Slashdot Mirror


Sea Rise Could Force Millions In Florida To Adapt Or Flee (miamiherald.com)

mdsolar writes: For the first time, a team of researchers looked at ongoing population growth in areas where the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has created flood maps that more accurately reflect local conditions. What they found was startling: projections that failed to factor in population growth in dense states like Florida hugely underestimated the number of people at risk and the cost of protecting them. Combined with the findings from a 2015 report, that means Florida can claim two titles: most property at risk, and now, most people.

421 comments

  1. It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since most people in Florida don't plan on being around in 30 years, the problem may very well take care of itself. We just need to make sure we build a protective dike around The Villages in the meantime.

    1. Re:It'll sort itself out. by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      make sure we build a protective dike around The Villages in the meantime.

      Didn't they build a wall of STDs to protect themselves from ... well, pretty much anything?

      Lets face it, thats just one viagra fueled orgy anyway.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    2. Re:It'll sort itself out. by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

      A thousand protective dykes would be even better.

    3. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 1

      Sadly, The Villages are on some of the highest land in Florida. Those reptiles will be safe long after the rest of the state is underwater.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    4. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You had better not let the environmentalist religious wackjobs hear you saying that humans can just adapt. They'll burn you at the stake if you're not running around screaming "THE END IS NIGH!!"

      Who are these people? The environmentalists I know aren't religious, and are more oriented towards mitigating the issue.

      And the religious I know don't believe in global warming, sea level rise, or any of that "liberal claptrap" at all, and are actively seeking the end of the world.

      And as I've had to explain to many people, adapting doesn't men that you and your family change. It means you and your family and 99 percent of everyone dies, and the rest are left to reproduce.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:It'll sort itself out. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You had better not let the environmentalist religious wackjobs hear you saying that humans can just adapt. They'll burn you at the stake if you're not running around screaming "THE END IS NIGH!!"

      I know, right? Straw men are vicious and incredibly dangerous. You'd do well to avoid them because you never know what they might try to do to you!

      PS, whenever I see your sig, I think of AmiMojo's sig. It fits awfully well.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re:It'll sort itself out. by GLMDesigns · · Score: 0, Troll

      The OP was saying that too many people BELIEVE in environmental causes to the point of not listening or not considering alternative positions. AND there are a lot of Gaia types out there who are religious fanatics.

      Many of tese idiots believe the earth, itself, is alive and that humans are parasites.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    7. Re:It'll sort itself out. by GLMDesigns · · Score: 0

      these - not tese

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
    8. Re:It'll sort itself out. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's San Francisco - wrong coast.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    9. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Fortunately, they're few and far between. I'm sure there are some places where they're concentrated just like the TERFs everyone keeps telling me that everyone else in the feminist movement ignores are concentrated in Michigan.

      As far as Gaia types, I'd like to direct you towards Dianist Wicca, which is the religion that many TERFs around here practice. It's a strange offshoot of Wicca that believes that men are unnatural and are seeking to destroy the planet. (Naturally, this extrapolates to other absurdities such as viewing lesbian sex as a holy form of sex and any sex involving an assigned male as being a perversion of the goddess' design. Regular Wicca is just homophobic towards lesbians and gay men equally.) They worship skyclad, but don't get your hopes up. I'm not attracted to women, but I doubt anyone would find a group of ugly, obese TERF Wiccans who believe some kind of "lesbian race" exists having a skyclad sabbat sexy.

      Personally, I think of them a lot like most people think of misogynerds who can't get laid. I doubt many of them are actually homosexual. They're just really bad with men, so they've decided to blame men for all kinds of absurd shit instead of the person in the mirror.

      Not making any of this up. Google is your friend. If somebody wants citations, I'll check back this evening if I have time and provide what citations I can. A lot of this isn't published on the internet, however, and I don't care enough to go to the library to get you an ISBN and page number.

    10. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Kohath · · Score: 2

      The precautionary principle tells us we should take these straw men seriously, just in case.

    11. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Z80a · · Score: 1

      I don't think you can mix those things at all.
      Religious wack-jobs that don't believe on evolution generally think on animals/planet as inferior things that god created to serve men, and would never mix with the oldschool lefty-but-not-SJW-tier-left-positioned environmentalists.

    12. Re:It'll sort itself out. by CaptainLard · · Score: 2

      You had better not let the environmentalist religious wackjobs hear you saying that humans can just adapt.

      You're right. So far we've done a great job adapting to:

      - Not using lead in gasoline where we've adapted with cars that run better than ever and a highly probable side effect of the global crime rate dropping significantly over the past few decades saving unknown $billions
      - By not using CFC's in aerosols we've adapted to avoiding a huge increase in skin cancer rates

      We have not done a good job adapting to a few 100k Syrian refugees trying to migrate. What's going to happen when a few Million Muslims need to migrate out of SE Asia...or worse, a few million floridians try to leave florida?

      Shifting 1/3 of our military's budget to renewables and CO2 mitigation would probably result in the greatest global stabilization event in history. But you know, some companies might lose some assets.

    13. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as I've had to explain to many people... It means you and your family and 99 percent of everyone dies...

      That seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to tell people.

    14. Re:It'll sort itself out. by dave420 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Want to try again? You just listed some organisations with no proof they (and all their members) are actually doing what is claimed. Sure, it's a pithy argument and looks good, but it is logically bankrupt.

    15. Re:It'll sort itself out. by mcouper · · Score: 1

      And that's women in sensitive shoes...

    16. Re:It'll sort itself out. by mcouper · · Score: 2

      s/sensitive/comfortable/

      Nothing worse than trying to be 'funny' and botching the quote.

    17. Re:It'll sort itself out. by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      And as I've had to explain to many people, adapting doesn't men that you and your family change. It means you and your family and 99 percent of everyone dies, and the rest are left to reproduce.

      99%? Do you always use hyperbole in your explanations?

    18. Re:It'll sort itself out. by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      lol ... Ford Religion. Very real for some ...

    19. Re:It'll sort itself out. by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 1, Informative

      Want to try again? You just listed some organisations with no proof they (and all their members) are actually doing what is claimed. Sure, it's a pithy argument and looks good, but it is logically bankrupt.

      Here's some nice anti-science religious remarks pulled from each of their websites then if you actually question that characterization:

      Sierra Club:
      The Sierra Club remains unequivocally opposed to nuclear energy.
      Nuclear is no solution to Climate Change...
      Uranium is one of the 4 Horsemen of the Dirty Fuels Apocalypse
      I think I can stop once we reach talk of horseman and apocalypse?

      GreenPeace:
      Unless checked, warming from emissions may trigger the irreversible meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet in the coming decades...
      The IPCC declares the loss of the Greenland ice sheet before 2100 virtually impossible.
      Thirty Greenpeace activists entered the Borssele nuclear power plant in Zeeland, Netherlands.
      Can I stop at proudly heralding their illegal activities?

      Running out of time but I can pull up WWF later if it's really necessary...

    20. Re:It'll sort itself out. by clicker666 · · Score: 2

      Sensible shoes. Not sensitive or comfortable.

    21. Re:It'll sort itself out. by fche · · Score: 1

      next thing you'll be telling us is how tolerance mandates not tolerating the intolerant :-)

    22. Re:It'll sort itself out. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ah, the new insult.

      As soon as one is "dogmatic" in his ways of approaching "perceived" problems, he is a religious nutcrack?

      Wow ...I thought I never gave money to any church.

      Seems I was mistaken and have to ask e.g. Greenpeace and WWF to get my money back?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    23. Re:It'll sort itself out. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The IPCC declares the loss of the Greenland ice sheet before 2100 virtually impossible.

      Citation please.
      Or well, safe your breath. The IPCC declares nothing like that.
      Also keep in mind: the IPCC is only the agency that is "distributing the bad news in 'digestible' chunks".
      They are not "the climate researchers" who actually lay open the bad news.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:It'll sort itself out. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      And the religious I know don't believe in global warming, sea level rise, or any of that "liberal claptrap" at all, and are actively seeking the end of the world.

      Then wouldn't it be sensible to sell them beach front property at bargain basement prices? We can just settle back a few miles for the new beach to come to us. Win-win, no?

      Heh, a little variation of the Statlers song about lights at Wrigley Field

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    25. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The precautionary principle tells us we should take these straw men seriously, just in case.

      That is why I am a fundamentalist Christian. Just in case this existence is ruled by a vengeful god and Hell is real. -Blaise Pascal

    26. Re:It'll sort itself out. by BCGlorfindel · · Score: 1

      The IPCC declares the loss of the Greenland ice sheet before 2100 virtually impossible.

      Citation please.
      Or well, safe your breath. The IPCC declares nothing like that.
      Also keep in mind: the IPCC is only the agency that is "distributing the bad news in 'digestible' chunks".
      They are not "the climate researchers" who actually lay open the bad news.

      The IPCC fifth assessment declares exactly that in Chapter 12.
      Exceptionally unlikely that either Greenland or West Antarctic Ice sheets will suffer near-complete disintegration (high confidence)
      Note they state both that it is exceptionally unlikely AND that assessment has high confidence.

    27. Re:It'll sort itself out. by david_thornley · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So the Sierra Club is anti-nuke? Disappointing, but hardly religious. "Horsemen of the Dirty Fuels Apocalypse" sounds more like a reference than a real religious belief. They're probably banking on the fact that most people can tell a literary reference from a religious dogma.

      Greenpeace may be overestimating the fragility of the Greenland ice sheet, and is also anti-nuke, and these are supposed to be religious beliefs? The IPCC considers it extremely unlikely that the sheet will be almost totally destroyed, which is not exactly the same thing as an irreversible meltdown. The Greenpeace reference would be reasonably accurate if, by 2040, the Greenland meltdown had started and wasn't going to be stopped, because then an irreversible meltdown will have been triggered. The sentence you quote is ambiguous, since it isn't clear whether "in the coming decades" refers to the trigger or the actual meltdown.

      Anti-nuke doesn't mean anti-scientific, unless we're going to go ahead and declare opinions other than mine to be anti-scientific. There are legitimate reasons to be nervous about nuclear power plants, and it's reasonable to weigh these differently than I do.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    28. Re:It'll sort itself out. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Thanx for the link, but please note again: the IPCC does not "declare" anything.
      I thought I made that clear?

      They "sell" information gathered by researchers. And basically 50% of everything they published the last two decades is wrong. Sea level rise: higher than they predicted, shifting out of the upper "edge" of the "error bar". Temperature rise: higher than predicted.

      The stuff about arctic ice and/greenland is a "statement" not a "declaration". You may believe it, I for my part don't.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    29. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      The environmentalists I know aren't religious...

      Sadly, too many environmentalists are quite religious - you don't see the altar or the idol that they worship, but I assure you that they have a full catechism and dogma in place.

      Tell me about it then. What is their mythbook? I'll read it.

      As an environmentalist myself - and read that as one who knows that humans are a part of nature, exist within certain parameters in nature, and we exist because we have been lucky enough to not become extinct yet, I'm not certain that you aren't merely taking the kooks that inhabit any opinion, and broad brushing their kookiness to anyone you don't agree with.

      All of the environmentalists I know are scientists and athiests to boot. The closest to religion any of us get is a sense of wonder at the universe. Mind boggling and stunning, but none of us drops to our knees and prays to something. Comparing us with crystal people and the kooks is like calling anyone who is registered Republican a snake handler, because snake handlers are usually Republican. I doubt William F Buckley Jr ever handled snakes as a religious rite.

      As well, myself and everyone I know as an environmentalist are willing to be proven wrong, and accepting it. This is definitely not the province of most religions, some of which will do their best to send you to their version of hell if you deal in heresy.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    30. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Greenpeace

      What is Greepeace's religion?

      Sierra Club

      What is the Sierra Club's religion?

      World Wildlife Fund

      What is the World Wildlife fund's religion?

      I could go on, but those are some pretty major, well known examples that you really shouldn't even need to have pointed out to you.

      Here is some examples of actual religion based anti-environmental groups:

      The Cornwall Alliance http://cornwallalliance.org/

      Who say:

      Around the world, environmentalism has become a radical movement. Something we call "The Green Dragon." And it is deadly, deadly to human prosperity, deadly to human life, deadly to human freedom and deadly to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Make no mistake about it, environmentalism is no longer your friend. It is your enemy. And the battle is not primarily political or material, it is spiritual. ... As Christians, we must actively trust God and obey His word. So when it comes to environmental stewardship, we must reject the false world view, the faulty science and the counterfeit gospel that threatens to corrupt society and the church.

      The Unification church and http://polluterwatch.com/anti-... the American Freedom Coalition, which also takes part in the Wise Use" anti environment group.

      That's what I mean by Religion and religious groups, not some cockamamie slashdot re-definition of religion as having a thought.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    31. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Here's some nice anti-science religious remarks pulled from each of their websites then if you actually question that characterization:

      Sierra Club:

      The Sierra Club remains unequivocally opposed to nuclear energy.

      That is an opinion. Not one I happen to share, but an opinion nonetheless.

      and a religion? More on that in a moment

      GreenPeace: Unless checked, warming from emissions may trigger the irreversible meltdown of the Greenland ice sheet in the coming decades...

      No proven, and yes, Greeen peace is a bunch of assholes.

      But tell me dear sir, tell me something you believe in and let me brand it as your religion. then allow me to take some extremists, and infer that you agree with them.

      Can I stop at proudly heralding their illegal activities?

      Running out of time but I can pull up WWF later if it's really necessary...

      Perhaps you should just stop - period. Your references are not anti-science,they are their opinions, and you've defined religion so broadly that if a person believes in three healthy meals a day, or wearing underwear, it is somehow their religion. It ain't. It's almost as stupid as declaring atheism a religion.

      note: If say, the Sierra Club was to be referring to nuclear power as something that didn't exist - that would be anti-science.

      I've already pointed out two anti-environmental groups with citations that are specifically religious in nature, the Unification Churceh and the Wise Groups and American Freedom Coalition (some name, eh) and the Cornwall Alliance ,who have a specific organized group that they and everyone else recognize as religious in nature, the Cornwall alliance being the Chrstian faith, and the American Coalition with Sun Myung Moon. Religion, pure and simple. The links are somewhere in another post here, look 'em up if doubt my veracity.

      And that's the alpha and Omega of it, not picking out some groups you (and I) might disagree with, and declaring their thoughts unscientific and as a religion.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    32. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Thanx for the link, but please note again: the IPCC does not "declare" anything. I thought I made that clear?

      But we are dealing with people who define opinions as religion, so it's like wreslting with a bag of weasels.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    33. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And as I've had to explain to many people... It means you and your family and 99 percent of everyone dies...

      That seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to tell people.

      Actually, most seem to think they'll be the few that survive.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    34. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      And as I've had to explain to many people, adapting doesn't men that you and your family change. It means you and your family and 99 percent of everyone dies, and the rest are left to reproduce.

      99%? Do you always use hyperbole in your explanations?

      99 percent might be conservative

      http://news.nationalgeographic...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The idea that human population may have nearly gone extinct at least once ~ 2000 humans left in the world makes for some interesting discussion.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    35. Re:It'll sort itself out. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      You should get out more. There are a lot more religious than it appears you have been exposed to.

    36. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Tamerlin · · Score: 1

      There are in reality two kinds of people when it comes to environmentalism:

      Environmentalist and idiots.

      In other words, if you don't believe that taking care of our environment is critical for the survival of the species, than you're an idiot... and probably couldn't figure out why your goldfish would die if you didn't change the water periodically.

    37. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then wouldn't it be sensible to sell them beach front property at bargain basement prices? We can just settle back a few miles for the new beach to come to us. Win-win, no?

      Absolutely not. You're supposed to sell them beach front property at highly inflated prices, because the land is "sacred", and that way you turn a profit and get rid of the undesirables. Some of you people just have no business sense at all...

    38. Re: It'll sort itself out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I want YOU to start citing your sources.

      Everything I have read shows that all models are running too hot, and sea level rise is in line with the rise over the last century.

    39. Re:It'll sort itself out. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Then get a big bat as in baseball bat and beat them :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    40. Re:It'll sort itself out. by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Then get a big bat as in baseball bat and beat them :D

      Hmm, sounds awfully tempting. I'd make sure it wasn't weasels in the bag first. Weasels are awesome.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    41. Re:It'll sort itself out. by GLMDesigns · · Score: 1

      thx. interesting.

      --
      If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
      Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
  2. Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes but at a sea level rise rate of 2-4mm/year, I think that people will have time to adjust!!

    1. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nope, problem is everyone insists on living in low lying areas, they are nicer with that sea view. Common sense is that you ban new housing, make it attractive to move somewhere higher - won't happen.

      So what happens is the same people insist the authorities 'protect their investments' so yoiu bankrupt yourselves building defences against rising water - which don't work. Once it's realized that's pointless - well no money left so you get lots of very poor refugees, no ability to handle that.

      So sad.

    2. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then perhaps the news isn't for you. It isn't a question of what most people do, but insurance rates will start to go way up, and owners can't exactly move all of their buildings... city planners will need to adjust....

    3. Re:Let's all start running now! by lesincompetent · · Score: 0

      Mod -5 wishful thinking.

    4. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was told in 1974 by The Weekly Reader that by the year 2000 all of the beaches in North Carolina were gong to be gone.

    5. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The article says three feet by 2100 by the most conservative article. 3ft = 914.4mm. 914.4 / (2100 - 2016) = 10.9 mm / year.

    6. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      May I suggest you start talking to the Dutch. Their language sounds like a mix of German, English and a throat infection, but I assure you, they all understand and speak English excellently. The name "Netherlands" means "lower countries". You know that the Netherlands are famous for windmills, right? Well, those aren't all mills. Many are wind pumps, which were used to drain the land, most of which is below sea level.

    7. Re:Let's all start running now! by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not the gradual rise that's the issue but the increased likelihood of extreme events. Events that might be considered "once in a lifetime" will happen with such frequency that insurers simply won't provide cover. People living in at-risk areas will be wiped out so often that they'll be driven to live somewhere else. It doesn't help that Florida is so flat either since it means storm surges could well travel miles inland and do damage.

    8. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Despite being colonised centuries ago, and having been through many hurricanes on a regular basis, FL remains firming above the water level with nothing on record to suggest your Daily Mail level of alarmism is based on anything factual. You should be more concerned with the Yellowstone Caldera.

    9. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep - sea level looks pretty much the same as when I bought my beachfront condo in the 1970's. I'm pretty sure my building will collapse long before I have to worry about my car being flooded in the underground garage.

    10. Re:Let's all start running now! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      The Dutch don't get hurricanes almost every year though.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    11. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was told in 1974 by The Weekly Reader that by the year 2000 all of the beaches in North Carolina were gong to be gone.

      Well of course not. As the sea level rises they'd just get replaced by newer beaches.

