A New Approach to Naming Storms (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


dcnovice -> A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 6:24:53 PM)

Hilarious!

http://www.upworthy.com/this-is-probably-the-funniest-most-effective-way-to-deal-with-people-who-ignore-science-facts-ever-2?g=2&c=upw10




kalikshama -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 6:43:40 PM)

That's awesome!




FatDomDaddy -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 6:45:57 PM)

More intellectual dishonesty...

For example, Marco Rubio does not deny climate change only the false and politically driven slant that its causes are man made and that by taking proper measures, enlightened leaders will curb, stop and reverse its effects.

Again, mankind needs to use our skills to ADAPT to climate change, not stopping it. We need MORE air conditioning not less!




kalikshama -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 6:53:46 PM)

I wonder if anyone gave the Florida Senator a copy of Rolling Stone's Goodbye, Miami - By century's end, rising sea levels will turn the nation's urban fantasyland into an American Atlantis. But long before the city is completely underwater, chaos will begin





kalikshama -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 7:02:08 PM)

Will Your City Be Underwater? There's a Map for That

Will your city or county be flooded by 2020? By 2050? Now there's a map for that.

As many as 3.7 million U.S. residents in 2,150 coastal areas could be battered by damaging floods caused by global warming-induced storm surges, according to a new report published Wednesday in the journal Environment Research Letters. Sea levels could rise as much as 19 inches by 2050, according to what the report calls "mid-range projections."

The team used data from the U.S. Geological Survey to map all areas along the continental U.S. coastline containing homes that lie within one to 10 feet from the water level at high tide. Previous estimates only looked at an area's elevation above sea level, not at the area's elevation relative to high tide, which underestimated the impact, said Benjamin Strauss, lead author and director of Climate Central's Program on Sea Level Rise. Climate Central is the nonprofit organization behind the report.

The map shows the areas at risk of flooding with every foot of sea level rise. Move the slider bar at the left to increase the sea level rise, and the areas on the map that are subject to being flooded or entirely underwater grow. As the bar moves, you can watch the population, number of homes and acres of land in danger swell in size. The map also shows the likelihood for each decade that sea level rise plus storm surge plus tide will reach a certain threshold.
Florida, Louisiana, California, New York and New Jersey have the largest populations in the flood zone. Among those, Florida has the highest population density in harm's way, Strauss said.

Read more or put in your zip code: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/03/will-you-be-underwater-theres-a-map-for-that.html

I used to live in South Florida, where they can't plan their way out of a wet paper bag.




PeonForHer -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 7:14:49 PM)

Was good, *chortle*!

However, I don't know why they can't just name them things like 'Hurricane Total Wanker' or 'Hurricane Twatface' and be done with it. It's not as if the hurricane's going to take anyone to court for defamation of character, is it?




MasterG2kTR -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 7:36:54 PM)

Spot on!!.....LOL




JeffBC -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 9:10:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy
More intellectual dishonesty...

The problem you have here is that some of us understand what, specifically, the word "science" means. We understand it's strengths and limitations. and we understand how well it compares to things like "faith" for predicting actual, real world events.




BamaD -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 9:45:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy
More intellectual dishonesty...

The problem you have here is that some of us understand what, specifically, the word "science" means. We understand it's strengths and limitations. and we understand how well it compares to things like "faith" for predicting actual, real world events.


Do not forget that based on science Al Gore told us the Washington Monument would be underwater in 20 years, that was 1988 he kept making the same prediction until the middle of the last decade.




Hillwilliam -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 9:56:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


Do not forget that based on science Al Gore told us the Washington Monument would be underwater in 20 years,

Bullshit




BamaD -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 11:16:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


Do not forget that based on science Al Gore told us the Washington Monument would be underwater in 20 years,

Bullshit

www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/06/26/rising-tides-of-terror




BamaD -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 11:17:40 PM)

And

www.mrc.org/bozells-column




JeffBC -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/29/2013 11:56:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Do not forget that based on science Al Gore told us the Washington Monument would be underwater in 20 years, that was 1988 he kept making the same prediction until the middle of the last decade.

... exactly as I said... some of us know what science is. Apparently neither you nor Al Gore do. I also said some of us understand both the strengths and the limitations of science. Again, you apparently do not but that's ok. Science has told us many, many things which were wrong as any scientist would tell you. But let me ask you this. What's your alternative, ouija boards?




joether -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 4:14:57 AM)

I'm all for this change in how storms are named!




Hillwilliam -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 10:05:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

And

www.mrc.org/bozells-column

the first link was a 404 error and on the second one, I looked thru 5 pages of articles of stuff like "Kicking God out of our gay friendly schools" and didn't even see the word 'Gore'.
ETA, I finally found something about Gore on page 7. The article was whining about him selling his TV network to Al-Jezeera. . It's called fucking capitalism OK?

Im selling a mountain bike, you offer me a hundred and DS offers me 2 hundred. Am I supposed to sell it to you for less because a third party might not like DS?




ResidentSadist -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 10:17:25 AM)

That is really righteous.




JeffBC -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 10:25:17 AM)

~fast reply~
So that question about "what's the plan if we toss out science" was meant to be real. If we decide that science is unreliable what are we to replace it with? Yup, science is nothing but a long and checkered series of mistakes... which still managed to crank out things like "the internet" that we are using right now. So for those who say that the climate science is rigged (which would imply that pretty darned near the entire climate science community is corrupt and probably into the larger science community also) then what are we to do? A bunch of scientists do work. Other guys check it. They kibitz back and forth and tweak and polish and refine. I mean you have an entire system of checks & balances specifically designed to find flaws and to call into question existing theories. So when we toss all that out... man oh man... then what?




Hillwilliam -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 10:33:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

~fast reply~
So that question about "what's the plan if we toss out science" was meant to be real. If we decide that science is unreliable what are we to replace it with? Yup, science is nothing but a long and checkered series of mistakes... which still managed to crank out things like "the internet" that we are using right now. So for those who say that the climate science is rigged (which would imply that pretty darned near the entire climate science community is corrupt and probably into the larger science community also) then what are we to do? A bunch of scientists do work. Other guys check it. They kibitz back and forth and tweak and polish and refine. I mean you have an entire system of checks & balances specifically designed to find flaws and to call into question existing theories. So when we toss all that out... man oh man... then what?

Then, you go to church and do what the man there tells you to do and return to the 8th century. Of course, there's already a large group of religious people who want to do that.




freedomdwarf1 -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 10:39:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

Hilarious!

http://www.upworthy.com/this-is-probably-the-funniest-most-effective-way-to-deal-with-people-who-ignore-science-facts-ever-2?g=2&c=upw10

I checked out the link.

Didn't mean diddly-squat to me because it was all about US people that for the most part I hadn't even heard of.
Fine for those storms in the US.
But what about others outside the US??

Badly thought out and ill-conceived methinks.
It needs to be more universal.
I like Peon's idea - generic asshole names that everyone understands.




popeye1250 -> RE: A New Approach to Naming Storms (8/30/2013 3:37:25 PM)

"And on the storm watch tonight you Floridians should be preparing to really get fucked up the ass by Hurricane Barak!"
"And we're keeping an eye on Hurricane Pelosi for next week, these two are called "stupid storms" as they go all over with no discernable direction."




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875