"I don't understand how anyone cannot see this. The evidence is all around us."
Well to be fair, the evidence is that we ALWAYS have droughts, heatwaves, floods, tropical storms, blizzards, and the like—literally every year, everywhere. There is no "normal" of perfect weather year-round. What *HAS* happened is that the media has been prostituting themselves with these events WHICH WILL HAPPEN REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING WE DO TO ELIMINATE FOSSIL FUELS as somehow being evidential of a worsening climate "crisis" but they never, ever point out that we're not having more wildfires (that can't be explained by human encroachment on previously forested areas and fire suppression protocols), or tropical storms (which can't be explained by better satellite imagery), or heatwaves (which can't be explained by more reporting stations or revision of historical data records), or floods/droughts (which can't be explained by blocking omega high pressure systems). We forever have had all these events; we will CONTINUE to have them even if Thanos snapped his fingers and made all carbon emissions disappear overnight.
The question to ask is, What was the baseline of these atmospheric WEATHER events at the turn of the 20th century, and what is the current frequency? Then, use science to help explain any change in that frequency or magnitude—but stop shouting at the top of your lungs that we must upend the entirety of modern Western society because climate change ... or something. Climate is in perpetual flux; there should be no expectation that it remains the same over time, or that the small percentage of CO2 molecules affecting the 9-15µm wavelengths of incoming solar radiation is irrevocably ruining the planetary climate system—ESPECIALLY when the influence of global cloud cover has a much greater effect and much wider range of potential forcing than does an additional few millionths of CO2.
Not only that but stop patting China and India while they are upping their emissions by building 2-4 GW coal plants a week - and giving them a pass by looking away.
While I am fine with ingenuity and science finding new purposes for formerly "waste" products that turn out to be VERY useful processes indeed, I am against just tipping things upside down for this new climate religion by ideologues that are only ending up making our (we little people at the bottom of the ladder) lives more expensive and miserable and take choices away from us under the rubric of "you'll thank us later because it will be GOOD for you!".
We need a revival of pitchforks, tar, and feathers for those of them that keep treating the rest of us an infantile idiots.
I am always amazed at the thought that floods and fires can get worse by the global warming crowd. If you build where it floods then you could have flooding. Depends on the storm, whether you have high tide, which way the storm hits the coast. How much rain that has previously fell before the storm hits to raise river levels. Fires are a different story, usually they can be controlled by forestry management. The houses that burned down in California, were man made disasters led by poor management.
Proof, Lloyd? Unless they are in a nursing home, why are you assuming that your assumption is true? While I've lived here for 42 years, it wouldn't take long to sell the house and then move to anywhere.
Sixty percent of US households are paycheck-to-paycheck (Forbes, CNBC, others). That's before looking at how many Boomers are on fixed incomes. Homelessness among Boomers is also on the rise (MSN, WSJ, others).
It's good that you're feeling resilient, but why be so dismissive of the possibility that others are in harm's way?
OK, 60% of U.S. households are paycheck-to-paycheck, but it's NOT 60% of Boomers households. That's false equivocation.
The number of Boomers that are on fixed income is also a false equivocation because (a) many of them have defined pension plans (b) full Social Security payments (c) the highest rate of home ownership and (d) the greatest proportion of wealth among all generations. You'll need to provide some kind of better data that proves homelessness among Boomers is becoming problematic because of external forces and not their own poor economic choices throughout their lives.
Financial literacy is not a systemic solution for five decades of neoliberal economic policy, regardless of generation. I recognize Boomers' outsized share of generational wealth, but remain concerned about those who are precarious.
"Young people are far more resilient and adaptable than the old, and they can follow the jobs and the water and move to Buffalo or Detroit. Old people are often stuck."
I moved to Detroit several years ago anticipating climate change.
I don’t understand how anyone cannot see this. The evidence is all around us.
Maybe, like that elderly relative I was chatting with, many older folks simply don’t care. They’ve lived their happy life and are relaxing now.
"I don't understand how anyone cannot see this. The evidence is all around us."