    12. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better. If we take turns screaming now then in about 200 years it will all be worth it.

    13. Re:Let's all start running now! by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Common sense is that you ban new housing, make it attractive to move somewhere higher - won't happen.

      In principle, there is no need to ban such housing, we just need to stop subsidizing it. Right now, it's subsidized both through government-financed flood insurance programs, as well as through the provision emergency services. That encourages people not only to build in risky places, but also to pay for flood-proofing their homes. If people had to pay for the full cost of insurance and emergency services out of their own pockets, many people who currently build in flood zones would consider it too expensive and build somewhere else, and others would flood proof their homes instead of getting a fresh home every few decades courtesy of the tax payer. Attempts to reform the system have been repeatedly undermined. (I think the reform act was probably too heavy handed. A better and simpler choice might be to limit payouts from government subsidized flood insurance to a one time payment, both per site and per property owner.)

    14. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dutch don't have porous limestone as the foundation of the land. Miami is built on it and sea water just bubbles up from the ground all over the place.

      They are simply fucked.

    15. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm not completely sure what you are suggesting, but it seems to be along the lines of 'don't worry - this is a solved problem, the Dutch already do it' ? If that is the case, then I assure you - it is not comparable. If that was not your point - the eh, never mind :)

      First: the Netherlands has less than a quarter the surface area of Florida (and a fifth of the coastline), with almost the same total population, meaning cost per surface area is borne by a lot more people. (source - wikipedia).

      But the Netherlands also does not have a lot of houses build _right on the ocean_ without (mainly natural) sand dunes in the way first. Those windmills and land draining you are referring to are mainly there to drain lakes (and keep them drained) - as well as a bay that was turned into a lake first by damming it off. Not to keep the sea level down. To use the same model - you'd have to build a giant dike around Florida first and then you can start pumping. Unless you thought to pump the ocean directly?

      Sea level rise is also a big concern in the Netherlands - making sure all the dunes and dikes can handle the increase.

    16. Re:Let's all start running now! by phrostie · · Score: 1

      But think of the insurance companies!

    17. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes but at a sea level rise rate of 2-4mm/year, I think that people will have time to adjust!!

      Well, yeah. Sortakinda. Adjusting can mean everything from moving to drowning and there ya go.

      Sounds so benign, so manageable. Next thing ya know, its 2100, and the levels have risen by 3 feet (conservative) to possibly 6 feet. That is death for places like Miami.

      Flooding is a regular even there now. http://www.newyorker.com/magaz...

      And the right weather event, at the right time - even in the near future - will just grease the skids for it.

      Now of course, its pretty easy to say "Well - they shouldn't have built there!

      Problem of course, is after Miami is gone, you'll be able to say the same thing about the new lowest lying land.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    18. Re:Let's all start running now! by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Dutch claimed land from lakes and swamp. That land is often below the level of the rivers and water does bubble up. An intricate system of small waterways to collect this water is used. The Dutch have been pumping out water continuously since the 11th century. If they stop pumping, the land disappears.

    19. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They have wind and rain in the Netherlands too, plus their tidal range is five to six times that of Florida.

    20. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      I was told in 1974 by The Weekly Reader that by the year 2000 all of the beaches in North Carolina were gong to be gone.

      I was told around the same time by Reverend Peter Popoff that the world was going to end before then.

      Regardless, that makes no sense, because any new ocean level has to have an interface with the land.

      That would be the beach.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you'd have to build a giant dike around Florida first and then you can start pumping

      It's not going to build itself, that's for sure. The Dutch are can-do people by necessity. Maybe Floridians prefer to give up the land they live on. The Dutch turned ocean floor into habitable land.

    22. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep in mind, the Dutch are surrounded by mountains. Where would Florida pump the water to? The ocean?

    23. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The geology of south Florida is completely different than the Dutch land. Look it up. You are suggesting we build dikes around the entire Florida coastline and have giant pumps just continually pump out the seawater? It won't happen. One, people won't allow their perfect beach view hidden behind a giant dike and the porosity of the ground it just way too high and the coastline is way too long.

    24. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The nice thing about tides is they are a constant source of change. Hurricanes have this nasty habit of coming at you from a variety of directions and using wind to push water through places where a normal wave doesn't always get through. Said wind also generates a lot of stresses on it's own along with help for much more solid things said wind picks up.

      Wall vs. waves is doable
      Wall vs. waves, wind, and flying cars (and free-floating windblown ships and oil derricks) is more--interesting.
      Walls that people with shoreline views don't want because it interrupts the view or the float in-out manmade boat dock / NIMBY vs. the above is going to suck ass.

    25. Re:Let's all start running now! by DogDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are gone. They're all artificial at this point.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    26. Re:Let's all start running now! by jiriw · · Score: 5, Informative

      We do get a couple of violent storms each year (in the 10 beaufort region), Hurricanes (12 beaufort), probably not... For the Netherlands such violent storms are more like a once in couple of decades event. In the '90's there was a severe storm travelling through North-West Europe with an hourly average wind force of 11 beaufort in the Netherlands and dozens of fatalities in at least 5 different countries.

      Although our storms may not be as violent as the hurricanes of the American South-east, there is a trough-shape in the North Sea due to the British isles at our West, which ads extra height to the local sea-level when wind is blowing from the North. That effect is one you won't have at the Florida coast. Sea water can be diverted in enough directions there, but force of the waves may be larger with more violent storms... so you maybe need tougher (thick-skinned, so to speak... more use of rocks to break the waves instead of sand dunes and earthen dikes?) dikes instead of higher ones. However, I think the hurricanes you have should not be a hindrance to implement proper water works in your country if you really want to defend the coastal lands from future flooding. There, however, is a totally different price to pay. A dyke between beach property and the proper beach makes the property a lot less ... beachy.

      In combination with spring-tide, the elevated sea level due to the trough shape of the North Sea, caused the 1953 sea-side flood which flooded major parts of the Netherlands and killed over 1800 people in the Netherlands alone. The sea level rose 4,5 meters (15 feet) above normal. That last major flood in Dutch history was the reason we implemented our major water works, the Delta works, which have kept us safe since then. The 2006 'flood', which caused a rise in sea level of 4,8 meter (16 feet) didn't cause any flooding in the Netherlands. And all water works functioned within proper specifications.

      A once in a couple of decades event, like the 2006, 1990 and 1953 storms is something which is fully calculate into the structural specifications of our water works. The Delta works, reduced the risk from large-scale sea-side flooding from once in 80 years to once in 4 millennia. We also recently (a decade ago) strengthened the river dykes to prevent flooding by higher river water levels. Global warming means more water ice from glaciers is melting and more evaporation above land and sea -> more rain inland, adding to the usual run-off, causing higher peak-water levels. This caused some inconviniences in the '00's... Previous predictions were too conservative and we acted accordingly. The largest river of North-West Europe, the Rhine flows right through our country... If a storm crosses Germany, we see the result in rising water levels a couple of days later. But also the Meuse, which also flows through the Netherlands and which is a rain-fed river, mostly, can put up quite an act.

      And temperatures have been rising, storms are become more violent on average. In 2013 we had a weather pattern which could, for the first time in history, be described as a super-cell, with two accompanying tornadoes.

    27. Re:Let's all start running now! by DogDude · · Score: 1

      Not a strong reader, are you?

      Using the most conservative estimate of sea rise — three feet by 2100

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    28. Re:Let's all start running now! by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      The neighborhood I lived in in Miami from 1990 to 2000 already had water in the streets at the highest tides of the month... it wasn't exactly rare for that, either.

    29. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd like to see your plan on incrementally making your house and all the roads 40cm higher in 5 years... it's more likely that if people stay there: at some point given some threshold there will be a sudden change to floating houses and boats once people accept the inevitability of the sea taking the land they are living on.

    30. Re:Let's all start running now! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      And pumps do wonders to remove water that gets past the wall. Or is New Orleans still flooded from Katrina and the levy breaches?

      There are ways to mitigate. Just like the climate deniers can't wave their hands and make science go away, you cannot wave your hands and make engineering go away.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    31. Re:Let's all start running now! by NoOneInParticular · · Score: 1

      No, I'm saying that there are engineering solutions for many problems, and that this particular problem might not the hardest one we tried to solve, and maybe not even the most expensive one. In Dutch conditions, it could be done with 11th century technology, and they got better at it. Giving up before doing an actual analysis of the art of the possible is the sure way to drown.

    32. Re:Let's all start running now! by kilfarsnar · · Score: 5, Funny

      The geology of south Florida is completely different than the Dutch land. Look it up. You are suggesting we build dikes around the entire Florida coastline and have giant pumps just continually pump out the seawater? It won't happen. One, people won't allow their perfect beach view hidden behind a giant dike and the porosity of the ground it just way too high and the coastline is way too long.

      I say we just build the wall and get the ocean to pay for it!

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    33. Re:Let's all start running now! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 0

      Oh well if it's just too hard, then we'd all better just give up.

      Are you serious? Oh, it's just too big, and just too complex for anyone to solve in the next 50 years. Better not even try.
      I have a feeling that those with the beach view will be just fine with not completely losing their property investment to being permanently underwater.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    34. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, gee... if they built a dike to stop the ingress of seawater, yeah I suppose they would pump the water to the outside of that dike.

      How is this a hard concept to parse?

    35. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I see a simple solution to this: refuse aid to the refugees. Anyone who chooses to live in Florida is on their own, and when their house gets flooded, too bad. They've been warned, but they're all a bunch of conservative religious morons who believe "global warming is a myth", so let them suffer the consequences. They can be hoist by their own petard.

    36. Re:Let's all start running now! by MachineShedFred · · Score: 2

      And there's absolutely no way that this problem can be solved through engineering. New Orleans is already below sea level, and has been for quite some time. Yes, Katrina was bad for them - very - but most of that shit show was the fault of a completely mismanaged response at all levels of government - city, county, state, and federal.

      Changes will have to be made, for sure. But suggesting the abandonment of the 8th largest metro area in the US is beyond stupid when we literally have decades to do something about it.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    37. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just wanted to say that I admire many thing I've read about Dutch culture. I can see why you threw my religious wingnut ancestors out lol.

      We'll never see anything like that kind of engineering and practical problem solving in Miami or New Orleans. I remember that during a segment of Carl Sagan's Cosmos, he describes the 16th and 17th century Dutch sailors as practical men of the world.

      If there's one thing I have to say about Americans and climate change it's that Churchill was wrong. "Americans Will Always Do the Right Thing — After Exhausting All the Alternatives" is the famous quote. In this case, Americans will never do the right thing because they're too steeped in superstitious religious narrative. They'll never build dykes and pumps to manage rising sea level. They'll deny, deny, deny all while the wealthy class quietly moves away from low-lying areas. Then when disaster finally happens (Katrina), we'll all hysterically whinge about racism and proceed to promptly do nothing. It's hopeless.

      Is there a good way for me to return to the Netherlands? I used to be fluent in German, but unfortunately I never learned Dutch from my great grandparents.

    38. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give him a break. It's not that clear-cut a decision if your other option is to pump the water beyond the famous dutch mountains.

    39. Re:Let's all start running now! by drew_kime · · Score: 1

      A better and simpler choice might be to limit payouts from government subsidized flood insurance to a one time payment, both per site and per property owner.)

      Yes, that. Show me news coverage of a flood (or forest fire) and I'll show you someone saying, "Yes, but we just love it here. We're going to rebuild."

      --
      Nope, no sig
    40. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Troll

      Did you miss the part about how you can't build walls? How are you going to pump water away when there's no wall?

      You can't build a wall because the reason these idiots live there is because of the view. They're not going to allow a wall to be built. And they Floridians: they don't believe in the sea levels rising, no matter how much evidence you show them, even if water is in their houses.

      You Europeans seem to find it impossible to grasp just how stupid a lot of us Americans are. Here's a clue: go read your own history books about how Europeans were back when they were burning people at the stake for believing the "wrong" theology. That's similar to the mentality of about half of America's population today. And Florida has an especially high concentration of them.

    41. Re:Let's all start running now! by grub · · Score: 3, Informative

      Florida is one giant slab of porous limestone. It's eroding from below as well, sinkholes surprise people all the time there. They can build all the dikes they want, they will collapse when the underlying ground dissolves.

      --
      Trolling is a art,
    42. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll just leave this here.

      Raising of Chicago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_of_Chicago

      That's 19th century technology folks. But let's not stop the 'South Park' level of Hysteria. It's fun and profitable. (For a select few.)

    43. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what exactly are we doing about it? How long would it take to build a 10-20-30 foot dike around the entirety of Florida? Who is going to pay for it? And as porous as the ground is, what are you going to do then? Just concrete over the entire state? Or wait, we'll have 10 thousand pumps running full time to pump the water back into the ocean? And if a Katrina comes along and dumps a couple feet of water and knocks out the electricity, we'll just rebuild. How long will that take?

    44. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Start building new construction designed to float while being securely anchored? I'm not an engineer so I have no idea what would be involved in securely anchoring a floating house to limestone in the event of a sizable flood.

      It may well be the case that the best option is to begin funding a mass exodus out of Florida and declare the whole state a national park. I mean, I'm not familiar with Florida's demographics much. If it really is like 99% retired rich assholes, then I'd say let them drown. I'm more thinking about Katrina where the people who were left in New Orleans to bear the brunt of the flooding were poor (not to mention all the racist whinging it caused).

      I mean, I really don't have a dog in the fight. My immediate plans are to move to Colorado for political reasons. That has the handy side effect that I'll never need to personally worry about the sea level. I'd really like to be able to flee to the Netherlands or Germany where my religious wingnut ancestors came from (claiming persecution just the same as they do these days--being unable to impose their particular interpretation of the Bible on others constitutes persecution in their minds, hasn't changed in centuries), but I doubt I'll ever have the wealth, credentials, or career it would take to be accepted as an immigrant.

    45. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We can't afford to build dikes like that; we're too busy lowering taxes for the rich and giving handouts to Wall Street.

      If we can't even afford to keep our bridges from falling down, what makes you think we can afford to build a sea wall?

    46. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Common sense is that you ban new housing, make it attractive to move somewhere higher - won't happen.

      No, that's idiot sense. As in, you believe everyone is an idiot and must be corralled to do the right thing.

      Simply stop subsidizing insurance, stop mandating that insurance is available for those areas, and let people pay what they want for the houses. If they are dumb enough to move into one, and dumb enough to die in one, fault is on them, don't send any aid except what they paid for already through insurance and property taxes (ie: Your house is on fire? We'll put it out. Your house fell into the ocean? Hope you had insurance for that, because FEMA don't give a shit.)

      Done. No need to ban anything. By simply removing government from the equation few will be willing to risk living there, and the few that do, well, they risk death. Do you feel you need to take great pains to stop people living in Alaska each time someone freezes to death? No? Could that simply be because you believe they were idiots for making such a shitty life choice?

      Apply the same logic here.

    47. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, start talking to the Dutch. They drain their country 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. It is below sea level. Yes, it involves dikes and lots of pumps. It involved lots of pumps even long before electricity and internal combustion engines. They can pump or drown, and so can you.

    48. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I say we just build the wall and get the ocean to pay for it!

      This happens all the time in the South Pacific. They call them "coral reefs".

      But good luck with that in Florida. ;-)

    49. Re:Let's all start running now! by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Events that might be considered "once in a lifetime" will happen with such frequency that insurers simply won't provide cover.

      No it won't. It is a self correcting problem. A couple of extreme hurricanes and drought, the life expectancy will drop, lifetime will shorten, and the events will become once-in-a-lifetime again. BTW for all those who get killed by these weather events, they are already once in a lifetime events.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    50. Re:Let's all start running now! by jiriw · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ,quote>Where would Florida pump the water to? The ocean?

      Well we (Dutch) do... if it's high tide and internal water levels are too high. But usually we let it go at low tide. That's the wonderful thing about the sea... it's dynamic. You 'just' have to have some internal basins to temporarily store fresh-water surplus and adjustable storm surge barriers in your major estuaries.

      the Dutch are surrounded by mountains

      Not .. quite. At the North and West we have the North Sea, of course. Our Northern flank has a shallow marshy-sea-land type of area and a string of sandy islands stretching a 100 miles or so in a west-east direction and a few dozen miles wide. The Western flank is sand dunes. And the South-west are major estuaries with river-separated islands... and those storm surge barriers, of which one major one (Eastern Scheldt storm surge barrier) is adjustable so it only closes when a storm hits. Oh, and the North-western area of our country contains a (very large, used to be even a lot larger) lake, which used to be a sea in its own right. But we dammed that off and now it's a fresh-water lake with about half the area poldered in, so that's a new provice (we do not have states, but provinces) now.

      At the South we have Belgium, which is an independent nation. They have less costs for their water-works because they don't have the major estuaries we Dutch have... but Belgium is still part of the 'Low countries', as is a piece of Northern France and the whole area is not much above sea-level. Then, at the South-east we have a couple of hills of which -maybe- the south-eastern tip might qualify as a mountain (its highest peak is 322 meters (1056 feet) above sea-level). East we have the German low lands, of which the Northern part looks very similar to our North-east,including the shallow marshy sea-land and more sandy islands, all the way up-to and including parts of Denmark, another nation yet again. East-south-east we have the Rhine flowing and the Rhine-Ruhr gebied, which is still quite low and one of the major population areas of Germany. It's only beyond that, there are proper mountains.

    51. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      What's this "we" business? There is no "we", there's "us" and "you guys".

      Sure, the Dutch could pull off some great engineering feats in Florida if they really wanted to. But asking Americans to do something like what the Dutch can do is like asking people in Somalia to suddenly set up a prosperous first-world nation.

      Quite simply, it just can't be done. Drowning is the only option in Florida. People there are not capable of fixing this problem.

    52. Re:Let's all start running now! by EdwardFurlong · · Score: 1
      I have relatives that live by the ocean, I do not know all the specifics, but the house is anchored some hundred feet into the ground, the first floor/ garage has "walls" designed to break away in the event of a flood, etc.

      Seems like a lot of work and money just to live by the ocean.

    53. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      It has nothing to do with what Floridians prefer, it has to do with what they're capable of.

      Do you think Somalians could, within a year, accomplish land reclamation works on the level of what the Dutch have accomplished? (Without just hiring the Dutch, of course, not that Somalia would have any money to do so.) Pick any dirt-poor ocean-bordering nation in Africa or southeast Asia and ask yourself the same question. So if you wouldn't expect Somalia to start building massive dikes and pumps and reclaiming land, what makes you think Florida could do it?

    54. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a feeling that those with the beach view will be just fine with not completely losing their property investment to being permanently underwater.

