill set to how the climate has changed in your area. Instead of winter wheat in KS/ Oklahoma , vineyards and orange orchards for example. It's not like everything south of the Dakotas is going to be uninhabitable.

In this case, a plan might be something like "immigrate now/soon before Canada becomes as xenophobic as much of the US".

As far as areas becoming uninhabitable, yes, some of that is expected to happen even under the most conservative predictions due to increases in wet bulb temperature and changes in precipitation. There are some areas in the southern US, as well as other places around the world at similar latitudes, that are expected to become uninhabitable due to the wet bulb rising (as a product of a moderate rise in temperature coupled with a moderate rise in humidity, both of which raise the wet bulb) to the point that it's fatal to be outside without air conditioning for more than a few minutes at a time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2017 5:09 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:30 am
Posts: 1669
Has thanked: 241 times
Been thanked: 373 times
williaty wrote:
flybynight wrote:
This has been discussed here before with different motivating factors. Moving 300-700 miles north will only put you in direct confrontation with existing people who live there. If that's your plan, expect a lot of resistance to your presence. A much safer plan is to adjust your skill set to how the climate has changed in your area. Instead of winter wheat in KS/ Oklahoma , vineyards and orange orchards for example. It's not like everything south of the Dakotas is going to be uninhabitable.

In this case, a plan might be something like "immigrate now/soon before Canada becomes as xenophobic as much of the US".

As far as areas becoming uninhabitable, yes, some of that is expected to happen even under the most conservative predictions due to increases in wet bulb temperature and changes in precipitation. There are some areas in the southern US, as well as other places around the world at similar latitudes, that are expected to become uninhabitable due to the wet bulb rising (as a product of a moderate rise in temperature coupled with a moderate rise in humidity, both of which raise the wet bulb) to the point that it's fatal to be outside without air conditioning for more than a few minutes at a time.

You first :D I plan to stick around in my underground /air conditioned house and growing coffee beans and bananas, while hunting giant crocodiles and mega pythons in the Texas rain forest :crazy:
Image

_________________
As of now I bet you got me wrong


Last edited by flybynight on Sun Jul 23, 2017 7:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jul 23, 2017 6:51 am 
Offline
* * * * *
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:16 pm
Posts: 11347
Has thanked: 71 times
Been thanked: 574 times
Quote:
"immigrate now/soon before Canada becomes as xenophobic as much of the US"


They are already way more so. Have you even read their immigration policies?

_________________
"Big Thanks - I promise to advance your agenda within the secret and omnipotent councils of the Trilateral Commission"

“No-one likes us, we don’t care.”


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group