Report warns of growing impact on US life

[DeluxAuto]

Unchecked climate change will cost the US hundreds of billions of dollars and damage human health and quality of life, a US government report warns.

This report is striking for two reasons. First, it is not abstract. It gives many specific examples - overwhelmed dams in South Carolina; failing crops in the parched Great Plains; a rise in insect-borne disease in Florida.

And, secondly, it majors on the economic impact, in effect challenging the White House's insistence on prioritising economic growth over environmental regulation.

With warnings about the effects on crumbling infrastructure, falling crop yields and decreasing labour productivity, the report sounds an alarm that climate change will soon cascade into every corner of American life.

"With continued growth in emissions at historic rates, annual losses in some economic sectors are projected to reach hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century - more than the current gross domestic product (GDP) of many US states," the report says.

"Without substantial and sustained global mitigation and regional adaptation efforts, climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century."

 

[von_Bismarck]

So we're just gonna disregard the erudite opinion of one Willis Eschenbach? Trysail quoted him, and everything. He has a California Massage Certificate, so we know he's a professional climate researcher.

 

[bigsly]

Chapter MCCCXCIII of The Sky is Falling! The Sky is Falling!?

 

[BotanyBoy]

"Without substantial and sustained global mitigation and regional adaptation efforts, climate change is expected to cause growing losses to American infrastructure and property and impede the rate of economic growth over this century."[/I]

Bold point #1 = (D)'s selling "green" shit and taxes from (D)'s that won't do a god damn thing.

Bold point #2 = no shit...welcome to human problems since forever.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Bold point #1 = (D)'s selling "green" shit and taxes from (D)'s that won't do a god damn thing.

Bold point #2 = no shit...welcome to human problems since forever.

It's not a partisan issue.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It's not a partisan issue.

No it's not.


But the "solutions" and how liberal v. authoritarian we as a society get with them absolutely are.

 

[DeluxAuto]

No it's not.


But the "solutions" and how liberal v. authoritarian we as a society get with them absolutely are.

Explain.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Explain.

OK, duderino says....

Without substantial and sustained global mitigation

Right??


Mitigation of what? Humans and their environmental impacts right?

By whom and under what authority? That's going to have to be government(s) right??

That means guns to peoples heads (laws and enforcement) paid for by taxes, no way around that.


So...assuming this person isn't some goofy as anarchist who thinks we'll all go super green if we just hold hands and sing kum-by-ah, he is talking about the application of authority to control and limit our environmental impacts.


How much is needed and what form it takes (the core issue in most politics) is obviously going to be up for debate.

That is inevitably for a huge list of reasons going to be a very liberal v. authoritarian polarizing issue and thus wind up a partisan argument.

It's already there actually.

 

[Libsam]

Welp, it looks like we better stop helping other countries out, and start taking care of our own people.

 

[DeluxAuto]

"Without substantial and sustained global mitigation"

Mitigation of what? Humans and their carbon footprint right?

By whom and under what authority? That's going to have to be government(s) right??

That means guns to peoples heads (laws and enforcement) paid for by taxes.

How much and what form it takes is up for debate which is going to be a very liberal v. authoritarian polarizing issue and thus wind up a partisan argument. It's already there actually.

Much and the bulk what needs to be done is not partisan and never has to venture into partisan territory.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Much and the bulk what needs to be done is not partisan and never has to venture into partisan territory.

So you don't think there is any fundamental nor moral or ideological disagreements on what needs to be done about the environment ??

Seriously?




It is partisan, for the reasons I listed and that is why it's already into partisan territory, thus all the controversy and partisan battles surrounding the issue.

Democrats have taken an authoritarian stance on the issue, Republicans a liberal one.

 

[FGB]

So, Lets NOT build betters homes away from the seas and oceans and NOT come up with a plan to live in a hot,drier planet and certainly NOT figure out a way to better control run away fires!

Lets tax and restrict untill the world boils over and wars kill a few more million!

Find me one egghead who is willing to bet his life that we can slowdown, halt or reverse ANY kind of climate change Hot or cold and I will show you both a liar and a fool!

 

[DeluxAuto]

Find me one egghead who is willing to bet his life that we can slowdown, halt or reverse ANY kind of climate change Hot or cold and I will show you both a liar and a fool!

We've already done that so it's a non-issue.

 

[trysail]

There's just one teensy, weensy problem— facts really are stubborn things.