      You've clearly never met a real Floridian. "Climate Change" is an unofficially banned term in government. Most of the people there are confident that nothing will happen during their lifetimes. Their property values (which have already taken a huge hit since 2007-2008) are dependent on a lack of climate change. Therefore, the climate must not change. If the climate must not change, there is no need to do anything about it. QED

    55. Re:Let's all start running now! by Captain+Splendid · · Score: 1

      you cannot wave your hands and make engineering go away.

      LOL, this is the US you're talking about, where infrastructure spending is practically communism. It's already been waved away.

      --
      Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
    56. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you get paid to write long-winded rants such as this?

    57. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unlike most people, insurance companies can think for themselves and will raise their rate according to the risk. Insurance is usually reevaluated continually. If the risk is high, then rates will be hgh. When the rates are too high for people to live there, then by definition, people will no longer live there. Problem solved.

    58. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm just too cynical, but I don't see how, even with technology 160 years more advanced, such a thing would be possible in the USA today.

    59. Re:Let's all start running now! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Dutch don't get hurricanes almost every year though.

      Neither do Floridians.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    60. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      No, not necessarily: in some places, the land just ends at a cliff or a bunch of big rocks. Beaches usually take some time to form by erosion. It also depends a lot on the local geology.

    61. Re:Let's all start running now! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Yes but at a sea level rise rate of 2-4mm/year, I think that people will have time to adjust!!

      Well, yeah. Sortakinda. Adjusting can mean everything from moving to drowning and there ya go.

      Sounds so benign, so manageable. Next thing ya know, its 2100, and the levels have risen by 3 feet (conservative) to possibly 6 feet. That is death for places like Miami.

      Now, my math may be rusty but 2-4mm/year over the next 84 years (to the year 2100) says 168mm to 336mm. Which is around 6.6 inches to 13 inches. Or - at the upper end - about one foot. So not sure where you get the "3 feet (conservative) to possibly 6 feet". A bit of exaggeration, perhaps? For effect?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    62. Re:Let's all start running now! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      So the rate of sea level change is 80mm per year?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    63. Re:Let's all start running now! by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 1

      you cannot wave your hands and make engineering go away.

      If you were to make only the people who benefit from the mitigation project foot the entire bill, the engineering would go away, because it would cost more than the protected property is worth.

    64. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However, I think the hurricanes you have should not be a hindrance to implement proper water works in your country if you really want to defend the coastal lands from future flooding.

      Actually, we had a pretty extensive water management system in south east FL. Dykes, canals, dams, pumps, the works. The bigger problem is developers vs. environmentalists. Guess what happens when you stop dredging canals, re-flood swamps, and remove dams so all the pretty fish and birds can have their homes back? Yup, you can't manage water so well anymore.

      Thinking sea rise has any real effect compared to that is just silly. 2mm from AGW. 500mm from mismanagement. Color me indifferent.

    65. Re:Let's all start running now! by Sique · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Maybe I suggest you start talking to the Dutch either. I often hear that argument, but it means that you just use it as a talking point, but have never bothered to actually look at what the Dutch have there. First of all, the Dutch live at a coast that is very unique in that it has a large intertidal zone, a landscape so unique that there is no english word for it (while French, Dutch, German and Danish call it vasière, wad, Watt and vade resp.) It can stretch over several miles and falls dry every low tide and gets flooded every high tide. In this zone, waves wash new sand on the shore every high tide, so the land slowly grows into the sea. (It's different in Northern Germany and Danmark, where the tidal streams wash the sand away.) Thus, along the dutch shore new islands form all the time and grow.

      In historical times already, the Dutch started building dams that got flooded every high tide, but kept the sand in the low tide, thus increasing the land grow at their coast. If the spot was high enough, they started building a dike on it to prevent even very high tides to get onto the freshly won land. After the dikes are ready and all remaining water has been pumped out, the land is called a polder. Most of the land at the Dutch coast is polderland. What we have here is a tradition of 1500 years of winning land by creating polders on former seabeds, helped by the unique feature of the large intertidal zones.

      One problem still remains: Rivers flow into the sea, and if the land level is below sea level, they will not. At every river mouth, you have to somehow get the river water into the sea water, and if the sea level rises, you have to have pumps that are able to pump all the river water up into the seawater, or the river mouth will move up until it reaches the point where the sealevel matches the river level. At the Dutch coast, this problem is migitated by another natural phenomenom: A very high difference between high and low tide. While for most of the oceans, the difference (called tidal range) is just one or two feet (and thus much lower than the expected rise in sea levels), at the Dutch coast, the difference is between 6 and 10 feet. Thus, to let the river into the sea, but not the sea water into the land, you just close big gates at the river mouths every high tide, but open it at the low tide.

      Florida borders directly at the Atlantic Ocean, and thus the tidal range is very low, which means that no Floridan river will flow into the ocean anymore if the sea level rises. If you build large dikes around Florida, it will not be flooded by ocean water, but the rain water and the ground water, which no longer can flow into the ocean, will flood Florida instead.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    66. Re:Let's all start running now! by Barsteward · · Score: 1

      we've still got our fair share of idiots here in europe..

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    67. Re:Let's all start running now! by Luthair · · Score: 1

      Its hard to see the change with your head stuck in the sand.

    68. Re:Let's all start running now! by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Common sense is that you ban new housing, make it attractive to move somewhere higher - won't happen.

      In principle, there is no need to ban such housing, we just need to stop subsidizing it. Right now, it's subsidized both through government-financed flood insurance programs, as well as through the provision emergency services. That encourages people not only to build in risky places, but also to pay for flood-proofing their homes. If people had to pay for the full cost of insurance and emergency services out of their own pockets, many people who currently build in flood zones would consider it too expensive and build somewhere else, and others would flood proof their homes instead of getting a fresh home every few decades courtesy of the tax payer. Attempts to reform the system have been repeatedly undermined. (I think the reform act was probably too heavy handed. A better and simpler choice might be to limit payouts from government subsidized flood insurance to a one time payment, both per site and per property owner.)

      We need better flood maps and risk analysis systems too. Some places have gotten a "100 year flood" several times in the past decade. That indicates to me the risk calculations could use some work. Another problem is new development. New development paves over the earth with nonpermeable concrete and then disposal of rainwater becomes a significant problem. Areas which were once had swampy land to soak up the rain can quickly become areas that generate large volumes of runoff/drain water.

      Some places have adequate retention pond regulations, and some places allow developers pass the costs, problems, and risks to the general public. The regulations for flood control are at a local or regional level. There is only so much the federal government can do, even if they were empowered to do something. Flood control in the USA is a very large problem and anyone proposing simple or easy solutions doesn't understand the problem.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    69. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, quit blaming religious zeal for any and every aspect of human behavior that you don't like. A far more fitting explanation comes from Upton Sinclair: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

    70. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dutch aren't magicians, and can't do shit about Florida's geology. Try to protect Florida in the Dutch style, and watch the water flow up through the ground well inside the dams.

    71. Re:Let's all start running now! by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      We need better flood maps and risk analysis systems too. Some places have gotten a "100 year flood" several times in the past decade.

      That's no coincidence, since those maps and zoning are influenced heavily by political lobbying. You only get better flood map and risk analysis when people are forced to insure privately, that is, when people actually have to bear the costs of their decisions.

      Flood control in the USA is a very large problem and anyone proposing simple or easy solutions doesn't understand the problem.

      It's a "very large problem" if you try to solve it through government intervention, planning, and financing; like all central planning, that doesn't work. It's not at all a "very large problem" if the market addresses it.

      Another problem is new development. New development paves over the earth with nonpermeable concrete and then disposal of rainwater becomes a significant problem.

      And, again, this is best resolved through insurance and civil lawsuits; city-wide zoning and planning can help coordinate that, and they might require insurance, but the final decision makers should be the developers.

    72. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      So how do you figure they'll move Miami up hill?

    73. Re:Let's all start running now! by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't ban housing. I would designate areas which were not eligible for disaster assistance. Which would mean you couldn't borrow money to build there at low rates.

      Which would mean either very expensive houses (from very wealthy people who can afford to cover damages) or inexpensive housing would be in those areas.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    74. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 2

      Alas, Florida has porous rock under it, so the water will go under any barrier they might try putting up.

    75. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 2

      Science also shows us that the ground is far more permeable in Florida than Louisiana. Levies don't work when you can't reach reasonably non-porous ground.

    76. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Florida has an area of roughly 170000 square kilometers and receives less than 2000mm of precipitation annually. For all of Florida, that makes less than 170000km^2 * 0.002km = 340km^3 of rain in a year. If you needed to pump all of it up three feet, it would take an average of 1m * 340km^3/year * 10^13N/km^3 / (365*24*60*60s/year) = 100,000,000Nm/s = 100MW. Not in the realm of the impossible.

    77. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 2

      OK, that's settled. Now imagine if the water bubbled up 1000 times faster...

    78. Re:Let's all start running now! by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      May I suggest you start talking to the Dutch. Their language sounds like a mix of German, English and a throat infection, but I assure you, they all understand and speak English excellently. The name "Netherlands" means "lower countries". You know that the Netherlands are famous for windmills, right? Well, those aren't all mills. Many are wind pumps, which were used to drain the land, most of which is below sea level.

      The Dutch don't have land that is porous like a sponge underneath them. Large areas of Florida have limestone bedrock that leaks like a sieve.

    79. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 2

      The analysis is complete, it won't work. Imagine you are sitting outside in a low area a way away from the coast. Suddenly the ground gets wet and then you're in a puddle. It just comes up out of the ground. It's the high tide.

    80. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thats funny, I was in the Netherlands 10 years ago. The tour guide claimed Amsterdam would be "completely under water in 5 years" because of the rising sea levels.

      I guess that hasn't happened yet.

    81. Re:Let's all start running now! by fhage · · Score: 1

      I was told in 1974 by The Weekly Reader that by the year 2000 all of the beaches in North Carolina were gong to be gone.

      Those of us with full reading comprehension understood the subject was beach erosion at Cape Hatteras, not global climate change.

      Despite a century building dikes and breakwaters and pumping sand, the beach in front of the historic lighthouse continued to erode, putting the structure at risk. In 1999, the US Park Service jacked the 200 ft tall brick structure up and moved it 1500 ft inland. When I visited in the late '80s, there was no beach, only riprap near the lighthouse.

      Personally, I think the Outer Banks of NC makes a great case study on environmental change and people's responses to it.

      The artificial dune line presents quite an environmental conundrum. Should we preserve them as well as the homes built on the formally shifting sand bars?

    82. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just too hard to relocate Florida's population to the Moon, and we'd better give up that plan too. See, now I'm a silly luddite too.

    83. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The Dutch don't get hurricanes almost every year though.
      This is just nitpicking about words.
      Hurricane is Aztec? Or Maya?

      We simply call it: Storm, more precisely Orkan, if you trust Wikipedia Orkan is derived via spanish from Hurricane (which I really doubt is true). The difference is ... neglectible. And in contrast to Florida we have a thing called "storm flood" ... so water wise, sea level wise, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany etc. are far far worse off than Florida (in case of a storm flood). Wind speeds are more or less the same as well. No idea why you americans think you are #1 in everything. Highest wind speed? Most rain fall? Most lack of rain fall? Highest sea level rising? Highest floods during storms?

      Should I tell you what you are really #1 in?
      - in making news when something goes wrong, because everything that goes wrong in your country is "prepared for not to go wrong" in any first world country. So in other words: because a Orkan in Netherlands or Germany does not really make any news anymore: as nothing really is happening. You think there are none ... big mistake, huge mistake even.
      - number of prisoners per 100k citizens. Ah, as we see in Florida, you are faking this too, by removing citizen rights of convicts. Is that a trick to look good in terms of "prisoners" per 100k citizens? I mean they have close to zero, after the prisoners are not citizens anymore and e.g. can not vote anymore.
      - I could easy put a few more ... but well ... don't want to interfere with your sleep patterns

      But thank you for your insights ... are you rated +5 insightful already?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    84. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, we absolutely should not subsidize the land that is likely to be under water in a few decades. We should also be sure to inform people of the problem. It would help if we didn't have so-called respectable legislators telling people it won't be a problem.

      It would be a good idea to make it clear that "this property is expected to be LITERALLY under water in x years" is part of the disclosure laws. It is, after all, a known defect.

    85. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on how porous it is. You might be able to just pump enough water back out. Anyway, it seems everybody's sure that it either can not be done or will not be done, so assuming that sea rise is a given, I guess the only option left is to pack up and move.

    86. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Dutch coastline is roughly 1/3 of the Florida coastline. The Dutch have spent large sums building and maintaining those dykes, I'm not sure it's feasible to do that on a 3x scale.

    87. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1) Nah.. I think people would rather have a sea wall block their beach view then live underwater.

      2) Japan is building a 250 mile 41 foot sea wall at a cost of $6.8 billion. Florida has a coastline of 1350 miles so a quick calculation puts the bill at $37 billion. Add a bunch of pumps to toss back all the water that leaches through the limestone... say $50 billion. US discretionary spending is $1.11 trillion. I'm not saying it's easy... but its possible.

      3) Maybe Trump was talking about >>this wall the whole time!!!

    88. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      We feel your pain.

      I suggest you build a cheap boat, a catamaran or trimaran.

      You can make them pretty storm proof. As in "not capsizing" and close to unsinkable.

      You can get plans for free and the cheapest 30 feet ships cost only 20k if you build them mainly yourself.

      Hope you are close enough to a river or a coast to utilize it :D Would be a shame if it only was sitting in your yard "just in case" :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    89. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not an engineer.

      Yeah, I got that.

    90. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus, man, could you for once not let your inferiority complex get in the way of a topical discussion? This is not about who has it worse. We're discussing the problems that may get in the way of an engineering solution, and why the way the Dutch keep their feet dry may or may not work for Florida.

    91. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's this "we" business? There is no "we", there's "us" and "you guys".

      Sure, the Dutch could pull off some great engineering feats in Florida if they really wanted to. But asking Americans to do something like what the Dutch can do is like asking people in Somalia to suddenly set up a prosperous first-world nation.

      Quite simply, it just can't be done. Drowning is the only option in Florida. People there are not capable of fixing this problem.

      Jesus, your level of butthurt about Florida is at epic proportions. Relax, fiesty internet tough guy.

    92. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see a simple solution to this: refuse aid to the refugees.

      Yeah, for all problems there is a simple solution. Simple and wrong.

    93. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      First hotels will build sea walls, like in Venice. Eventually, when the water has risen too much, they will abandon Miami. But it will take many decades - no one is going to be caught by surprise. Land values will gradually decline and be sold and eventually properties will be abandoned. There is no crisis - it is just change that happens over the course of a lifetime - like so many other things.

    94. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

      While for most of the oceans, the difference (called tidal range) is just one or two feet (and thus much lower than the expected rise in sea levels),

      For most of the planet the minimum is 1m and up to 2m, not 2feet. E.g. basically every island in in the middle of the ocean has 2m tidal range.

      As far as I can say (I'm german), your idea about Netherlands tidal range makes no sense either.
      This is the tidal calendar for Norderney, was to lazy to search for a Netherlands one: http://www.bsh.de/cgi-bin/geze...

      Even with current moon and weather we have more than 3m.

      Could not resist, here is one for Rotterdam: http://www.tide-forecast.com/l...

      Interesting: the tidal range is indeed smaller than in the random German island I picked. Only 2,30m

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    95. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Informative

      Keep in mind, the Dutch are surrounded by mountains.
      There is a marvelous invention mankind once made. It is called a map.
      I suggest to consult one ... once a while. It is enlightening.

      I just got enlightened myself ... did not know the oldest maps are up to 8000 years old (but well, they are star maps :D ): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      You get $100 extra if you find a mountain in Netherlands ... as far as I know the highest hill is not even 300m. (You can safely round that to 300 yards, aka 900 feet)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    96. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Good catch. That works out to 10mm/year. But there are other studies that predict less. 10mm/year is indeed something for a property owner to worry about, but is not something to be alarmed about with respect to safety.

    97. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Miama, New Orleans, Venice - those places will all be underwater. But this change is inexorable - I think that people should not build new oceanfront property in those places!

    98. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Good point. I think that living near the ocean in low lying areas is a perilous thing!

    99. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Common sense is that you ban new housing"

      That's one form of "common sense", though an insanely complex one on a societal level. Where does it stop? Next is government expected to stop people building in tornado zones, areas with high winds, areas with poisonous snakes? A simpler one is to simply expect people to have some personal responsibility from both a moral, legal and financial standpoint. If you build in an area with a significantly increased risk from various situations (Volcano, earthquakes, flooding, landslides, etc) YOU should have to prepare/insure against it out of YOUR pocket. The only thing the government should be responsible for is some level of risk assessment (flood maps, earthquake zones, etc), a reasonable rescue response and minimal temporary assistance.

    100. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      If they build sea walls, they'll be disappointed when the water rises on their side anyway because they're on top of porous limestone.

      Meanwhile, you know the top 1% (or 0.1%) will cook up some scheme where their pet legislators will claim they're too big to fail and the rest of us will end up paying for the lost value. Even for the ones who own the very industries that are contributing heavily to the problem while they deny it exists.

    101. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's about it. It is sufficiently porous that in some low lying areas you can actually see the water coming up out of the ground during a high tide.

    102. Re:Let's all start running now! by Mab_Mass · · Score: 1

      but most of that shit show was the fault of a completely mismanaged response at all levels of government

      Please don't forget the neglected, obsolete levy systems that weren't updated/repaired. The failures started happening long before the storm.

    103. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Interesting. And yes, the rest of us will end up paying. Today we have paid for reconstruction in New Orleans (why? - isn't that a Louisiana responsibility?) and we routinely pay for beach reconstruction in towns all across the Atlantic seaboard (why? - isn't that a local responsibility?)

    104. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      It's bad enough paying for reconstruction that is in the path of danger, but it's a little harder to swallow helping those who also profited big by both creating and denying the danger as well.

    105. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      We'd lower them for the poor and lower middle class, but they don't pay any income taxes as it is.

    106. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Look, asshole. You obviously don't care about the people of Florida and their perfect beach views. Why don't you just shut your face and let them deal with the problem or lack thereof.

    107. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to pit the engineering accomplishments of the Netherlands against the engineering accomplishments of the United States? For a bunch of religious knuckledraggers, we sure have accomplished a lot of scientific and engineering feats.

    108. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Now imagine that the first time you see the puddle, it is about 1/16" deep. And then the next year it's about 1/8" deep. 20 years later the puddle will be 1.25" deep. And 80 years later as you are lying on your deathbed the puddle will be 5" deep. Only you don't give a shit because it was pretty easy to add some fill and jack your house up 6". All this assumes the IPCC predictions are correct. Generally they have vastly over predicted warming and sea level rise.

    109. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      So you're saying we could build a 1000 mile long wall 41 feet high on the Mexican border for considerably less than 37 Billion? That sounds like a pretty reasonable deal.

