Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by timothy on from the roblimo-abides dept.

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.

49 of 421 comments (clear)

  1. 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: 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.

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.)

    6. 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.
    7. 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.

    8. 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.
    9. 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.

    10. 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)
    11. 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.
    12. 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,
    13. 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?

    14. 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.

    15. 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.

    16. 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?

    17. 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!
    18. 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*
    19. 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.

    20. 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.

    21. 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...

    22. 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.

    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. 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!
  2. 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.

  3. 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.
  4. 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

  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. Re:NP by KGIII · · Score: 2

    Then N = 1.

    --
    "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  9. Re:It'll sort itself out. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's San Francisco - wrong coast.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  10. 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
  11. 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.

  12. Florida DEP isn't even allowed to use the words. by Jahoda · · Score: 4, Informative

    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". .

  13. 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%.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  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. 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!!!

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

    Sensible shoes. Not sensitive or comfortable.

  19. 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
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.