Well to be fair, the evidence is that we ALWAYS have droughts, heatwaves, floods, tropical storms, blizzards, and the like—literally every year, everywhere. There is no "normal" of perfect weather year-round. What *HAS* happened is that the media has been prostituting themselves with these events WHICH WILL HAPPEN REGARDLESS OF ANYTHING WE DO TO ELIMINATE FOSSIL FUELS as somehow being evidential of a worsening climate "crisis" but they never, ever point out that we're not having more wildfires (that can't be explained by human encroachment on previously forested areas and fire suppression protocols), or tropical storms (which can't be explained by better satellite imagery), or heatwaves (which can't be explained by more reporting stations or revision of historical data records), or floods/droughts (which can't be explained by blocking omega high pressure systems). We forever have had all these events; we will CONTINUE to have them even if Thanos snapped his fingers and made all carbon emissions disappear overnight.
The question to ask is, What was the baseline of these atmospheric WEATHER events at the turn of the 20th century, and what is the current frequency? Then, use science to help explain any change in that frequency or magnitude—but stop shouting at the top of your lungs that we must upend the entirety of modern Western society because climate change ... or something. Climate is in perpetual flux; there should be no expectation that it remains the same over time, or that the small percentage of CO2 molecules affecting the 9-15µm wavelengths of incoming solar radiation is irrevocably ruining the planetary climate system—ESPECIALLY when the influence of global cloud cover has a much greater effect and much wider range of potential forcing than does an additional few millionths of CO2.
Not only that but stop patting China and India while they are upping their emissions by building 2-4 GW coal plants a week - and giving them a pass by looking away.
While I am fine with ingenuity and science finding new purposes for formerly "waste" products that turn out to be VERY useful processes indeed, I am against just tipping things upside down for this new climate religion by ideologues that are only ending up making our (we little people at the bottom of the ladder) lives more expensive and miserable and take choices away from us under the rubric of "you'll thank us later because it will be GOOD for you!".
We need a revival of pitchforks, tar, and feathers for those of them that keep treating the rest of us an infantile idiots.
Keep doing it!
I am always amazed at the thought that floods and fires can get worse by the global warming crowd. If you build where it floods then you could have flooding. Depends on the storm, whether you have high tide, which way the storm hits the coast. How much rain that has previously fell before the storm hits to raise river levels. Fires are a different story, usually they can be controlled by forestry management. The houses that burned down in California, were man made disasters led by poor management.
"Old people are often stuck."
Proof, Lloyd? Unless they are in a nursing home, why are you assuming that your assumption is true? While I've lived here for 42 years, it wouldn't take long to sell the house and then move to anywhere.
Or are you speaking solely from your POV?
Sixty percent of US households are paycheck-to-paycheck (Forbes, CNBC, others). That's before looking at how many Boomers are on fixed incomes. Homelessness among Boomers is also on the rise (MSN, WSJ, others).
It's good that you're feeling resilient, but why be so dismissive of the possibility that others are in harm's way?
I'm not being dismissive of other peoples' plights. I am dismissive of Lloyd's nuance concerning "stuck".
OK, 60% of U.S. households are paycheck-to-paycheck, but it's NOT 60% of Boomers households. That's false equivocation.
The number of Boomers that are on fixed income is also a false equivocation because (a) many of them have defined pension plans (b) full Social Security payments (c) the highest rate of home ownership and (d) the greatest proportion of wealth among all generations. You'll need to provide some kind of better data that proves homelessness among Boomers is becoming problematic because of external forces and not their own poor economic choices throughout their lives.
Financial literacy is not a systemic solution for five decades of neoliberal economic policy, regardless of generation. I recognize Boomers' outsized share of generational wealth, but remain concerned about those who are precarious.
If baby boomers will be hit the hardest, it is because the Logan's Run initiative and the introduction of Soylent Green.
"Young people are far more resilient and adaptable than the old, and they can follow the jobs and the water and move to Buffalo or Detroit. Old people are often stuck."
I moved to Detroit several years ago anticipating climate change.
Least you got a cheap house!
It wasn’t cheap. We have plenty of expensive houses within the city limits.
Sorry, I assumed given the devastation that Detroit has gone through the last coupla/three decades.
'Tis OK, Grok. Detroit in general is still a shithole even if the occasional suburb neighborhood has retained its property value.