    110. Re:Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Climate change is a pretty generic, non descript euphemism that describes the normal state of the global climate. Flux. It should be banned.

    111. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      He may be a bit upset when he only gets half of what he expected out of the reverse mortgage that was supposed to fund his retirement.

    112. Re:Let's all start running now! by rhazz · · Score: 1

      ...the oldest maps are up to 8000 years old (but well, they are star maps :D )

      I call bullshit. There is no way Hollywood has been around for 8000 years.

    113. Re: Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then imagine that sinkholes don't exist, or at the very least have nothing to do with the water permeating the limestone that Florida consists of. And then wake up.

    114. Re: Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a good thing that some hippie stoner got bored of his day job as a guide and made that shit up, because it disproves all of climate science and proves that Florida is safe.

    115. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm confident that Floridians can improve upon their inbreeding programs to have their children grow gills within the next 50 years...

    116. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      You mean that humans created the situation? Perhaps - although one needs to blame the entire human race for that: we live in a system, and that system has behavior. But the question of whether humans created the situation is not so clear. I know that the mainstream news paints that picture, but the facts are less certain. E.g., the CO2 that humans produce is about 1% of what nature produces annually. And yes, global temperature has been rising if you look only at the holocene; but if you go back farther, we are very square on a trend, and global temperature has been much higher than it is today: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/.... And yes, CO2 has been rising, but that is cyclic as well; do you know that during the time of the dinosaurs CO2 was TEN TIMES what it is today? - and yet Earth was verdant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... So humans _might_ be causing global warming, but it is not so clear, and it is also not clear that the ecosystem cannot adjust.

    117. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If standing water was your only concern creating float-able structures might work, even if it would be an odd lifestyle with many logistical challenges. However since it is such a hurricane prone region waves, wind and storm surge are also major concerns. Once water gets moving little on earth can stop it besides solid land. A tsunami is a pretty good example, its a temporary ocean level change on a regional scale at it will turn an entire area into muddy debris laden parking lot.

    118. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Dutch don't get hurricanes almost every year though.

      Neither do Floridians.

      You wikipedia link diagrees with you. 63 storms /13 years is > 1 storm / year
      The period from 2000 to the present was marked by several devastating North Atlantic hurricanes; as of 2013, 63 tropical or subtropical cyclones have affected the U.S. state of Florida. Collectively, cyclones in Florida over that period resulted in over $100 billion in damage[10][11] (2008 USD). Additionally, tropical cyclones in Florida were responsible for 69 direct fatalities and at least 80 indirect ones during the period. Eight cyclones affected the state in both 2003 and 2005, which were the years with the most tropical cyclones impacting the state. Every year included at least one tropical cyclone affecting the state.

    119. Re:Let's all start running now! by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      The issue for Miami is even if they build levees and seawalls the water will just rise up from below through the porous limestone bedrock below them. When Miami brought in Dutch engineers their suggestion was floating islands.

    120. Re:Let's all start running now! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The one thing you aren't going to get from private insurance is a coordinated plan, and an uncoordinated flood plan is useless. If Developer A, building on 2km of shoreline, doesn't want to build any flood protection, and Developer B builds protection on the next stretch, Developer A's land is going to flood Developer B's land, free market or no free market. This is something that pretty well has to be done by government.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    121. Re:Let's all start running now! by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      One of the main reasons to pay for reconstruction in New Orleans is that it is a major port at the mouth of the Mississippi River. The amount of commerce passing through that port is huge.

    122. Re:Let's all start running now! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      They have decades to do something about it. However, that would probably involve admitting that the sea level is rising, which they seem very reluctant to accept. It will be interesting to see the results.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    123. Re:Let's all start running now! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      From the point of view of the human race, it doesn't really matter what happened in the time of the dinosaurs (and the Sun was dimmer then anyway). What matters is what has happened in the last couple thousand years or so, and we're getting well beyond the variations over that time period. If your home city is permanently flooded, you're really not going to be consoled by the fact that it's getting to be a perfect brontosaurus habitat.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    124. Re:Let's all start running now! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2

      Storm != Hurricane. The last hurricane in Florida was over 10 years ago.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    125. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      You lost me there.

      What has Hollywood to do with that? If it is a joke it is a bit out of my league :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    126. Re:Let's all start running now! by sjames · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the ecosystem CAN adjust, but we may not enjoy it and it will be expensive. There were no humans back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth.

      In a system as complex as the atmosphere, 1% can be a lot. A far smaller volume of fluorocarbons created quite a problem.

    127. Re:Let's all start running now! by jewens · · Score: 1

      323 meters, thank you very much. Which at 1,059 feet is 59 feet to spare when it comes to mountain-hood. But admittedly it is about 200 feet from the German-Belgian-Dutch border.

      --
      That group of bovine standing over there appears quite portentous. That's right it's an ominous cow herd.
    128. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    129. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Good point. Although at some point it is a losing proposition. I guess we are still far from that point though.

    130. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Yes, very true. Perhaps climate change is partly anthropogenic - we can't say for sure, but it is possible. Still, if there is even a very slight swing in natural sources of CO2, that swing would overwhelm human sources. I think that we need to stop assuming that nothing will ever change. Should we try to reduce CO2? Yes, I think so, although for all we know the climate might then make a sudden swing the other way.... One thing I do know, is that climate change is not "threatening civilization" as is often said by the media. Rising tides might displace many people - and many of those will be poor and vulnerable - but it does not threaten civilization. And there are equal perils that occur on a regular basis, such as the Asian tsunami of a decade back that wiped out 250,000 people in one day without any warning. Humans are fragile and the Earth often rolls right over us.

    131. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Good point. We will adjust, but there will have to be migration to other parts of the globe. I don't agree that climate change threatens civilization - humans survived the last ice age - but it will cause displacement.

    132. Re:Let's all start running now! by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      You're right, at some point it's a losing proposition. When sea level rises enough that NOLA gets cut off from overland routes for highway and rail it will be time to move to another port up river. I think that's probably something like 100 years away.

    133. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Not in public works, we haven't. Just look at the levees in Louisiana. Or all the bridges that are falling down. They can't even keep the DC Metro subway system running.

    134. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but apparently they aren't hampering your governments so much that you can't do impressive public works projects, or keep your infrastructure from falling apart.

    135. Re: Let's all start running now! by Bartles · · Score: 1

      Lol. What bridges are falling down? You're conflating maintenance with engineering. It seems like these problems always happen in places that have been run by Democrats for generations.

    136. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's ok, The Netherlands had a long history with that kind of thing as well. In general sufficiently catastrophic flooding events destroying cities and killing countless thousands of people have a tendency to eventually shift public and political priorities on the matter.

      One can but hope you won't have to be down several hundred billion or even trillion dollars for that realization to really set in though.

    137. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      And there's absolutely no way that this problem can be solved through engineering. New Orleans is already below sea level, and has been for quite some time. Yes, Katrina was bad for them - very - but most of that shit show was the fault of a completely mismanaged response at all levels of government - city, county, state, and federal.

      New Orleans was a sort of perfect storm. One interesting fact is that the Mississippi River is seeking a different outlet, along the Atchafalaya River, as tectonic thinning makes the Atchafalaya a steeper, (read better) course. It has over time switched courses, around every 5K years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      We've tried to avoid this switching of the river's course by building the Old Rver control structure. It is na attempt to keep the Mississippi goingthe way we want it to. And this one almost failed in 1973, in which case we'd be taling about a new bayou located in New Orleans. http://www.wunderground.com/bl...

      While it is understandable why we'd want to keep the Mississippi exiting like it has for years - there is a colossal amount of infrastructure in New Orleans, tectonics tells us we'll lose that battle, possibly in our lifetime.

      As well, we've accelerated the loss of delta by the dredging we've done along the Mississippi. In th end though, we still have the thinning plate, so I have no ideas for a solution.

      Changes will have to be made, for sure. But suggesting the abandonment of the 8th largest metro area in the US is beyond stupid when we literally have decades to do something about it.

      What do you suggest? Since it is already flooding regularly, decades to do something in itself might be optimistic.

      Where do you go? dredge an entire new city to build to the west? Fill in the Everglades? Here's a map of Florida and another with land 0-5 meters, and 5-10 meters. Having been spending time in the Everglades just last month, I can tell you that a helluva lot of the 0-5 meter area is on the low end.

      http://earthobservatory.nasa.g...

      And it isn't looking specifically at that total rise, but what can happen when the right storm hits at the right time, like Sandy a few years ago, the temporary conditions can wipe away a lot of real estate.

      Me? I know how humans are. They don't have much aof a timeline, they have amazing amounts of inertia, and much of the time they'll simply put their heads in the sand, and refuse to believe. Then something comes along and wipes them out, and the blame game starts. So I'll go to Miami occasionally and enjoy it while it still exists, but I won't buy any real estate there.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    138. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      They have decades to do something about it. However, that would probably involve admitting that the sea level is rising, which they seem very reluctant to accept. It will be interesting to see the results.

      Maybe capture an asteroid and use it as the aggregate in the world's largest mudjacking project? Pump enough concrete inder the Miami Metropolitan area to raise it a few meters? Outlandish, and no doubt, but anyone have any better ideas?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    139. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Sounds so benign, so manageable. Next thing ya know, its 2100, and the levels have risen by 3 feet (conservative) to possibly 6 feet. That is death for places like Miami.

      Now, my math may be rusty but 2-4mm/year over the next 84 years (to the year 2100) says 168mm to 336mm. Which is around 6.6 inches to 13 inches. Or - at the upper end - about one foot. So not sure where you get the "3 feet (conservative) to possibly 6 feet". A bit of exaggeration, perhaps? For effect?

      I wasn't using OP's math, of 2-4 mm per year, I was using from the article:

      According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sea levels could rise by more than three feet by the end of this century. The United States Army Corps of Engineers projects that they could rise by as much as five feet; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicts up to six and a half feet. According to Wanless, all these projections are probably low.

      So I used 3 as the lowest number given.

      Really, read the article in my post, Its very interesting. What is happening is real, this is happening in Miami right now, and not at 3 feet of sea level rise, not at even a 1 mm rise, at the present day ocean levels. From just the spring tide.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    140. Re:Let's all start running now! by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Miama, New Orleans, Venice - those places will all be underwater. But this change is inexorable - I think that people should not build new oceanfront property in those places!

      But they don't believe that they will ever change. Remember, once that people can be convinced to reject global warming, they can reject sea level rise, they can reject plate tectonics. Hell, rejecting all science is the new truth today. So build build build! Those eggheads and their sea level rise, they're just socialists trying to keep real estate agents from making money.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    141. Re:Let's all start running now! by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      The one thing you aren't going to get from private insurance is a coordinated plan, and an uncoordinated flood plan is useless. If Developer A, building on 2km of shoreline, doesn't want to build any flood protection, and Developer B builds protection on the next stretch, Developer A's land is going to flood Developer B's land, free market or no free market. This is something that pretty well has to be done by government.

      When government does that sort of thing, it is, in fact, quite destructive and harmful. If Developer A does not believe it is in his economic interest to build protection and Developer B needs it, then Developer B should either offer to pay enough money to Developer A to make it worth his while to build the protection or Developer B should not buy (or sell) the property and put their money somewhere else. What you're proposing is forcing Developer A to subsidize Developer B's non-viable business, and to add insult to injury, to destroy coast line in the process. And most likely, Developer B will bring the process about by lobbying government with just your arguments. Your example illustrates nicely how our coast lines and environment get destroyed, courtesy of government and crony capitalism.

    142. Re:Let's all start running now! by Sique · · Score: 1

      If you look at this map you see that the tidal range of florida is between 50 cm and 70 cm, and that indeed, the coast of the Northern Sea is one of the coasts with the highest tidal range (it actually increases from West to East, thus the german islands have an higher tidal range than Rotterdam indeed.)

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    143. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not the problem. There are two things you need to know about Florida and real estate.

      First, distribution: the property along the beach is outrageously expensive. The property one block in is about half that much, and the property four blocks away from the water is generally reasonably priced.
      http://www.zillow.com/homes/Panama-City-FL_rb/?fromHomePage=true&shouldFireSellPageImplicitClaimGA=false&fromHomePageTab=buy

      Second, Florida is mostly flat, so all the people that currently live in flood zones (and those flood zones include land over 30' above sea level, so a lot more than 4 blocks inland) will have to move a long way inland to get away from the water. As we've seen during hurricane evacuations, the roads aren't designed to take that level of traffic as people try to get to and from work every day.

      If you have an option for a 15 minute commute, and someone suggests that you might want to buy a house 45 minutes away because in 30 years you might be seeing the water 10 feet closer to their house, you'll probably ignore them. If someone suggests that the resale price of your house 3 blocks from the water might be lower in 10 years, you might consider buying a house a little farther away. If someone tells you that over the next 5 years, your suburban house will be worth half what you're paying for it, you probably won't buy it. Anything on the scale of 100 years doesn't enter in to the computation.

    144. Re:Let's all start running now! by AlterEager · · Score: 1

      You can't build a wall because most of Florida is on porous rock -- the water just comes under your wall.

    145. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Yes. There are a-lot of people who cannot think for themselves - they have to be told what to think, even when the facts are actually available with a small amount of searching. And yet, there are so many special interests that benefit from having people think ABC or XYZ - a tug of war for human thoughts. The human condition.

    146. Re:Let's all start running now! by drew_kime · · Score: 1

      Dude ... I'm talking about people whose houses have just been destroyed and they're going to rebuild on the same spot. What does 100 years have to do with that?

      --
      Nope, no sig
    147. Re:Let's all start running now! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I guess everyone in south Florida just needs to live on a houseboat then...

    148. Re:Let's all start running now! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      We're putting out more then enough fossil carbon dioxide to raise the atmospheric amount, and the isotopic balance has been changing. Since it's also a rapid change, it seems extremely likely to be anthropomorphic. Climate scientists have looked hard for other possible causes, and have found none.

      Climate change has the potential to be extremely destructive. While humanity is going to survive, and civilization with it, it's almost certainly going to cause a lot of very expensive and disruptive problems, and we need to be addressing the situation now. (Not that I'm confident we will.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    149. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Storm != Hurricane. The last hurricane in Florida was over 10 years ago.

      Tropical Cyclone==Hurricane. Tropical Storm can also count, but it may also be a low-stage hurricane, depending on who is speaking.

      Either you are confused, or you're relying on the confusion between classifications, but the fact is, Florida has suffered billions of dollars in damages from tropical cyclones in the past decade, including a few Federal Disaster Declarations and even some deaths.

    150. Re:Let's all start running now! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      On the off-chance that this isn't a religious belief of yours, this is the Chicken variation on the Prisoner's dilemma, bringing in the free rider problem. This is exactly what government is good at resolving.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    151. Re:Let's all start running now! by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... How many tropical cyclones landed in Florida, since 2006? Zero, you say? I rest my case.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    152. Re:Let's all start running now! by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      On the off-chance that this isn't a religious belief of yours, this is the Chicken variation on the Prisoner's dilemma, bringing in the free rider problem. This is exactly what government is good at resolving.

      The prisoner's dilemma doesn't apply because players are able to coordinate, alter the payout matrix via contractual agreements, and have many options besides cooperating or defecting. And it isn't a free rider problem because Developer A simply doesn't want flood protection in the first place.

      Imagine, for example, I'm Developer A, and I specialize in high end homes for nature lovers. I built it with a small footprint on stilts, so that it is perfectly protected from any kind of flooding and doesn't disturb the wetlands. The construction is expensive and the house is small, but it provides an oasis for people who love natural environments and I'm betting people will pay a premium for that. Now you come in as Developer B, you want to build your standard cookie-cutter American McMansion, because that's all you know how to build, and so and demand that I build "flood protection". I say "hell no!" because not only do I not need it, it would ruin the value of my investment by destroying its natural character. As far as I'm concerned, Developer B can build whatever crap he wants to on his land, but I am under no obligation to ruin my land and investment to make his building cheaper. But because you're a big cheese lawyer who golfs with the mayor, you go to City Hall, throw your weight around, and next thing there is an ordinance and zoning change that everybody has to build flood protection, destroying the value of my investment and destroying the environment as well.

      Your error is that you assume that flood protection is always good, and that both developers benefit from it. But that assumption is wrong: the optimal use of either parcel may or may not involve flood protection, and if the choice of flood protection is linked between the two parcels, then the economically optimal outcome of coordination can be either that both build flood protection or neither do, and that they split the cost or one developer pays for all of it. Your "government coordination" imposes a solution that is likely economically suboptimal.

      On the off-chance that this isn't a religious belief of yours,

      Well, it is obviously a religious belief of yours, since your attempts at giving rational economic justifications are farcical.

    153. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      Yes, I think you have it right on all counts, although I think that we also need to accept that climate does change naturally - even if some portion or even all of this current change is anthropogenic. Humans have always adopted to climate change, from the time of the last ice age through the drying of the Middle East, which was lush not too long ago. We need to stop thinking of the Earth as a stable equilibrium system - it is not.

    154. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have dikes like that. Have a look at ORCS (Old River Control System) and you will find that if we didn't spend millions to keep the Mississippi River in its current banks; the mouth of the Mississippi would be somewhere in the vicinity of Beaumont, Texas.

      Now when you couple maintenance of capital projects like dikes and levees with crony contract awarding; you get pumping stations that short out as soon as they are needed and levees that break in storm surge from a hurricane hundreds of miles away. Yep, I'm talking about the post Katrina flooding of New Orleans. (Hurricane Katrina never actually hit New Orleans but hit the Mississippi Gulf Coast)

      Now, when you start talking sea level rise and Florida; you also have to consider that there is no bedrock under Florida. Other than the panhandle area; everything is build up on top of shell formations. When you get water flow or brackish water intrusion; the shell dissolves and the land settles. Ok, sea level increases which causes the land to sink. Yep, going to be some wet sneakers eventually there. The worst is when pumping out ground water creates underground flow conditions that dissolve a pocket underground. Eventually, the pocket starts to collapse and you get sink holes that swallow whole neighborhoods.
      (I took a job in the Pacific Northwest and left Winter Park in 1999. Missed getting swallowed by a sink hole by a block and half in 1998. I love central Florida; but not sure I want to buy property there again.)

    155. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are talking about the 15th century massive engineering project that created the polders and put in levees to hold back the North Sea; we can do things better than they did way back then. The Dutch project to turn the Zuiderzee into arable land was a miracle of 15th century engineering. What makes the Netherlands so phenomenal is that they maintained things working like clockwork over centuries. The U.S. can't even maintain railways and highway bridges through 4 generations. (Thinking of all the WPA built bridges from the 1930s that are falling apart)

    156. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      forgot a link:
      http://www.unmuseum.org/7wonders/zunderzee.htm
      How the Netherlands made even more land in the early 20th century.