"...After reading all of that, I got to wondering about the recent temperature history of the US. I went to NOAA’s Climate At A Glance, got their recent monthly data, and graphed it up, along with the dates of the four US National Climate Assessments. Here’s that result:

https://4k4oijnpiu3l4c3h-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/us-national-climate-assessments-and-us-temperature.png​

Figure 1. Recent US temperatures, most recent (October 2018) temperature, and dates of the US National Climate Assessments.​

As you can see, since the First US National Climate Assessment some 18 years ago, the US average temperature has gone up by … well … about zero degrees Celsius. Or for Americans, it’s gone up by … well … about zero degrees Fahrenheit.

I can see why the hype in the Climate Assessments has had to keep increasing in order to keep the alarmism alive …

… it’s to distract us from the most embarrassing fact that the US temperature hasn’t increased in the slightest in the 18 years since the first US National Climate Assessment.

Oops …"

​

-Willis Eschenbach
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/23/the-froth-of-the-fourth/
​

​

 

[Dribble]

except for one problem...it isn't zero is it? Nor is the slope zero. But those facts mean shit to stupid people

 

[trysail]

except for one problem...it isn't zero is it? Nor is the slope zero. But those facts mean shit to stupid people

It's flat as a pancake.

Just as the man said,

"...As you can see, since the First US National Climate Assessment some 18 years ago, the US average temperature has gone up by … well … about zero degrees Celsius. Or for Americans, it’s gone up by … well … about zero degrees Fahrenheit."

https://4k4oijnpiu3l4c3h-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/us-national-climate-assessments-and-us-temperature.png​

​

 

[phrodeau]

It's flat as a pancake.

Just as the man said,

"...As you can see, since the First US National Climate Assessment some 18 years ago, the US average temperature has gone up by … well … about zero degrees Celsius. Or for Americans, it’s gone up by … well … about zero degrees Fahrenheit."

https://4k4oijnpiu3l4c3h-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/us-national-climate-assessments-and-us-temperature.png​

​

I think I see your difficulty. You like to visit websites like 4k4oijnpiu3l4c3h-zippykid.netdna-ssl.com. That would mess anyone up.

 

[Dribble]

Get you eyes checked...or up your meds again. Not even close. The yellow line means nothing, except for stupid people. The Gaussian average...there are better ways...still significant to at least 99% confidence

 

[Kirkrapine]

Democrats have taken an authoritarian stance on the issue, Republicans a liberal one.

Makes you want to rethink what you call liberalism, doesn't it?

 

[stickygirl]

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/lo-hem/201803.gif
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/global/lo-hem/201801-201803.gif

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201803

 

[BotanyBoy]

Makes you want to rethink what you call liberalism, doesn't it?

No, see I'm not a dishonest lefty so I'm not into the pretending words mean whatever I want them to in the moment to suit my narrative.

The word liberal and it's meaning are fine.

What it does mean or at least make apparent however is that we need to stop calling Democrats liberals as they are rarely anything of the sort these days and address them by their proper nomenclature.

 

[about_average]

So, Lets NOT build betters homes away from the seas and oceans and NOT come up with a plan to live in a hot,drier planet and certainly NOT figure out a way to better control run away fires!

People are working on those things.

Lets tax and restrict untill the world boils over and wars kill a few more million!

Drought causes starvation causes war.

Find me one egghead who is willing to bet his life that we can slowdown, halt or reverse ANY kind of climate change Hot or cold and I will show you both a liar and a fool!

Tom Wigley

 

[BotanyBoy]

Drought causes starvation causes war.

Well comrade....sounds like a good reason for the government to force people into starvation by arbitrarily restricting their agricultural activities and treating anyone who doesn't comply like a fuckin' terrorist.

Can't let those stupid fucking redneck white male cis scum grow food for themselves while others are hungry !!!

That's progress!!!

 

[about_average]

Well comrade....sounds like a good reason for the government to force people into starvation by arbitrarily restricting their agricultural activities and treating anyone who doesn't comply like a fuckin' terrorist.

Can't let those stupid fucking redneck white male cis scum grow food for themselves while others are hungry !!!

That's progress!!!

Yeah, ok.

 

[Kirkrapine]

No, see I'm not a dishonest lefty so I'm not into the pretending words mean whatever I want them to in the moment to suit my narrative.

The word liberal and it's meaning are fine.

What it does mean or at least make apparent however is that we need to stop calling Democrats liberals as they are rarely anything of the sort these days and address them by their proper nomenclature.

I meant, it should make you doubt whether what you call liberalism is desirable.