$2 Billion damages per inch of GW sea level rise

Study: Climate change added $8 billion to Sandy’s damages

formatting link
They shouldn't even quote little numbers, like inches, in stories targeting the MASSES, that sort of downplays it to the idiots.

Reply to
Fred Bloggs
Loading thread data ...

According to random numbers from unnamed "experts" at some alarmist website?

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

The real problem is cheap federal-funded flood insurance. It lets people build expensive beach houses, and rebuild them.

Reply to
John Larkin

At least one of the experts involved in the study was named.

"study co-author Bob Kopp, director of Rutgers University’s Institute of Earth, Oceans and Atmospheric Sciences." Rutgers isn't quite an Ivy League College - they were private universities, and Rutgers had gone public before the League was set up, but they aren't going to host an alarmist web-site.

Reply to
Bill Sloman

Academic studies from respectable universities don't rely on "idiotic single view statistics" whatever they might be/

John Larkin makes the same claim. It's based on stuff the gullible twit reads on climate change denial websites.

The problem is that there aren't all that many positive effects, and you mostly have to move to exploit them, abandoning loads of expensive infra-structure in the process.

Reply to
Bill Sloman

The story links to the publication of their study in Nature Communications here

formatting link
where you're getting alarmist website from.

I didn't know Stevens Institute of Technology, a hellhole dump in Hoboken, had an oceanography department. I hope they do better with oceanography than that sham engineering department joke there. Notice the way they say "of New Jersey" and not Hoboken, because Hoboken sounds too much like Skid Row. U.S. is full of sham so-called educational institutes that have evolved into pure taxpayer ripoffs.

If these idiots think we're going to spend $100 trillion to save Manhattan, they've got something coming. Let the place revert back to being a sandspit.

Reply to
Fred Bloggs

Very true. I consider wiping the slate clean of residential development in what should be coastal wildlife habitat a positive effect.

I especially like the way the idiot morons build these big international airports in wetlands areas and then complain they have a bird strike hazard going in.

Reply to
Fred Bloggs

Alas, we humans have traditionally located ourselves near bodies of water, and large concentrations (cities) near large bodies of water, or junctions. Big airports don't require or benefit from water resources, but they ARE placed near big cities. Exceptions include Washington Dulles International Airport; have you ever heard of Reston?

Reply to
whit3rd

We're not dead, we're Reston!

Reply to
Rick C

Sure they do. Whenever they want to expand JFK, they just dump some more landfill into Jamaica Bay. Lots cheaper than buying up thousands of houses.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Reply to
Phil Hobbs

I know you can't read, but lookup who the authors are. It all goes back to some retarded doom 'n gloom website with random number math. It's all bullshit.

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

I expect some of us know a lot more about bs than others, essentially having lots of first hand experience.

Any reason why you don't give a link to that web site and the names? i.e. show us the money!

Reply to
Rick C

It was a bit of a close-run thing with that Ebola outbreak. Fortunately it didn't cross over into humans.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Reply to
Phil Hobbs

You already posted the link. Move your mouse or trackball cursor over the names of the authors. Write down the name of the organization that appears. Now ask jeeves to find that website and take a look around.

Reply to
Cydrome Leader

I suppose you mean this:

formatting link
because they're on mission to promote and publicize climate change research doesn't mean they're doctoring the data.

Reply to
Fred Bloggs

Looks like most of their funding comes from the government and the big philanthropies.

formatting link

Reply to
Fred Bloggs

So you don't know... Ok, got it.

Reply to
Rick C

... because water is a source of transportation and power "generation"

Ditto O'Hare and Midway. Flying into Midway is as maddening as Boston. In addition to the water, the proximity of "highly developed civilization" reinforces your hope in the pilot's abilities!

Reply to
Don Y

Hong Kong's old Kai Tak airport was the most exciting one I've flown into. A turn between two mountains at about 500', down skimming the rooftops of run-down residential high-rises with laundry out on poles and down onto a runway that terminated in the sea.

They closed it in '98 in favor of a massive modern airport out on Lantau island with various modern links to Kowloon.

It doesn't look as bad, but apparently Reagan airport in DC requires a fair bit of pilot skill because they can't overfly sensitive regime structures such as the presidential palace.

Reply to
Spehro Pefhany

onsdag den 19. maj 2021 kl. 22.20.54 UTC+2 skrev Spehro Pefhany:

formatting link

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.