    157. Re:Let's all start running now! by doccus · · Score: 1

      Their *grandchildren* will have time to adjust.. However, It's unclear to mer if a ratio of 30% crude oil will change the freezing point of salt water, or just how near the geographic North Pole Florida will, in fact, be by then. Or is it the South poledirection it would be yanked to? Kind of pointless anyways. Just like bimini and that underwater complex you'd need scuba gear to enter - not that I wouldn't just DIG an underwater villa, but the access road would be just hell!

    158. Re:Let's all start running now! by doccus · · Score: 1

      Wat? Wat is jouw betekenis. Keelontsteking? Dat is de Duitse accent .. zeker ;-)

    159. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      And pumps do wonders to remove water that gets past the wall. Or is New Orleans still flooded from Katrina and the levy breaches?

      There are ways to mitigate. Just like the climate deniers can't wave their hands and make science go away, you cannot wave your hands and make engineering go away.

      yeah, but pumps require power; and in a storm, power goes away. of course, any decent engineer will design around that, but not on a budget.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    160. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Did you miss the part about how you can't build walls? How are you going to pump water away when there's no wall?

      You can't build a wall because the reason these idiots live there is because of the view. They're not going to allow a wall to be built. And they Floridians: they don't believe in the sea levels rising, no matter how much evidence you show them, even if water is in their houses.

      You Europeans seem to find it impossible to grasp just how stupid a lot of us Americans are. Here's a clue: go read your own history books about how Europeans were back when they were burning people at the stake for believing the "wrong" theology. That's similar to the mentality of about half of America's population today. And Florida has an especially high concentration of them.

      also, re florida; florida is built on limestone. limestone is pervious

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    161. Re: Let's all start running now! by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      Here is an idea.

      Everyone who is convinced that there is no problem, that the sea level is not rising, all the climate stuff is scare stuff to raise research funds, put some skin in the game and move to coastal Florida. You can probably pick it up for a relative steal, as the values should be dropping as the scaredy cats sell.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    162. Re:Let's all start running now! by Duhavid · · Score: 1

      What your proposing is that Developer A can either 1, extort money, or 2, make Developer B's plans nonviable due to having to pay for Developer A's lack of plan.
      In case 1, Developer A will be able to sell their developments before Developer B, in general ( people are not very good at assessing risk, and will go with Cheap just about every time ). In case 2, well, that is kinda silly, but OK.

      But also, say Developer B just walks away. Developer A sells the properties and moves on to the next stupid thing. The people who purchased those properties are now on the hook. You will either answer "that is capitalism, red in claw and beak", or "they can take the developer to court".
      Case the second first, it seems unlikely that the developer will be around then. If they are, will they have the insurance coverage or other assets to handle the liability? And all the time spent in court proving the issue ( 'dar, we dinnint know, dar' ). If you are honest, I think you can see that the drive to be able to maximize profit will make allowing such a risk to leak down to the buyers a very likely thing. ( it happens all the time now )
      Case the second, "capitalism, red in claw and beak". Sure, but do you really want that? The meat you buy poisons you, "you should have " isn't so awesome when you or a loved one is victim.

      Notes, I am assuming Developer A knows or should know full well that the protection is needed, and that if they were developing for themselves or their loved ones, they would so do.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    163. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      And pumps do wonders to remove water that gets past the wall. Or is New Orleans still flooded from Katrina and the levy breaches?

      There are ways to mitigate. Just like the climate deniers can't wave their hands and make science go away, you cannot wave your hands and make engineering go away.

      "Obey explains that when there is a torrential rain (a frequent occurrence) and inland Florida floods, there is nowhere for the water to go. Cities on the western edge of Miami-Dade County, such as Hialeah and Sweetwater, are now at risk of massive flooding with every big storm. To solve this, the South Florida Water District is installing pumps on the freshwater side of the control structures on the canals. The pumps, which cost about $70 million each, can take the runoff water from storms and pump it into the ocean to alleviate flooding.
      But stopping saltwater incursion is more difficult. The town of Hallandale Beach, just a few miles north of Miami, had to close six of its eight wells due to saltwater intrusion. The town now buys half its water from a well field in Broward County and is working on a deal to drill six new wells of its own, at a cost of about $10 million. Fort Lauderdale has also faced saltwater intrusion, as has Lake Worth, a community just south of Palm Beach. "In the long run, the whole area is likely to have problems," Obey says." http://www.rollingstone.com/po...

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    164. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      May I suggest you start talking to the Dutch. Their language sounds like a mix of German, English and a throat infection, but I assure you, they all understand and speak English excellently. The name "Netherlands" means "lower countries". You know that the Netherlands are famous for windmills, right? Well, those aren't all mills. Many are wind pumps, which were used to drain the land, most of which is below sea level.

      "Some engineers point to the coastal resort community of Scheveningen in Holland as a possible inspiration for what might be done in Miami. In Scheveningen, engineers created an elaborate dike with a road and parking within it, as well as pedestrian walks and a man-made sand dune. But Scheveningen has an altogether different geology and coastline than southern Florida. Then there is the question of scale: The dike at Scheveningen is a half-mile long and cost nearly $100 million to design and construct. Miami Beach alone is seven miles long – the entire Florida coastline is more than 1,200 miles. Even if an elaborate dike like this were possible, you can't build a wall along the entire coast. If you just walled off Miami Beach, the water would still flow in from the bay side." http://www.rollingstone.com/po...

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    165. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      It's not the gradual rise that's the issue but the increased likelihood of extreme events. Events that might be considered "once in a lifetime" will happen with such frequency that insurers simply won't provide cover. People living in at-risk areas will be wiped out so often that they'll be driven to live somewhere else. It doesn't help that Florida is so flat either since it means storm surges could well travel miles inland and do damage.

      "I was driving with Harold Wanless through Miami Beach one day when the sun suddenly disappeared and the skies opened up. When it rains in Miami, it's spooky. Blue sky vanishes and suddenly water is everywhere, pooling in streets, flooding parking lots, turning intersections into submarine crossings. Even for a nonbeliever like me, it feels biblical, as if God were punishing the good citizens of Miami Beach for spending too much time on the dance floor. At Alton Road and 10th Street, we watched a woman in a Toyota stall at a traffic light as water rose up to the doors. A man waded out to help her, water up to his knees. This flooding has gotten worse with each passing year, happening not only after torrential rainstorms but during high tides, too, when rising sea water backs up through the city's antiquated drainage system. Wanless, 71, who drives an SUV that is littered with research equipment, notebooks and mud, shook his head with pity. "This is what global warming looks like," he explained. "If you live in South Florida and you're not building a boat, you're not facing reality." http://www.rollingstone.com/po...

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    166. Re:Let's all start running now! by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Events that might be considered "once in a lifetime" will happen with such frequency that insurers simply won't provide cover.

      No it won't. It is a self correcting problem. A couple of extreme hurricanes and drought, the life expectancy will drop, lifetime will shorten, and the events will become once-in-a-lifetime again. BTW for all those who get killed by these weather events, they are already once in a lifetime events.

      thus, the popularity of ever taller platform shoes in miami

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    167. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The neighborhood I lived in in Miami from 1990 to 2000 already had water in the streets at the highest tides of the month... it wasn't exactly rare for that, either.

      monthly flow problems? there are ways to deal with those.

    168. Re:Let's all start running now! by cjonslashdot · · Score: 1

      LOL. At least we see it coming! (at the rate of 10mm/year I think that I can out-run it). 70M years ago the sea level was 300 feet higher than it is today - so there is a long way to go! - I am sure that the coastline will be changing somewhat. Of course there was still plenty of dry land 70M years ago - or the dinosaurs would have been very unhappy! http://curry.eas.gatech.edu/Co...

    169. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All this assumes the IPCC predictions are correct. Generally they have vastly over predicted warming and sea level rise.

      That's not actually correct, the IPCC has over predicted global surface temperatures by a little bit, and for a brief period in 2010, the temperatures actually fell out of the IPCC prediction + 95% confidence interval. However, since then the temperatures have remained in the 95% confidence interval, but are admittedly still below the actual prediction. Sea level rise, however, is a completely different story. The IPCC got it pretty wrong, they underestimated sea level rise by around 60%.

    170. Re:Let's all start running now! by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Florida is "close" to the east coast of the continent. So there is not much water "west of it" hence there is no strong high tide. Not sure, but I would assume that is true for most large "east coasts" of "peninsulas" e.g. east of Korea.

      However I'm surprised that the tide is indeed that low. Interesting to know :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    171. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what countries? They pulled resources to achieve this and Florida is as best a target as they could find. OBVIOUSLY: rain became totally forecastable and REGULAR in NYC for the last few years, though lately it has been ridiculous. Better start believing it, several ways it can be done.

    172. Re:Let's all start running now! by ooloorie · · Score: 1

      What your proposing is that Developer A can either 1, extort money, or 2, make Developer B's plans nonviable due to having to pay for Developer A's lack of plan.

      That is exactly what I am proposing, and it is not only the economically right thing to do, it is also the just thing to do. When Developer B buys his land, he knows that there was no requirement for flood control on Developer A's land. What Developer B did was buy land that wasn't so valuable for his purpose and then force other people to pay for improvements that make his land more valuable in order to make a big profit. It's classic crony capitalism and rent seeking.

      Notes, I am assuming Developer A knows or should know full well that the protection is needed, and that if they were developing for themselves or their loved ones, they would so do.

      You are quite ignorant. As I was saying, Developer A developed in a way (in this example) that didn't need flood protection; look up "stilt houses": it's a traditional, sustainable, safe, ecologically responsible way of building near the water and in flood zones, and it's becoming increasingly popular again for those reasons. The irresponsible builder is Developer B, who wants to rely on expensive, disruptive, and unsustainable "flood barriers" to protect a kind of house that is completely unsuitable for flood prone areas. And to add insult to injury, Developer B wants others to subsidize his low quality construction, and will end up costing the community in perpetuity in order to protect him.

      Case the second, "capitalism, red in claw and beak". Sure, but do you really want that? The meat you buy poisons you, "you should have " isn't so awesome when you or a loved one is victim.

      It is ignorance and stupidity like yours that are responsible for both the economic stagnation and the social and environmental problems we are facing.

    173. Re:Let's all start running now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ocean's response to you is "you're a crazy hitler like guy who can only wish I'd stop sending my unwanted water to your land". Then he threw a bunch of money on a table offering it to everyone who will help defeat you claiming you're anti-christian for wanting to build your wall..

    174. Re:Let's all start running now! by dywolf · · Score: 1

      a) they don't have to land to cause damage.
      b) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    175. Re:Let's all start running now! by vandamme · · Score: 1

      I've been there: Vlodrop. The mountains of Holland. Kind of like the mountains of Florida. Been there, too, just about as impressive.

  3. NP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's really not a problem. Florida is built on drained swamps, and swamps float. The sea water can just be drained away and Florida will be safe again. So go down there and make your millions buying land.

    1. Re:NP by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      But what if P=NP?

    2. Re:NP by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      But what if P=NP?

      You'd have a transistor?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    3. Re:NP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, that would have to be N=PN.

    4. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 2

      Then N = 1.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    5. Re:NP by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      It's really not a problem. Florida is built on drained swamps, and swamps float. The sea water can just be drained away and Florida will be safe again. So go down there and make your millions buying land.

      Swamps (basically dirt and other bits of rotting vegetation, a few snakes and the occasional alien) may float. Multistory concrete buildings, not so much.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    6. Re:NP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or P = 0.
      (or both)

    7. Re:NP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Swamps (basically dirt and other bits of rotting vegetation, a few snakes and the occasional alien) may float. Multistory concrete buildings, not so much.

      You would be very surprised. I'll just leave this here, again.

      Raising of Chicago

      That's 19th century technology folks. But let's not stop the 'South Park' level of Hysteria. It's fun and profitable. (For a select few.)

    8. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Any number multiplied by itself is zero.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    9. Re:NP by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      I was actually referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    10. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Ok ....
      I submit!

      That was funny.

      Still holding my stomach after 2 minutes ... can barely type.

      Likely an old joke, but nevertheless: you got me!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    11. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      If it's old, I'd never heard of it before, it just occurred to me as I read it. It might actually be original content. If so, you're welcome to it and can take it with you wherever you go. Consider it yours.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    12. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      LOL I know... I know... I was still referring to the P=NP. If P is equal to N×P then N must be 1, i.e. basic algebra. I was solving for N.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    13. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      (bow) Khrab!

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    14. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I've a sad suspicion that not many people got it. :/ Ah well... Math humor has a rather limited audience.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    15. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, I was in fact holding my stomach while typing the answer ... I did not really laugh out that loud ... but chuckled for minutes.

      It is one of those jokes you have to let travel around in your mind.

      E.g. I heard this one a few weeks ago:

      A guy decides to become a monk. He goes hard core and joins a monastery with a swear to silence. Only every 6 years he is allowed to say two words, on the gathering of the monks.

      After the first six years after the older monks had said their words, the abbot nods to him.
      He says: "hard floor".

      After further six years they have the same gathering again and every monk says his two words. When the abbot is nodding at him, he says: "bad food".

      Another six years pass and again thy have the gathering to utter their two words, and he says: "I quit!"

      The abbot nods and says: "We thought so. The last 18 years we had nothing except complains from you".

      I don't remember where I caught that one, but I told it a friend of mine, and for an hour at random situations he started chuckling and said: har har, the longer it rolls in the mind the funnier it gets, the more "true" about "human nature" it gets, too.

      There is a another one:
      A customer sits in a french restaurant. The waiter comes and the customer interrupts him while he was asking for orders: "Do you have frog legs?" The waiter looks at him, not amused: "most certainly, Sir!"
      "What are you waiting for? Hop hop into the kitchen and get me a Sandwich!" the customer replies.

        Oki, that was a lame attempt to hijack the thread, but I liked the joke ... a british guy, old 70 year old, musician told it to me in an irish pub ... I liked it.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      The first one resonates with me. I'm a secular Buddhist (sure as hell not a damned monk) and have been on refuge a few times. I've yet to meet a Buddhist would would not like that joke - and see wisdom in it. I'll be sure to convey that.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    17. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I'm an atheist, but I like Buddhism. It is a part of my live as I do jap. martial arts. Probably I move into a Buddhist country, Thailand.

      It is surprising how "religion" influences the live there in a positive way.

      A friend of mine is working in a "catholic school" in Thailand as teacher. She is Buddhist, not sure how "tough" as in "going to the temple" or "going to the prayers". She says: all teachers are Buddhists, except for the Filipinos teaching english etc, they are catholics.

      I live in Germany right now. Both christian Churches have a law exception that they are allowed only to hire people of their own confession. So if you want to work in an protestant's kindergarden, the "owner", "operator" or how ever you want to call it, can demand that only employes that are protestants are hired. In other words: if he rejects one with the note: "you are not a protestant", you can not sue him (successfully). Albeit by constitution you may not discriminate by sex, religion etc. As I said: an exceptional law ... no idea why the courts hold it up.

      I like the Buddhist way of: we don't care about your religion as long as you leave us alone. And as a matter of fact, I never have seen muslims that were more sexy than there :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    18. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Oh, I'm atheist - thus Secular Buddhist. I do not believe in a god, put it that way. It's a tough subject to discuss in public as most people feel compelled to either tell me what I believe or tell me how to believe. I'm not really sure why.

      I believe that "reincarnation" is real - because I understand basic science. Reincarnation is, to me, my atoms will someday be among the stars. And, they will be. Maybe not stars but there's a good chance of that considering how long the galaxy is expected to last and the fact that atoms are always recycled. I am made of matter, I can neither be created nor destroyed. Err - I will not reassemble as a new human, that's really unlikely. Even if I *did* reassemble as a new human, in my entirety, I'd not actually have any memory, association, nor care that my atoms had belonged to a dead human. Chances are, some of my current atoms belong to some long-dead human. They are not a part of me.

      I am on a path - the path is that of enlightenment. Enlightenment can be different for anyone and often is. In my case, I'm seeking being content and working my way towards it by walking the 8 fold path as I see fit. It is imperative to note: I am not a monk, I'm not even a good Buddhist. I like to say, "I'm a Buddhist, not a fucking monk." (It's good for getting some strange looks.)

      I believe in karma. For the most part. I don't think it matters in a "next life." That's just silly talk for weak people. No, I think karma is accumulated by doing good things. This is not always the truth but it seems to be true in the vast majority of cases. Even as poor as almost any situation is, it's somehow better if you're doing things for the right reason.

      For me, I seek logic, reason, and to be content. For the most part, I'm content. I don't dislike anyone - nor do I intentionally try to harm anyone. (That even includes people on Slashdot's "foe" list - I use that as a marker and not as a personal indication - you must have said something I thought was irreparably wrong at some point - presumably something that led to fewer liberties for the individual than is required for a safe and effective society.)

      I think the change came to me after I'd had the misfortune to get the chance to participate in life-fire combat. I spent eight years enlisted as a Marine. It's how I paid for my degree - I used the GI Bill. I learned a lot. I learned a lot about people. I don't like harming anyone - that doesn't mean I haven't and that I won't. It's that I'd prefer to not do so.

      Martial arts? What kinds?

      I studied some Jiu-Jitsu and Akido as a kid and into my 20s. I took every available course in MCT (Marine Combat Training). In my opinion, it's a great way to keep or get in shape - physically and (ideally) mentally. Without the mental aspect, I'm unimpressed. Hopefully you've a good Sensei?

      Have you studied for long? Preferences? Favorite instructor? Any competitions aside from certifications?

      I do not try to convert people to my religion. You're right. Buddhists aren't really about telling other people how to live or what to believe in. Over the years (I've been practicing for about 20 years) I've figured out one word to describe most Buddhists that I know. That is: Pragmatic. I've gone to actual monasteries and stayed there for a while (that's called 'refuge') and they seem generally content with me. They give me wisdom and direction. They put me back on the path. Well, no... They help me find my own way back. Yeah, pragmatism is the best way to put it. The best way that I can think of. They're not even always peaceful - they can and will be violent. There's a reason that monks are bad-ass martial artists. (I am *not* one of those.)

      As for the East? I'm not really fond of Japan. I've been. I'll leave my opinions out of it. Thailand is a good choice, so is Laos of Vietnam. China might be a good place -- if you can get out of the cities. Money, your typical retirement fund, should hold you over there for a long, long time. Parts of India are nice. Nepal is nice but ca

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    19. Re:NP by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

      Like

    20. Re:NP by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Any number multiplied by itself is zero.

      say what?

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    21. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      LOL Good catch. Any number multiplied by zero is zero - was what I meant. *sighs*

      You want to know the worst part about that?

