35
36

Study: Climate Models Overestimated Global Warming For The Last 55 Years (dailycaller.com)

submitted by chabanaisFortis est veritas

sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]sentinel106Neoconservative 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Hey guys. I'm as conservative as the next guy, and I was very skeptical of the global warming movement at first, but my views have change and I wanted to talk to you about it.

I live in Miami, Florida, a city notorious for being susceptible to hurricane and flood damage. Heck, when there's a heavy downpour here the streets flood pretty badly. Florida has the longest coastline in CONUS, making us ground zero for being overtaken by the sea, and this is only exacerbated by the fact that our whole state is just about at sea level. Whether or not you believe climate scientists have been parroting alarmist policies, please understand that I want to save my home and my property, no matter the cost.

Because of Florida's unique situation, we thankfully have a coalition of local and state-level politicians who are working to protect the future of our towns and cities. Miami Beach, for instance, is working on extensive seawalls to protect against storm surges. In the Everglades, the CERP (Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan), if it works, will seek to manage water drainage from under Miami to prevent the city from being flooded from beneath.

In Florida climate change and sea level rise is not a partisan left-versus-right issue, it is an issue that affects every person and property owner, especially those who live by the sea.

If you do not agree with climate science, that is your right. However, I implore you to not obstruct those who wish to protect the place that I call home. I want to be able to pass down this land to my children, and their children, and that cannot happen if we simply ignore the problem.

Thank you for hearing me out. May God bless and you all have a nice day.

Addition: I've stirred up quite a debate here! I'm glad to see everyone commenting, discussing, and contributing to our great community.

[–]PhredexProud to be on the Drone Strike list 5 ポイント6 ポイント

By the way, all of Florida is considered transient land. Over geological time, it is more often underwater than above it.

http://fcit.usf.edu/florida/lessons/land/land.htm

[–]albinoeskimo 0 ポイント1 ポイント

what actions would you suggest? china and india account for 30 something percent of carbon pollution and don't seem too concerned with reigning that in any time soon. Large swaths of rainforests in asia, south america and africa are being destroyed for wood and to create farmland. What independent, domestic action could we possibly take that would remedy this?

Best case scenario, we mildly reduce the problem by letting the natural gas industry run the coal industry out of business and keep regulating emissions but not to the point to where it would be more profitable for businesses to leave. Worst case scenario, we impose a crippling carbon tax and businesses simply leave the country and pollute as much as they want somewhere else.

[–]sentinel106Neoconservative 2 ポイント3 ポイント

I really can't even begin to speculate, because I'm no expert. My own personal opinion on the matter? A comprehensive sea-wall system with an additional drainage system. For South Florida the problem is two-fold as the limestone foundation acts like a sponge, allowing water to seep up. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan I mention has some good ideas, namely digging pits in the limestone to allow the water-buildup to drain. A sea-wall around the state can relatively easily be made out of sand. Heck, my old home in Indian River County had a massive seawall out of sand spanning all of the beach. Is it cheap? Not exactly, but it's cheaper than the alternative.

I'm absolutely with you on the expansion of the natural gas industry. Obama's campaign to stifle our domestic energy production has baffled me. Energy independence is vital to our national security and has the added benefit of allowing us to break Europe out of dependence on the Russians.

[–]chabanaisFortis est veritas[S] -4 ポイント-3 ポイント

So what parts of the study do you actually disagree with?

Oh and by the way I link to that study in this comment:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/2buw4b/study_climate_models_overestimated_global_warming/cj94f6l

I'm interested in just the facts and I agree that this was not a partisan argument.

[–]sentinel106Neoconservative 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Thanks for the reply.

I'm not an academic, so I must confess that the study goes over my head.

This part of the article irks me:

According to McKitrick, all climate models predict that rising carbon dioxide levels will cause rapid warming in the troposphere over the tropics. But that’s not what has happened, as neither satellites nor weather balloons have detected much warming in the tropical troposphere — meaning something is likely wrong with the models.

Even if all of that is true, I want protective measures in place to make sure my state isn't inundated by the sea.

[–]Terron1965 0 ポイント1 ポイント

So the truth and facts be dammed you want untold billions in improvements for your city whether they are warranted or not.

Gotcha, I suppose you want everyone else to pay for it also.

[–]sentinel106Neoconservative 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Saving the East Coast cities will end up being cheaper than letting the oceans drown them, as I've said in other comments on this thread.

It's not just "my city," it's every American coastal city that is at or near sea level, which accounts for tens of millions of people.

[–]PhredexProud to be on the Drone Strike list -4 ポイント-3 ポイント

And EVERY SINGLE climate model has been proven incorrect.