Libs are against free speech

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

You do realize that if they can get how the rise in sea level will affect one section of coastline (perhaps one section they are rather concerned about), they can use computer simulation to measure the impact elsewhere, all based on sea levels, land elevation, and costal composition, don't you???

Because if you think these scientists need to examine every inch of coast line to get accurate data.... you're obviously still back in the stone age.

What affects the northern part of the state may not do the same in the southern part of the state. That is the contention. You can't make a claim that one result in the northern part will be the same in the southern part.

Originally Posted by Aquila

Ummm... what is my agenda? Not wanting to watch NC drown. LOL

Misinformation. Fake news. Liberalism. etc etc.

Originally Posted by Aquila

What's yours??? Republican Dominance and the dismantling of every democratic institution in America. From unions to Medicare.

I'm conservative before Republican, so no, it's not about GOP dominance. Though I wouldn't be against dismantling oppressive unions and actually doing something about medicare fraud.

[n david]

BTW, while we're debating the subject of NC sea change report. That report was from 2010, the bill required NC to have another study completed by last year.

The new study was completed and accepted.

REPORT LINK

What’s New: This document expands on the 2010 report and 2012 addendum in a number of important ways, including the following:

• Inclusion of scenario based global sea level rise predictions from the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Report (AR5).
• Emphasis on the spatial variation of relative sea level rise rates as evidenced by the analysis of data collected by NOAA tide gauges along the North Carolina coast.
• Additional discussion of the expected spatial variability in relative sea level rise rates along the North Carolina coast due to geologic factors.
• Review of recent research indicating that ocean dynamics effects may be a significant source of spatial variability in existing relative sea level rise rates along the North Carolina coast.
• Discussion of recent research into the impacts of sea level rise on the frequency of relatively minor coastal flooding not necessarily associated with storms (nuisance flooding).
• Examination of dredging effects on tide range and sea level signal.
• Consideration of a 30-year time frame for sea level rise projections as requested by the CRC.
• Development of a range of predictions at each of the long-term tide gauges along the North Carolina coast based on a combination of local vertical land motion information and the IPCC scenarios.

Interesting that the scientists decided to look into the differences in the NC coastline and used that in the new study. I guess they must be from the stone age.

The results showed the coast may experience a change of 2 to 12 inches over the next 30 years.

The report will be updated every 5 years, which is good.

[Aquila]

Tom Thompson (president of NC-20, a coastal development group) who denies global warming. The group is a conglomeration of coastal development companies and local supporters.

The guy isn't even a climate scientist. In short, he's a businessman.

Now, I'm curious, if NC faces massive flooding that requires development of the new coastline, might those in association with the NC-20 get the contracts?

I'm just curious.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Tom Thompson (president of NC-20, a coastal development group) who denies global warming. The group is a conglomeration of coastal development companies and local supporters.

The guy isn't even a climate scientist. In short, he's a businessman.

Now, I'm curious, if NC faces massive flooding that requires development of the new coastline, might those in association with the NC-20 get the contracts?

I'm just curious.

You can complain about Thompson all you want. The new study took his comments into consideration and used them in its analysis.

I doubt Thompson is an idiot.

You, on the other hand, claim that what happens with the tide at Carolla and the Currituck National Wildlife Refuge is the same as what will happen down on Sunset Beach and Bird Island. And you claim those denying it are from the stone age.

[n david]

You should be happy, Aquila. They completed a new study and found a possible sea tide increase between 2 to 12 inches. It's not the 39 inch tsunami which the previous study claimed -- but that was over a 100 years. And they're required to continue studies every 5 years. So hooray! Be happy. NC isn't "banning" speech or "silencing" scientists after all!

Of course, I'm betting you'll complain about the new data, even though scientists did the study.

[aegsm76]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Again, you're only proving how little you know about the science. The goal isn't to stop climate change. The goal is to mitigate the severity of climate change by lessening man's contribution, which is what is bringing the system out of balance. In other words, the effort is to soften man's impact so as to slow climate change back down to its more natural pace... not prevent it.