      Yes, yes I do have my Ph.D in Applied Mathematics. *sighs again*

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    22. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I'd never thought of it before then. I think I'm gonna save it for later use. Wait, no... I can't. I gave it away. Angel O' Sphere (/. user) liked it a bunch and I told 'em they could have it. So, I hope to see it again.

      As I said to them (or someone else who replied - I think it was them), mathematics humor only goes so far.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    23. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      That was a long post.

      Regarding Foe or Freak, I only mark people in a similar way you do. Basically people I don't want to read or respond to again. Funnily I have most of them (actually they are not many, perhaps 10) still on my radar and many of them have changed. Some of them simply wrote completely idiotic posts regarding computer science and claimed to be programmers/engineers etc. Funnily they are now posting stuff that contradicts their 5 year old posts. That is good imho.

      So far I only was in Thailand. Whole February. I try to go there again ASAP. I'm working on acquiring a remote job opportunity. In that area I would like to see Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam and Burma. Probably Malaysia, have to investigate how strict the Muslim regions are. Obviously dream islands like Bali should be explored.

      But that is mostly just for "traveling" and being at the beach and having nice food. To dig into the "culture" I plan for later. I would like to work with elephants e.g.

      Nepal is basically the crown I like to reach, Tibet would be nice, too - but I doubt I have the nerves to tackle the Chinese bureaucracy.

      Unfortunately I only started to travel around there just now. Retiring there is basically the goal. I don't mind the heat. Frankly, in summer my part of Germany is hotter than Thailand is right now. Much hotter. But temperature is going up there, lets see how it is in may (yes, I could look that up, but it would spoil the fun). E.g. I avoid places with air conditioning or to many fans. Ofc. AC in the sleeping room is fine ... getting it to like 25C or so.

      Regarding religion, I have no deep opinion. Only kind of spirituality ... but probably not the right thing for /. to talk about. However - in my experience - the old saying: "You do not need to believe in Karma, to be bitten by it in the ass at the end." is very very true.

      Modern religions have destroyed so much culture and knowledge, it just makes me sad. When I was in Thailand in February I met there a girl from the Philippines. She does not know _anything_ about ancient Philippine folklore, gods, fairy tales, deities etc. Perhaps she is an exception, no idea. My impression however is: the catholics made sure where ever they went, that nothing is left from old knowledge/gods etc.

      I have no Sensei anymore. I'm practicing mainly Aikido, some Kenjutsu and to a lower extend Gojo Ryu Karate. Aikido since nearly 30 years, Kenjutsu since about 20 years and various Karate styles occasionally since 40 years (I'm more interested in traditions and "how to apply" techniques than "exercising" or "fighting"). When I'm in Thailand next time I will do Muay Boran (the Muay Thai analogon to Karate Kata) and Krabi Krabong (Muay Thai weapons). However I'm about once a month in Paris, sometimes a bit more sometimes a bit less for Aikido. Either giving classes (rarely) or studying with Bernard Palmier, Chrsitian Tissier, Endo Seishiro etc. The teacher who influenced me most is Frank Noel. Right now I'm mainly trying to catch old jap. teachers "that have not died yet" on seminars. E.g. Saotome Sensei (Washington DC), Yamada (Aikikai New York), or teachers from "the second tier". Like Yasuno Masatoshi, Ikeda Hiroshi or Miyamoto Tsuruzo.

      Plenty of youtube videos available on them.

      In case someone reads this: no, Aikidoka don't compete in cage fights. Your idea if Aikido "works" or does not, is your own thing. I live in a country where the streets are safe, so I don't "do it" for "self defense". I practice the martial arts mentioned above: because it is fun ... that was simplified.

      The only guy who once challenged me was a well known Kung Fu practitioner. It started basically like always. He said my technique is bad. And I was to proud to listen and think (as he was an asshole anyway). So first he tried to explain me "how I could improve". Then when he attacked and I did my "Sankyo" I dislocated his shoulder. Obviously my technique worked. Coming back t

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I wanted to wait to give this a reply that it deserves. Thus it is delayed longer than it would normally have been. I had to make sure I set aside time and mindset to reply. I almost said something but I realized if I'd said something then I'd never get back to reply. So, I left it unread until now.

      If anyone doesn't think Akido is effective then they're really dumb. Much of my training was MCT. I'm going to skip the official martial arts and just resort to this, it's for the sake of brevity. MCT is Marine Corps Combat training. There are varied levels. This was a lot of years ago and the program has changed. Wow has it changed.

      The program has changed a lot...

      MCT was actually changed and is now taught differently. Why? It's too rough, seriously. They toned it down because it's not very useful in situations where you don't necessarily want to cause serious bodily injury or death. I'm thinking English is not your native language and I'm not sure what you know but it's a bit like you'd see the USSR Spetzna use or like you might see the Israeli special forces would use. I don't know what words you'd know so that's the best way to describe it.

      Here's what it is:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      It's a bit nicer. I was in before they toned it down the first time. The first time they toned it down, it went to the LINE system in the late 1980s.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      However, it was also a bit like Okinawan Karate, Judo, Akido and Jiu-Jitsu. Avoid, grab, break, kill. There are multiple levels that you go up in and the training is very rough. It's rougher than anything I faced in the civilian world. It expands, as you go up, into a variety of weapons, weapons techniques, and things like that. We carry a small fold-out shovel. It's called an entrenching tool or an e-tool. It's kept sharp on one side for a reason. There is no competition fighting.

      If I I had to put it on a civilian term - I'd say that, with a fairly good civilian instructor, say in Jui-Jitsu, just your first level MCT would put you at about a brown-belt level assuming it's the Western-style 5 belt system. If they use strikes/stripes then it's probably in the first strike category. After five full courses, I'd probably say, depending on the student, a good 4 to 6th degree in black. But, that's going to vary a whole lot depending on the instructor. I don't know any of the people you mentioned.

      I only played around a bit after the Marines and for the four years while I was between the two enlistments. Other than that, I really don't consider the civilian stuff very similar at all - at least not as instructed here in the West. There are some good dojos out there - some great masters and instructors. They're fairly rare. For example, if I were about 20 years younger - I'd go get in the ring with that new silly televised fighting - UFC and MMA? Yeah, I'd go play there but they have rules.

      I don't think I'd do well with rules. I'm big enough that I can take a hit, just come in past it, and take out the throat, sweep, and then stomp on their sternum with my heel. I'm not really sure how to fight another way - nor am I sure why I'd want to? So, I'd go get in the ring but I don't think they'd let me. Even if they're bigger than I am, I'm certainly faster - even at my age. I do stay in shape.

      I've also had special protection detail and escort training - including asset protection driving school. LOL It's what I did in the military. I'm not some bad ass or anything. I'm pretty harmless. Someone would really have to piss me off to make me fight them. I'm not fond of it. Someone always ends up getting hurt, often times it's both of you - even if it's just a broken hand.

      The links above give some information about what it looked like. I didn't find anything (I didn't look for long) really good otherwise. It was pretty dynamic and changed a bit depending o

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    25. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I know about those fighting systems. But never met one who was trained in them. Would be cool to "role" a bit around see what the core is.
      I guess it is focused on very close distances.

      Besides Muay Boran etc. in Thailand and Burma I'm also interested in the Filipino arts like Escrima, Arnis, Kali etc.

      Or when I once settle down: Maori fighting techniques. I don't know how their martial arts are called, but I prefer to work with weapons from a certain culture and educate my body with them instead of doing "self defense".

      When you are in Asia, drop me a note :D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    26. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am familiar with Escrima. I had a friend who's father was a ranked master. I guess you could say my father and he were friends. They were both Marines. His son never joined the Marines and I've long since lost track. I once got to see his father spar with a master of Kenpo and that was exciting - it was also exceedingly fast. They were, truly, a blur.

      I have been sitting here trying to think of ways to articulate this. I've probably spent about fifteen minutes pondering. I've typed, erased, and typed again. I'm going to guess that you've done some competitions or have been to competitions and that you've done a lot of sparring? If so, you notice how many martial artists will circle and seek a weakness?

      I do not do that. I do not circle - nor do animals, more often than not. Only when animals are trained do they circle each other - usually. Normally, they go in straight. I depend on quick and precise, as opposed to brute force. It's actually graceful. It is finesse but sudden and exact. I will do something stupid (seeming) like take an easy strike and hit my opponent in the nose. I won't do that because I expect it to cause damage. I'm trained to do that because it blinds them for a moment, they will reach accordingly, and it then opens them up to other vulnerabilities such as taking out a knee.

      I never, ever, kick higher than my waist - with one notable exception. If the opponent happens to be on the ground, I may kick as high as I possibly can so that I can slam my heel down on their sternum or throat.

      I do not know what words you're used to but it's akin to Systema (Spetsnaz' martial art, sometimes called Systema Spetsnaz) and Krav Maga (Israeli martial art used by Mossad and IDF). They made the conscious choice to tame it quite a bit because it was considered too rough for use in Afghanistan and Iraq. No, that's not bragging or anything. They really did tame it just for that reason.

      So, if you and I were in a fight then you'd probably beat me up. However, if you didn't beat me up then you'd be in a whole bunch of trouble. You're presumably younger, stronger, and faster than I. You've also probably dedicated many more hours to training than I have. That's okay, my ego isn't frail. You'd almost certainly kick my ass. If you did not kick my ass then you'd be in a spot of trouble.

      Anyhow, the same goes to you. If you happen to get into the States then make sure you let me know ahead of time and I'll show you around. I know some people who are very heavily into martial arts - as in really into them and not into them as a fad or as a way to be tough. I'd be happy to show you around, introduce you, and even let you hang out at my house while doing so. I've got a guest house with plenty of room and it sits empty the vast majority of the time.

      I hate calling it a guest house. It's just an old farmhouse that was here when I bought the place. I was going to have it torn down but it's from the 1840s, post and beam construction, and was in beautiful shape. So, instead of having it demolished and the basement filled in, I hired a company to come in and do a rehab and a restitution so that it's near original condition in a lot of ways. I've had a variety of people who used it for various purposes. It seems pompous to call it a guest house, though it technically is, and is disingenuous in that it implies more to it than there really is.

      Ah well... At any rate, hit me up via email if you want. This thread is going to expire soon. The site is *not* up and running just yet but I'm working on a project. I'm getting https://kgiii.gq/ up and running and seeing what one can accomplish using nothing but free tools and their own labor. It does appear that the site is having some technical difficulties - it's at the server level. That's to be expected for a free hosting company but I was pleased to see that the outage was expected to happen and was announced. They're actually in the process of replacing some hardware.

      Seriously, feel free to visit or to

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    27. Re:NP by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Arg, all the nice stuff I wrote is gone ... needed to restart my laptop.

      Yeah, many interesting points you raise. I will only rarely quote something, as many points I make fit to different parts of your post.

      I have been sitting here trying to think of ways to articulate this. I've probably spent about fifteen minutes pondering.
      Understandable, fragments of "what to answer" are wandering in my mind since more than a week.

      I visited your web page, thanx for the invitation, as soon as we can not talk here anymore or if you wish right now, we can switch to your site.

      Beating you up
      Most seriously not, my main martial art is Aikido, we don't have competitions, hence I'm rather slow and likely don't have the eye for tricky moves. I'm quite confident with swords, so :D So if we had a sparring, I guess you would be winning. However I occasionally spar with some BJJ guys, usually they win in the end, but it is quite fun as it takes them quite long to get me down/to submission. Well, rules, you know, I can not simply kick them in the throat when they jump for my legs, and who would harm a "friend" in a friendly sparring just "to show off"?
      Ah, I did some "sparring" last year in a "street fight club" (yeah, long story) ... we used gloves like in boxing but smaller. This refers to "the rules". I found it incredible difficult to even see my opponent!! And consider in Boxing you are not allowed (rules) to "block" attacks but have to dodge them or "accept" them with the gloves/fists.

      Circle (dancing) (Or rules as in scoring points)
      Yes, I neither would circle one. If one would circle me, I would just turn on the spot. With swords, depending on distance, I would perhaps not move at all, does not really matter if he is behind me as long as he is a bit more than 2 yards away. Standard Aikido is about dodging the attack and using the force of the attacker in a more or less circular movement. However to come to the point where both bodies collide you simply advance straight forward. (And turn at the latest moment) Advanced Aikido is very different, you stay on the line and try to anticipate the attack in a way that you can deflect it and break the balance of the partner in the moment of contact. And as Aikido is mainly about educating your body and not about fighting, most Aikidoka that needed to fight simply went straight into the enemy.
      I picked this line of yours because of some history I like to share. 90% of jap. martial arts have no competitions. Before the war it was about 75% ... rough estimate. After the war most were forbidden but would be practiced secretly. Soon competitions during "grading" became common especially in the sword or traditional weapon related arts, like Kashima Shin Ryu. Plenty of serious injuries and even death were common. Until all "competitions" in "gradings" with weapons (wooden swords usually) were forbidden. What remained are Kendo, sword fighting with bamboo swords and armor that protects the "point zones", you are only allowed to strike the zones with armor, and only with certain kinds of strikes. In the early 90th it had two fatalities because a thrust leaded to a broken bamboo sword and the splinters went through the mask and killed the victims. Two such cases happened in so short order, that the attack "thrust" was forbidden from the "rules" of legal strikes. Later it got introduced again, the Kendo masks have now a plexi glas armor in the inside and only a hole for breathing.
      Most Karate styles had no competition. But around the war time and later some styles introduced competition. In the end most (all?) Karate styles followed.
      The point of this chapter is: rules and dancing and circling. In old school Karate during competition you had only three rules: (1) a technique needs to be applied in a way that from the outside view of a judge it is deadly or maiming. However, you had to "stop" the attack, depending on school millimeters before hitt

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  4. Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With that many people, Florida is a huge political powerhouse. The citizens of Florida will simply elect local, state, and national leaders who will solve this sea rise problem once and for all with strong legislation. Democracy can not fail.

    1. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought President Obama was going to save the world, from global warming, capitalism, and evil governments that kill people remotely by drones. Whatever happened to that guy?

    2. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought President Obama was going to save the world, from global warming, capitalism, and evil governments that kill people remotely by drones. Whatever happened to that guy?

      The Republican party of NO!, that's what happened.

      Besides, he was never a liberal anyway, he's still to the right of Ike.

    3. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 0

      You mean the GOP, the group that - the minute he was elected - said could shut up and get in the back of the bus? Great way to start a relationship!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    4. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Normally this game is played with compromise. I get some of what my constituents want, you get some of what your constituents want, we both have a bad guy to complain about and both get to go home to the electorate and talk about what good things we have done.

      The Republicans have instead focused on the fact that they can get a lie halfway around the world while the truth is still putting its pants on, and have made it their mission to prevent the proper functioning of government, refusing to pass necessary legislation, and blaming whomever is convenient. Government deadlocking over budgets or the debt ceiling? Not their problem. And do note, Obama's opinions on about the GOP are pretty irrelevant since he is not a legislator. I mean, thanks for not pretending that the GOP hasn't been deliberately obstructionist. The entire country has kinda figured that out by now. In fact, they are so convinced that the GOP establishment is a bunch of incompetent pocket-lining scumbags that they are sending Trump up for election. Because he's an "outsider". Karma's a bitch, ain't it?

    5. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought President Obama was going to save the world, from global warming, capitalism, and evil governments that kill people remotely by drones. Whatever happened to that guy?

      The Republican party of NO!, that's what happened.

      Besides, he was never a liberal anyway, he's still to the right of Ike.

      Ummm... ah... wait for it... Bwhahahahahahahhahahahhahahhahhahahahahhahahahhahahahahahahaaaa... ha. Whew man. Space Aliens ate your meds again?

      But I guess it didn't lessen the ability to just blame like a 4 year old. Wow.

    6. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama pushed it as much as anyone else. Don't get me wrong, I hate to see it and blame the GOP in part but Obama never really wanted compromise.... He made it clear early on it was his way or the highway. He locked out opposing voices and ridiculed those who weren't of his cult... er, sorry, his party.

      This obstructionist crap doesn't carry any weight with anyone who's been paying attention.

      Heck, even the law that allows abuse by the secret service at The Donald's rallies was signed off on by Obama himself. The entire narrative of Big Media on this matter is totally a smokescreen for the truth.

    7. Re:Florida Is A Political Powerhouse by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Is it obstructionist? Where do bills originate? It's not the President's office...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  5. But what could force global warming alarmists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To flee? Looks like nothing's working so far.

  6. Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

    Two Florida politicians that have not done well were running from this issue. Did that create a classic wimp factor that undercut them on all issues?

    1. Re:Jeb and Marco by KGIII · · Score: 1

      > wimp factor

      I'd make a joke about theoretical quantum physics but you'd probably not understand.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Try me. The reference is to Jeb's father who suffered politically from a wimp factor.

    3. Re:Jeb and Marco by KGIII · · Score: 1

      So, your new theory is that he's a simp?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re:Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Slightly interacting massive politician? Or was that the guy from NJ?

    5. Re:Jeb and Marco by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Simp, in this usage, was short for simpleton. See, I told you that you'd not get it. It was a play on words, a pun - if you will, but not a very good one - one made even worse by having to explain it. It was also not the one I'd have originally gone with but that would have suffered the same fate.

      Ah well... 2/3rds of "pun" is "P-U." (Best said allowed, of course. Just not in polite company, or folks you want to respect you the next morning.)

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    6. Re:Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      SIMPs are strongly interacting massive particles, recently proposed to explain dark matter better. Badly named because their strong interaction is with themselves, not normal matter.

    7. Re:Jeb and Marco by KGIII · · Score: 1

      So, now you're saying Republicans are fat?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    8. Re:Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Or on the dark side?

    9. Re:Jeb and Marco by KGIII · · Score: 1

      For that to be true, they'd have to have a light side.

      I'll mention that I've spent this winter in Florida - up in the panhandle, I've property on the beach in PCB. Now that the college girls have gone back (Panama City Beach is the home of Spring Break and where it all got its start)... Well, let's just say there's a bunch of definitions for light (or perhaps bright) and I'm going to wager there's not a whole lot "light" about a good many of 'em.

      Thing is, I don't know how they can get and stay so big. I'm from a bit further up the coast (mostly in NC - to VA range but now reside in NW Maine) and I melt away in the shade. It's not even noon and it's almost 80 - with a "feels like" that's a bit higher and the humidity is going to be 90% tonight. Yeah, I'd melt.

      However, I'm still waiting on two more calls and then I'll be out of here - hopefully. I'm going even further south. I'm going to go to Cuba. I've been twice but never officially - I've never been able to get my passport stamped. So, I'm going again before the influx of Americans changes. I'm trying to get the approval expedited and we'll see. I'm not sure how long I'll get to stay but I'm hoping it's for up to a month. I found someone local (two, actually) who can and will fly the missus and I down. She's never been (having only previously left the country to go to Canada) so it's a good place for her to start seeing the world with me.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    10. Re:Jeb and Marco by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Ah, Republicans are college girls. Need to cogitate on that.

    11. Re:Jeb and Marco by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      C'mon. He wasn't that massive, and he interacted pretty strongly. M would apply to Taft, not Bush.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    12. Re:Jeb and Marco by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Simp, in this usage, was short for simpleton. See, I told you that you'd not get it. It was a play on words, a pun - if you will, but not a very good one - one made even worse by having to explain it. It was also not the one I'd have originally gone with but that would have suffered the same fate.

      Ah well... 2/3rds of "pun" is "P-U." (Best said allowed, of course. Just not in polite company, or folks you want to respect you the next morning.)

      makes sense. after all, his son was a chimp.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  7. Nothing to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Really??

    For the last 25-plus years, the rest of the world has been listening to America shouting at the top of their voice:
    "There's no such thing as Global Warming"

    Increase in hurricanes? = Statistical anomaly.
    Severe drought? = Temporary inconvenience caused by el nino.
    Extreme snowfall? = No problem - we're used to it!

    Go away, and read the story of King Canute and the sea...
    I'm sure that you can tell the climate that you're not completely f***ing things up for the rest of the planet.

    (or you could try raising gas to $1.40 a litre, and putting the taxes raised into doing something useful...)

    1. Re:Nothing to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No warming in the past 10 years - statistical anomaly!

    2. Re:Nothing to worry about by CajunArson · · Score: 1

      What increase in hurricanes are we talking about?
      Is the weather on Jupiter at issue here?

      http://www.livescience.com/507...

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    3. Re:Nothing to worry about by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      1) Hurricanes have actually been at a record minimum for the last several years with very few severe hurricanes developing.
      2) Not acknowledging extreme weather might be caused by climate change is just as wrong as blaming all extreme weather on climate change
      3) In the US we buy gasoline by the gallon, not by the liter, and $1.40 sounds like a good price to me (we aren't far from it).

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    4. Re:Nothing to worry about by vtcodger · · Score: 0, Troll

      Been reading The Guardian again, have we? By all means read it. They do some excellent reporting on a lot of things. But their reporting on climate issues is truly atrocious.

      Increase in hurricanes? Not happening. Really. Here's a chart http://policlimate.com/tropica... The vertical axis is ACE -- Accumulated Cyclone Energy which is what the cool kids use nowadays. It gives greater weight to stronger/longer lasting storms. But the number of storms isn't increasing either. Why isn't the number increasing? No one knows. Maybe more wind shear offsets more warm water.

      Severe drought? No real increase. BTW, the worst drought condition is probably the Sahara. It didn't rain a lot there before, but it quit raining there almost completely about 4000 years ago. No one knows why.

      Extreme snowfall? Probably not, but the older records are not very good. Possibly the worst snowfall event on the US East Coast was the blizzard of 1888 but it's hard to compare it with modern events because reporting is different now.

      BTW, there isn't any recent event that compares to things like the Summer of 1814 (The "year without a Summer"), the dustbowl drought. The severe droughts in the American West in the 1300s, the 1938 New England Hurricane, etc, etc, etc.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    5. Re:Nothing to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The price of gas isn't going to stay low forever, and the people who buy massive vehicles they don't actually need because 'hurr, cheap gas' are fucking idiots. In just the past week gas in my area jumped from $1.53 to $1.79. I wouldn't be surprised at all to be paying more than $2 all summer long, and it -won't- fall back to current lows next winter. I'd be pleasantly surprised if my predictions are wrong.

    6. Re:Nothing to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No warming in the past 10 years - statistical anomaly!

      All 10 of the past 10 years are in the 15 hottest on record. All 5 of the past 5 years are in the hottest 8 on record. All 3 of the past 3 years are in the hottest 4 on record. Both of the past 2 years were in the hottest 2 years on record. Last year was the hottest year on record.

      Nope, no warming in the past 10 years.

    7. Re:Nothing to worry about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the record minimum thing a bit misleading since hurricanes is too limiting a term.

      globally last year was a record for cyclonic tropical storms in both number, severity, and length of season (or unseasonability...roughly same thing) once you include the typhoons and cyclones from the other oceans and hemispheres. even the few hurricanes we got last year were rather stronger than normal and also out of season.

    8. Re:Nothing to worry about by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      It didn't rain a lot there before, but it quit raining there almost completely about 4000 years ago. No one knows why.
      Depends what you call "Sahara".
      The northern regions where "feeding the world" till roughly 400 after Christ's birth. Without the "Sahara" as the most important grain region the roman empire had not existed.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    9. Re:Nothing to worry about by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      1) Hurricanes have actually been at a record minimum for the last several years with very few severe hurricanes developing.

      Only if you count hurricanes that hit the US mainland. 2015 was a record year for hurricanes, typhoons and tropical cyclones globally.

      BTW $1.40/liter = $5.30/gallon.

  8. SubjectsInCommentsAreStupidCauseTheSubjectIsTFA by lesincompetent · · Score: 0

    Sea rise *WILL* force millions[...]
    FTFY.

  9. We will build a wall by raind · · Score: 1

    And make them pay for it, they will - trust me.

    --
    Get up!
    1. Re:We will build a wall by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      The only problem with that approach, is that Aquaman and Atlantis are fictional. And even if they weren't. . . .good luck collecting. . . (grin)

    2. Re:We will build a wall by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      it would cost a few million clams.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  10. I live in Florida by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And we are renting NOT buying.

    1. Re:I live in Florida by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      That's what the old Eskimo said about his ice flow.

    2. Re:I live in Florida by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about his ice floe?

    3. Re:I live in Florida by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Thx

    4. Re:I live in Florida by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about his ice floe?

      Floe was a floosey, that's why she kept coming back in cycles. Time and time again. But Jack only remembers when she ebbed and not when she floe'd.

      Weather has really long cycles that certain alarmist people refuse to understand. It doesn't put money in their pockets you see.

  11. Missing option - Evolve by tanveer1979 · · Score: 1

    They can evolve into alligators. Only those who do not believe in intelligent design

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
    1. Re:Missing option - Evolve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is so stupid and ignorant on so many levels and so clueless about evolution, that you must be an intelligent design whackjob to come up with it.

    2. Re:Missing option - Evolve by cardpuncher · · Score: 1
      >Only those who do not believe in intelligent design

      Can you believe in intelligent design and Florida simultaneously?

    3. Re:Missing option - Evolve by ausekilis · · Score: 1

      They say never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups. Imagine the power of a large group of "Florida Man".

    4. Re:Missing option - Evolve by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      That is so stupid and ignorant on so many levels and so clueless about evolution, that you must be an intelligent design whackjob to come up with it.

      Oh yeah? Then how did alligators get here? Huh?

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    5. Re:Missing option - Evolve by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      >Only those who do not believe in intelligent design

      Can you believe in intelligent design and Florida simultaneously?

      Sure! Under that way of thinking only the designer has to be intelligent.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    6. Re:Missing option - Evolve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, nothing prohibits intelligent malicious design.

      The Christianity makes a lot more sense if you assume God is a frustrated dungeon master who's still buthurt about his "prevent the bad guys from eating the fruit of knowledge with the help of your talking animal friends" campaign went off the rails.

      I mean, we've got water falls everybody dies, flaming rocks fall everbody dies, OK fine here's an NPC with a new quest...and you killed him, fine, have fun colonizing Florida (muttered maniacal laughter).

    7. Re:Missing option - Evolve by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      On the backs of the hippopotamuses. Duh.

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    8. Re:Missing option - Evolve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And below that are the turtles. Turtles are the foundational animal and from there it's turtles all the way down.

    9. Re:Missing option - Evolve by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I would have thought that they would have evolved into manatees before alligators.

    10. Re:Missing option - Evolve by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Well it's too bad that our friends can't be with us today
      Well it's too bad
      The machine that we built
      Would never save us that's what they say
      That's why they ain't comin' with us today
      And they also said it's impossible
      For a man to live and breathe underwater
      Forever was a main complaint
      Yeah and they also threw this in my face they said
      Anyway you know good and well
      It would be beyond the will of god
      And the grace of the king
      Grace of the king
      Yeah

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  12. The Impact could have been less by humptheElephant · · Score: 0

    Here is an example of policy makers and climate deniers ignoring science. These mega rich folks who funded politicians to fight the science should be forced to pay for their folly. We could have started sooner to lower our CO2 dumping into the atmosphere. This is not a problem that can be ignored to make it go away.

    1. Re:The Impact could have been less by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      The damage is done. You can play 'coulda woulda shoulda' and 'I told you so" if you want, but all that accomplishes is an increase of smugness, and a continuation of division.

      It's time to stop with that bullshit, and actually do something about it. We have several decades before this becomes a problem, which can be used to mitigate the damage.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:The Impact could have been less by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      The damage is done. You can play 'coulda woulda shoulda' and 'I told you so" if you want, but all that accomplishes is an increase of smugness, and a continuation of division.

      It's time to stop with that bullshit, and actually do something about it. We have several decades before this becomes a problem, which can be used to mitigate the damage.

      longer snorkels for everyone

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  13. Oligatory by NotDrWho · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    We're all gonna die!!!!

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
  14. Put another way by mdsolar · · Score: 0

    In what election cycle does SCOTUS not steal the election from AL Gore?

    1. Re:Put another way by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      The only FL counties that were recounted were ones that voted for Bush.

      Bush won the original FL vote and 1 recount. Gore only won 1 recount. That's when SCOTUS said you have to stop.

    2. Re:Put another way by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      The question is, when does SCOTUS not have an opening to interfere? How much must be lost?

    3. Re:Put another way by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      Two questions:

      1) When should SCOTUS stop interfering?
      2) How many times can a candidate recount the counties they lost until they win?

      In this case my question is (2). Your question might be (1).

    4. Re:Put another way by mdsolar · · Score: 1

      Nope, when does Al Gore win by a 7 pt margin?

  15. And nothing of value is lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a wash. New beach front property, new schools, new roads, and put more to work building these new things. All in all I am looking forward to my brand new world - to make Florida great again.

    VOTE TRUMP 2016

    1. Re:And nothing of value is lost by RenderSeven · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clearly 1% of the people are hogging 99% of the dirt! Those people in Denver dont need a *mile* of dirt under their feet when the deserving 99% in Florida with damp feet have almost nothing! It's time to redistribute the dirt!

      VOTE SANDERS 2016

    2. Re:And nothing of value is lost by msauve · · Score: 1

      "It's time to redistribute the dirt!"

      They're trying. Haven't you watched any of the debates?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:And nothing of value is lost by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      They're trying. Haven't you watched any of the debates?

      I thought that was PhD* program

      *Piled Higher and Deeper

      --
      Time to offend someone
    4. Re:And nothing of value is lost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dirt redistribution is an idea only for Communists, Socialists and Class Warfare, er, ists.

      Dirt rights for property owners!

    5. Re:And nothing of value is lost by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      I didn't think that was dirt they were slinging around.

  16. Bangladesh by jabuzz · · Score: 2

    And there was me thinking the place with the most to loose from rising sea levels by a large margin was Bangladesh. It certainly cannot hope to claim most people, the report cited claims six million people, which is a fraction compared to the 18-20 million people that could be submerged in Bangladesh.

    I guess the value of the properties submerged is more in Florida. However to match Bangladesh everyone in Florida would have to be submerged which seems a bit unlikely even on worst case scenarios which of course would see more people in Bangladesh submerged too.

    1. Re:Bangladesh by mdsolar · · Score: 2

      The study relied on US census data.

    2. Re:Bangladesh by Kohath · · Score: 1

      No sympathy for Florida beach house owners?

    3. Re:Bangladesh by dsmatthews9379 · · Score: 1

      Plus have you ever seen a really fat Bangladeshi, most of Florida will just float to the new high tide line.

  17. ask the Dutch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently, the Netherlands has the already the same problem for many many years, and they solved it. Shouldn't the state of Florida ask the Netherlands to how they mitigate the risk of flooding?

  18. My Scientist Says ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Just your opinion.

  19. heads in sand by doug141 · · Score: 0

    The Florida government does not condone speech about climate change or sea-level rise:
    http://www.miamiherald.com/new...

    1. Re:heads in sand by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Soon to be head in the mud.

    2. Re:heads in sand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DERP officials have been ordered not to use the term “climate change” or “global warming” in any official communications, emails, or reports, according to former DERP employees, consultants, volunteers and records obtained by the Florida Center for Investigative Reporting.

      FTFTFA. Well, to be fair, it doesn't sound like DEP originated the policy.

    3. Re:heads in sand by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Soon to be head in the mud.

      Mudhead? Where's Peorgie?

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  20. More global warming lies from slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    a staple over the years

  21. I fully support global warming by 0111+1110 · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is going to rock, people! This is why global warming has my full support. Mother Earth has been begging for this for eons and it's time for us to deliver and prove that we are truly badass on a planetary scale. Terraformers who can truly shape the atmospheres of entire planets. Planets the size of the earth are mere toys to us. Little blue marbles in our giant hands. My greatest fear is that it will take too long. I want to see this in my lifetime. This needs to happen NOW. Not in a hundred years. Not in a thousand years. Not even next year. RIGHT NOW. Let's make this happen people! And Mars you motherfucker. You're next. I'm already putting aside as much money as I can for the inevitable canal front property that will be selling at bargain prices in just a few months.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    1. Re:I fully support global warming by mdsolar · · Score: 0

      I thought the issue was tiny hands.

    2. Re:I fully support global warming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a moderate viewpoint. We should take care of the global warming problem, but not before global warming takes care of the Florida problem.

  22. They should have done what North Carolina did. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    North Carolina has outlawed sea level rise since 2012.

    It has been ruled unconstitutional for the sea levels to rise.

    It is the job of the federal government to respect and enforce all laws enacted by a duly elected constitutional body of legislators. If Florida had outlawed sea level rise in 2012, it would be a federal government problem, and the state does not have to do anything. Now ordinary Floridians are having to pay for the mistakes committed by incompetent state legislatures.

    It clearly shows government does not work, any government based solutions does not work. It is time to shrink the government small enough to be drowned in a tidal pool.

    Whatever it is, I am in the west, and I don't want my tax dollars paying for dumb mistakes done by Floridians. It is time for people to take responsibility for their decision where to live. And I want the Federal government off my back, off my land, the Bureau of land management dismantled. The only role federal government can play here legally is to put out the wild fires using helicopters and airplanes.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by msauve · · Score: 1

      The only role federal government can play here legally is to put out the wild fires using helicopters and airplanes."

      I must have missed the part where they were given those powers when I read the Constitution.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    2. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has been ruled unconstitutional for the sea levels to rise.

      Yes, yes of course. Barrak Obama will show up and make a speech addressing the ocean!. And by the will of Barry it will all be fixed.. of course. (Then he'll go to Hawaii.)

      Just like all the other speeches he's made that fixed everything. I mean, look at all those great middle-east speeches. Problems are all solved... right.

    3. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by saider · · Score: 1

      The only role federal government can play here legally is to put out the wild fires using helicopters and airplanes.

      As a Floridian, I don't want my tax money to pay for firefighting in the west. I think the western states should be able to take care of that on their own. Why does the federal government need to get involved? Just let nature take its course.

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    4. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      The only role federal government can play here legally is to put out the wild fires using helicopters and airplanes.

      As a Floridian, I don't want my tax money to pay for firefighting in the west. I think the western states should be able to take care of that on their own. Why does the federal government need to get involved? Just let nature take its course.

      Our founding fathers, in their infinite wisdom, anticipated such disagreements. They provided for a conflict resolution mechanism to resolve such disputes.

      It is called the second amendment. Shoot out in the main street, neutral venue. You want to choose the weapon and I the location? Or you want to pick the location and leave the weapon to me?

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    5. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by caseih · · Score: 1

      Except that you'll need those fires put out so you can go live there when major cities in Florida are uninhabitable. We have thousands of square miles of wilderness that you can come live in.

    6. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Government does work; a bunch of high standard-of-living nations in western Europe have proven that.

      The problem is that democratic government requires an educated, non-greedy populace to work well. When it's tried in places full of uneducated religious idiots, it doesn't work very well, and that's what we see in many places in America, especially Florida.

      One thing that does need to be done is that states need to (in defiance of the Federal government if necessary) prevent Floridians and other southerners from moving out when they start getting impacted by climate change. They need to suffer the consequences for their voting choices, instead of just being able to move to states where the people are smarter and screw things up there too like they did in their home states.

    7. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I choose a FleshLight as the weapon.

    8. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by saider · · Score: 1

      No need to move. We have been adapting since before WWII.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiltsville

      --


      Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
    9. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That escalated quickly!

      Jeebus H. Christ! This is why I want to get the fuck away from you mentally ill assholes!

    10. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      You're closer to the truth than most would admit. The problem with our fires is the decades of aggressive fire fighting - it's allowed a massive amount of fuel (dead and dry material) to build up in the forests, so any small fire becomes a major one. We should let them burn a lot more than we do... But then, that releases soot and CO2 and we can't have that, can we?

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    11. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      In most countries the constitution is limiting the powers of the government versus the population.
      It does not define anything else, as in: the government may only do this and that. In other words the government is free to do what ever it wants as long as it is not violating the rights of the citizens given in the constitution and the bill of rights.

      Anyway, that is how constitutions work in Europe. If yours works different I would be glad to here in which areas.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    12. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      But then, that releases soot and CO2 and we can't have that, can we?
      The release of CO2 during forest fires is a zero sum game.
      The amount released is exactly the same the trees used up during growth. And exactly the same the trees growing afterwards will consume to regrow to that size/hight.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    13. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by msauve · · Score: 1

      Here you go: US 10th Amendment. Unfortunately, that's only how it says it works. In practice, the federal government does whatever the fuck it can get away with.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    14. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      ... or to the people.
      Means: to the congress. Hence to the government. You are mixing up "The United States" with the "government of the united states".

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by msauve · · Score: 1

      No, you're very wrong. "The people" is a term of art widely used in the Constitution, and refers to residents/citizens. When the 1st A says "...the right of the people peaceably to assemble..." do you seriously claim that it refers to Congress?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    16. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 0

      You and I know that, but Treehuggers think otherwise...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    17. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      European countries tended to be more or less absolute monarchies (depending on period and location), and constitutions generally came later, as limits on the power of the monarch. When the US was formed, it was a loose confederation, and the Federal government had very little power to limit. The Constitution granted the Federal government certain powers and responsibilities, and the Bill of Rights specifically denied the Feds further power. There's been some pretty bad abuse of the interstate commerce clause, but aside from that the principle still holds. There have been amendments to give the Feds more power, the biggest that's still in effect probably being allowing a national income tax.