A - do you realize how you speak down to me.
Or is this something that libs are required to learn?
Seriously.
You "assume" that your side is right and any other side is automatically wrong.
To me, that proves that you are the one blinded and not me.
My carnal flesh wanted to post my accomplishments and ask you about yours, but that is not right nor is that the point.
The point is that you do not realize that I might actually view the "facts" and reach a different conclusion.
Therefore you attempt to discredit my opinion.
Not cool.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by n david

You can complain about Thompson all you want. The new study took his comments into consideration and used them in its analysis.

I doubt Thompson is an idiot.

You, on the other hand, claim that what happens with the tide at Carolla and the Currituck National Wildlife Refuge is the same as what will happen down on Sunset Beach and Bird Island. And you claim those denying it are from the stone age.

Of course they have to measure different spots now, this idiot politicized it. They will no doubt get extra funding to do this anyway. And, he gets to better target his market. The end result will be the same...devastation costing billions. The developer moonlighting as a climatologist wants exact numbers in exact locations to help him bamboozle locals into development schemes that promise to protect them or minimize damage. But he can't do this unless he gets the climatologists, he claims not to trust, to do his homework for him. Lol

It's not that the effects will be the same, it's that a single sample of data can be used as a baseline in computer simulations to predict various effects. We can computer generate what will happen globally if sea levels rise 20 feet. Even flood geologists use these simulations.

The one thing these simulations can't do is predict the exact number of home and or businesses will be affected because these factors fluctuate. Of course exact numbers for each area will need to be made section by section.

But think about it. If a panel of scientists said a one meter rise could cost an estimated amount of damage based on a selected area at a specific sea level, because it represents an average...who in their right mind would say, "Yeah, but you don't know exact dollar amount of damage unless you survey every 30ft.!" Lol

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I mean, has there ever been an organization in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organized human life on Earth? Not that I’m aware of. Is the Republican organization—I hesitate to call it a party—committed to that? Overwhelmingly. There isn’t even any question about it.

If you agree with that, you haven't just drank the Kool-Aid, you've dived right into a swimming pool full of it.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by Aquila

When scientists are suffering from emotional and psychological problems due to the implications of their research... we should take notice.

Yes, we should take notice of the fact that they're mentally unstable.

I certainly trust the judgment of someone who's suffering from "emotional and psychological problems". /sarc

[Aquila]

To demonstrate that the Republicans are one of the most dangerous organizations in the modern world, I'd like to point out that many leading conservatives have targeted the following, stating that they are "socialist" in nature and should be abolished or have funding seriously cut:

The Department of Agriculture, Amber Alerts, AMTRAK, public beaches, public busing services, the Census Bureau, the CIA, Federal Student Loans, dams, Public Defenders, Disability Insurance, the Department of Energy, the EPA, Farm Subsidies, the FCC, the FDA, FEMA, food stamps, garbage collection, health care, public housing, the IRS, public landfills, public libraries, Medicare, Medicaid, state & national monuments, public museums, NASA, the National Weather Service, NPR, public parks, PBS, the Peace Corps, prisons & jails, public schools, sewer systems, snow removal services, Social Security, public street lighting, the Department of Transportation (highways, roads, bridges), USPS, vaccines, veteran health care, Welfare, the WIC program, and state zoos.

The Republican Party would like to abolish and dismantle all of the above and turn to private corporations that regulate themselves to provide the services these democratic institutions provide. Their argument is that such things are not "Constitutional". However, this is only a ruse to gain respectability and votes. Their goal is to liquidate every democratic system, social service, civil institution, and regulatory measure that would prevent a complete corporate take over of the United States. For example, the prison system. Republicans are big advocates of eliminating state run prisons. They claim that this will save money. However, it creates a market wherein incarcerating citizens becomes a motive for corporate profit. If we continue to make incarceration a profitable industry, corporations that run private prisons will continue to collude with federal and state governments to ensure that "business is good". Is it any wonder that the United States has more incarcerated citizens per capita than any other Western nation? Essentially their goal is to liquidate America to facilitate a corporate buyout.


For anyone who thinks that our Founders would support such a thing, they should do their homework regarding how our Founding Fathers viewed "corporations" and corporate power. Most don't realize that our Founding Fathers placed far more regulatory measures on corporations and corporate power than we have today.

The America that conservatism is marching us towards is corporatocracy that our Founders would have never tolerated. It is, "We the people...", not, "We the free market....", or even, "We the corporations..."

We the people....