      In the US, the Constitution specifies some things state governments must not do, but the states do most of the lawmaking. Copyright law is Federal because it's part of an ability the Constitution granted to Congress, while murder laws are passed by individual states because the Constitution doesn't give Congress the ability to pass such laws.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    18. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Actually, government works with ignorant and greedy people, although not as well. What government needs to work is a general consensus in the population that it works, which is something of a self-fulfilling belief.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    19. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The "people" likely refer to anything appropriated depending on context, or not?

      Or how exactly, if not via the congress, should "the people" exercise the rights you so loudly claim they have?

      How "the people" install a law, if not by voting for congressmen and let them install it?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    20. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by msauve · · Score: 1

      "How "the people" install a law, if not by voting for congressmen and let them install it?"

      Huh? Creating laws is a power given to government by the Constitution, so it doesn't fall under the 10th Amendment. As an example of how this works, the Federal government has no Constitutional power to set building codes, so that's a power which the states have. Having said that, the Feds do sometimes get involved with State powers, by doing things like withholding funds if the states don't follow Federal will (such as building roads to Federal standards). But the Feds have no power to _force_ the states to follow Federal standards.

      As another example, the people have a right to privacy, if for no other reason than the Feds have no (or very limited) power to violate such a right. There were big debates about even adding the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments) to the US Constitution, the argument against being that if the Feds had no Constitutional power (for example, to legislate firearms), then there should be no need to explicitly guarantee a right to arms. Also, if some rights were spelled out, the Feds would act as if those were the only ones which existed. That's supposed to be covered by the 9th Amendment ("The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."), which is in practice completely ignored by the Feds.

      It can be difficult to explain unless you've lived here for a time, because the US isn't really a nation of law, but of power. The Feds have the power to control "Interstate Commerce," which was meant to prevent states from doing things like charging tariffs (tax) to other states when goods were shipped through a state. But the Feds got a Federal court to say that growing crops in a garden for your own use or birds flying between states is "Interstate Commerce," so they make laws which are unconstitutional to anyone with common sense. Our "law" has no clothes, but no one will say it. So there can be a big difference between what we're promised by our Constitution, and what actually happens.

      But most people don't care. Panem et circenses, they have TV to watch.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    21. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by clovis · · Score: 1

      North Carolina has outlawed sea level rise since 2012.

      It has been ruled unconstitutional for the sea levels to rise.

      The ABC article and other articles derived from it are flat out wrong.
      What the article says is exactly the opposite of what the law said. The law REQUIRES that peer-reviewed science be used.

      Here is the actual law from the state of North Carolina's web site. It is short an easy to read.
      http://ncga.state.nc.us/sessio...

      Here is the relevant section.
      "These rates shall be determined using statistically significant, peer-reviewed historical data generated using generally accepted scientific and statistical techniques. Historic rates of sea-level rise may be extrapolated to estimate future rates of rise but shall not include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea-level rise unless such rates are from statistically significant, peer-reviewed data and are consistent with historic trends."

    22. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by hawkfish · · Score: 1

      Government does work; a bunch of high standard-of-living nations in western Europe have proven that.

      The problem is that democratic government requires an educated, non-greedy populace to work well. When it's tried in places full of uneducated religious idiots, it doesn't work very well, and that's what we see in many places in America, especially Florida.

      One thing that does need to be done is that states need to (in defiance of the Federal government if necessary) prevent Floridians and other southerners from moving out when they start getting impacted by climate change. They need to suffer the consequences for their voting choices, instead of just being able to move to states where the people are smarter and screw things up there too like they did in their home states.

      Up here in Seattle we have a bit of a homelessness catastrophe caused in part by the (relatively) generous support programs and a functioning high-tech economy that holds out the promise of gainful employment. While I don't begrudge desperate people a better life, it does annoy me that all these "State's Rights" morans can implement their punitive social policies and expect us to clean up the mess. You can't have state's rights like that without border controls. Either we have national policies for problems that affect us all or we need to break up the union. Anything else is dysfunctional.

      --
      You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
    23. Re:They should have done what North Carolina did. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incorrect. North Carolina outlawed basing developmental rules on predictions of sea level rise that aren't historically based because they believe the forecasting methods of global warming predictions to be flawed.

      So effectively, the sea level rise isn't illegal. But a government entity PREPARING for the sea level rise would be illegal.

  23. The economic argument by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As usual, there is a relevent xkcd.

    Are real estate people making a killing in buying/selling land on coasts or farm area that will supposedly be affected by global warming?

  24. Posted by timothy.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeay, another global warming scare story Posted by timothy

  25. Evolution will take care of this by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

    Future Florida inhabitants will be taller by a feet than now.

  26. For those of you with seashore properties.. by evolutionary · · Score: 1

    We can offload that waterlogged, burdensome property. Just consult our offices about how to get the best bid for your seashore sunset view ,sea air, and waterlogged basement/first floor. Buyers are ready to pay as much as $40,000 dollars to buy your land out for redevelopment. Cut your million+ dollar loses from that property you invested your life in because you, like many other unfortunate people bought the industry by-line: Global warming was made up by fear mongering, panicky scientists.

    --
    "Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
  27. Or, actually have consequences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You moved to a flood plain, and even if its not an official one, look around - the place is a giant, flat sandbar, in the middle of hurricane alley. Why not simply let people suffer the consequences of either their poor decision making or their calculated risks?

    Why must there always be some kind of impending bailout?

  28. Problem will solve itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When Social Security runs out of funds. Like I've been told for the last 40+ years.

  29. frozen & petrified, covered in grits! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about his niece, Flo?
    I hear she sells insurance now.

  30. think of the diving by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    All those poor people can become diving instructors in 1000 years when the houses are under water

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  31. I thought they solved this already... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    Florida legalized murder a while back, I thought they said that was going to solve the population-related problems. What happened?

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:I thought they solved this already... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      I guess it only got legalized for hispanics shooting blacks. Or cops shooting blacks or hispanics ... be careful with "precedence" ... it often does not work as expected ;D

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  32. Surely by MitchDev · · Score: 1

    Sending out notices saying "move or risk living underwater" doesn't cost that much does it? Really, it's not the government's job to "protect" these people, if they are too stupid to get out of the path of the oncoming train, let natural selection take it's course...

  33. Dupe from 2015 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And 2014, and 2013, and 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 06, 05, 04, 03, 02, 01, 00, 95, 90, 85, 80.......

  34. Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by Eloking · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I had a lot of fun with this simulator that give a taste of sea rising : http://geology.com/sea-level-r...

    The lack of will to fight global warming let most of the scientist baffled toward the governments of the world. It's a little understandable, the global warming is so subtle (~2mm rise and 0.13 Celcius per year) that the frog analogy of Al Gore perfectly explain our lack of action. As of now, it's not possible to make a business case that, with X billions you'll save Y billions of natural disaster.

    For me, money is the key of that fight and the sonner the better. And that map (see link above) showed me something interesting. A lof of huge and rich city are at sea level (Miami, New York, Tokyo etc.). Each of those city worth in the trillion : http://www.businessinsider.com...

    I wonder what the speech will look like when water will start flooding Broadway. How will the fight again global warming will look like with a budget of 10 trillions?

    --
    Elok
    1. Re:Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by drew_kime · · Score: 1

      Been there.

      Done that.

      Didn't change a damn thing.

      --
      Nope, no sig
    2. Re:Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by Jahmbo · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by Eloking · · Score: 1

      Been there.

      Done that.

      Didn't change a damn thing.

      Yeah, because an hurricane is an everyday event.

      I'm talking about a periodic (high-tide) flooding of the subway.

      --
      Elok
    4. Re:Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but think of the GDP boost when you have to rebuild all of those cities! /s

    5. Re:Sea rise, the economic battle of climat change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize the map calculates in Meters, right? So after carefully examining the map, I've realized that the ocean will need to rise by at least 7 meters before most major cities are submerged. At the current rate, the ocean seems to be rising by only 3.5 millimeters per year and I'l factor in that the ocean will rise at faster rates in the future since things are accelerating. But despite all that, it'll take almost 1,000 years before NYC or any other major city sinks. I'll be long dead before we need to worry so I don't think I'll even waste more brain cells arguing about the possible outcomes 1,000 years into the future.

  35. Florida DEP isn't even allowed to use the words. by Jahoda · · Score: 4, Informative
  36. Giant domes and class tunnels... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    It ia very easy to protect the cities... dome them and tunnel the highways.... Come on people this is not rocket science....

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Giant domes and class tunnels... by The-Ixian · · Score: 1

      Is a class tunnel some means by which one travels between socioeconomic enclaves?

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    2. Re:Giant domes and class tunnels... by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Is a class tunnel some means by which one travels between socioeconomic enclaves?

      http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/t...

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  37. We've heard all this before. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In 2005, it was reported that Lower Manhattan would be under a foot or two of water by now. I haven't seen any real estate prices there drop yet.

    1. Re:We've heard all this before. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You just told everyone you consider the mainstream media scientific literature. The only thing you're damaging with statements like this is your reputation, which luckily you have hidden.

  38. What if their prediction is wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think these doom and gloomers need to face consequences for causing a panic.

  39. Time to move some dirt and mix some concrete by bad-badtz-maru · · Score: 1

    Articles like the Herald's are just the first step towards multi-billion dollar public works projects. Politicians and their mega-contractor cronies love these. I predict a lot of high-dollar dirt shuffling in Florida's future.

  40. Please Go Fuck Yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That hobby horse you have makes you look retarded. Then again, so does everything else you post.

  41. More 'climate change' nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From 'Climatedot'.

    Try this instead:

    www.climatedepot.com
    www.wattsupwiththat.com

  42. Saint Paul by mdsolar · · Score: 0

    Saint Paul worried that his actions might prod someone into sin. It is possible that causing warming my lead to children not honoring their parents, which is against religious precepts.

  43. "Call me when it's Washington DC.." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or my house in my home district..

  44. Is the sky actually blue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I no longer trust anything issued by the executive branch of the US government. If NOAA told me the sky was blue, I would no longer believe it.

  45. Welcome to New Venice, the 53rd state! by burtosis · · Score: 2

    In 2124, after the Florida government gives up on trying to remove several cities built atop tall stilts, Miami and many other low lying areas succeeded and formed our 53rd state. Everyone commutes on electric busses and barges and loves thier new sea homes. You can fish off your porch and the ocean is never more than a block away from everyone, not just the 1%.

  46. Move out all the poor people now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Move out all the poor people now so that the rich can have their precious beach front homes to themselves, with less congestion and lower crime. Global warming is about protecting the properties of all the rich people living on the coast. Nothing else.

  47. You can not go wrong with "COULD"... by mi · · Score: 1

    If you look carefully, you'll realize, the gloomy predictions tend to include non-committal words like "may" or "could":

    Sea Rise Could Force Millions In Florida To Adapt Or Flee

    This makes them non-falsifiable and thus unscientific...

    Unscientific, but convenient... Years later, when the earlier peddled fears fail to materialize, the peddlers offer you new ones without having to blush about the past ones: we never said, it will stop snowing in Scotland, only that it could .

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:You can not go wrong with "COULD"... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You are confusing the mainstream media with scientific literature. I can understand why - you get all the fun of tearing apart scientific findings you disagree with, without all that nasty business of actually demonstrating anything. Of course a newspaper headline is going to be non-falsifiable and unscientific - it's a newspaper, not a paper in a journal. Find the paper they are discussing and rip it to shreds with your own paper. If you can't do that, it might just behove you to stop pretending you've done it. You haven't. You'd like to, I'm sure, but you haven't.

      Listen to the literature, and maybe you will stop being quite so confused. You are not helping your position by telling everyone you get your scientific information from the TV Times.

    2. Re:You can not go wrong with "COULD"... by mi · · Score: 1

      it's a newspaper, not a paper in a journal

      Ah, but those truly scientific papers are nowhere near as scary and thus fail to convince the laymen to submit more aspects of their lives to the government... Worse, some of them not only fail to support the official line, they openly argue against it — can't have that, can you?

      Listen to the literature

      Sorry, I'm too busy smelling the cinematography and watching the music at this time.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    3. Re:You can not go wrong with "COULD"... by delt0r · · Score: 1

      The scientific literature is even more vague, for the simple reason the models simply can't predict anything specific. Clearly no here bothers reading it. You clearly didn't.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
  48. Have they not feet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can they not walk?

    There is NO ONE at risk. The timelines are too long. I mean come on, "OK, chum, stand there for 50 years, if you don't move, you'll get wet.

  49. It is so cute... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... when they say 2100. Aw, lovely. :)

  50. payback for those botched elections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    karma is a bitch...

  51. Remember the past by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remember in the mid 80's reading about that the seas will rise 100 ft by now.
    People forget that ice turns to water and water turns to vapor.

  52. Protection from what? by ilsaloving · · Score: 1

    These people don't believe in climate change, so there's nothing to worry about.

    Why is it anyone's responsibility to protect people who not only don't want to be protected, but refuse to acknowlege that a problem even exists?

  53. Just vote for the right guy by rbrander · · Score: 2

    And the sea will be held back with a wall, and THE SEA WILL BE FORCED TO PAY FOR IT!!!

    1. Re:Just vote for the right guy by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      And the sea will be held back with a wall, and THE SEA WILL BE FORCED TO PAY FOR IT!!!

      the freshwater fish will be deported! they're all rapists, and the ocean is deliberately sending them here.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  54. well what can you say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's what you get when you deny climate change and vote the nutjob wing of the republican party.

    Republicans they hate themselves along with every one else.

  55. Adapt of course! Let there be real Water World! by blackmesadude · · Score: 1

    That's all I had to add.

    1. Re:Adapt of course! Let there be real Water World! by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      I disagree, the fashions were horrible.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
  56. Well NYC handled it really well in 2015 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when it was submerged by the rising waters of global warming as predicted by ABC... oh wait, when they freaked kids out with that Al Gore fest years ago they were wrong. NYC did not permanently submerge beneath the rising seas in 2015.

    Funny

    In the summer of 215 the north pole was not ice-free either, even though Al Gore said it would be.

    I'll start to believe that progressives believe this crap when they start acting like they believe it; when the rich elite leftists stop flying on chartered jets, vacationing all around the globe, buying enormous estates on sea coasts (where they would presumably be a very bad investment) that consume as much power as a hundred families would use in their homes, owning and driving fleets of cars and luxury yachts, etc I will start to think maybe they at least believe in the hype (which is still a separate issue from whether the hype is valid)

  57. Adapt? by Huge_UID · · Score: 1

    Gills?

  58. The Everglades Has an Advanced Civilitation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The people living in (yes, in) the Everglades figured this problem out ages ago...put everything on stilts ;)

    So are they trying to disrupt the property values in Florida now or just try to get the people that are freaking out that the ocean is going to rise 6 feet any day now to move out of Florida?

  59. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  60. Time Traveler 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reminds me of John Titor talking about his parents living in tree houses along a river in Florida in 2036...

  61. Alright Drama Queen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Calm down. There's no will to fight because the need is non-existent!

    Look at your flood map again. Look at it for Miami. But, look at it with the rise set at one meter. The effect is negligible, almost non-existent. But the important thing to remember is that it will take over 250 years to reach that level!

    The map's very dramatic and impactful 7 meter default setting will take 1,800 years at the worst case scenario rate.

    Enough hysterics and drama. Nobody gives a fuck about 250 years into the future and even less so 1,800 years into the future. If people can't back away form a rising sea level over the course of 250 years, then fuck them! I'm not inconveniencing myself in any way for your distant, dystopian, and fantastical future.

    FOAD

  62. Another day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    another propaganda piece by global power elite to use the environment for control while they pollute the shit out of it

  63. How will they adapt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adapt? How? Will they grow fins, tails and gills? When will we meet the first mermaid?

  64. Once read a pulp SF book that touched on this by mpercy · · Score: 1

    In a dystopian near-future America (is there any other kind in pulp SF?), psuedo-evangelical Christians have assumed power and made the USA a theocracy, of the Ayatollah sort. The populace is largely kept in line by a Brotherhood of brownshirts, who keep up with everyone via their "Personal Jesus" confessionals, which are nothing more than surveillance engines, and the elaborate, massive religious-themed productions (think 4th of July fireworks shows on the DC Mall) helped entertain the masses.

    Anyway, one "cult" that even the theocracy knows not to mess with: The Elvii. The Elvis worship was strong...

  65. Perhaps we can stop subsidizing beachfront living? by mpercy · · Score: 1

    States like Florida, plus the Federal government, seem intent on keeping as many people living in beachfront or oceanside or riverfront living as possible by subsidizing against *inevitable* flood losses. Some places have been flooded and restored multiple times at taxpayer expense. Take a hint!

    If you can afford to build a $1M house on the beach, then you can afford to watch it float away on your own dime...

  66. No! My Feet aren't wet.... by Stubbyfingers · · Score: 1

    No! The foundation of my house isn't eroding into the ocean! That's just your imagination. Climate change isn't real! (What's this jellyfish doing in my yard?)

  67. Oopsie. by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    The Benevolent God made the Earth for mankind and gave man dominion over it. Except that He made it 75% salt water.

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  68. Re:Florida DEP isn't even allowed to use the words by gzuckier · · Score: 1

    Let's just remember that this is the state where in 2015, Department of Environmental Protection employees were banned from usage of the term "climate change" or "global warming". .

    i don''t like the sound of that "blimate bange"

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  69. Climate Change is going to rob us by stanrock · · Score: 1

    All those buildings that flood and need to be re-located will cost $$$. Wno is going to pay? Not me.

  70. Doesn't need global sea level rise by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

    If the Gulf Stream is interrupted, the net effect would be a rise of sea level along the entire US eastern seaboard - about 3 feet at Chesapeake Bay - _without_ changing global average sea level at all.

    This is because the Gulf stream acts like a gradient, pulling water away from the US coastline.

    This is a more likely near-term scenario than a 6 foot sea level rise (which would take at least a century) as all it takes is a decent size freshwater plume entering the northeast Atlantic ocean from Greenland glacier melt and the amount of freshwater coming in from this direction is increasing.

    Freshwater in these volumes sits as a layer on top of salt and could force the Gulf Stream to "dive" or stall. There are a number of academic papers analysing this possibility and they all agree it's quite likely to occur if enough glacial melt occurs. The other effect would be a mini-ice age in northern europe (which is 5-8C warmer than it would be without the Gulf Stream transporting heat to the area) and it's been hypothesised that the middle ages cold period was due to a combination of volcanic eruptions and gulf stream effects.

    A 6 foot sea level rise over a century doesn't need evacuations. Populations shift in faster cycles than this anyway. The bigger issue is large infrastructure planning to ensure things like major roads and power plants aren't going to be flooded before the end of their planned lifecycles.