3 ms·
These are rather viewpoint-based articles. As a thought experiment, test their cause-and-effect explanations against the historical floods that Houston has exp
by jhayward 9y ago
These are rather viewpoint-based articles. As a thought experiment, test their cause-and-effect explanations against the historical floods that Houston has experienced since it was originated by the Allen brothers. Houston had terrible floods even in the 1920's and 30's. There was very little concrete and pavement in those days, especially in the areas they claim are lost prairie.
- melling 9y agoSaying there were bad floods before and there are bad floods now doesn’t negate the claim that humans have made the problem worse. http://www.npr.org/2017/08/27/546603361/houstons-explosive-growth-amid-disregard-of-flood-preparedness http://www.npr.org/2017/08/27/546603361/houstons-explosive-g...
- jhayward 9y agoNothing in that article demonstrates that the flooding was made any worse by any of the claimed mal-administration. The only demonstrable difference these days is that very heavy rainfall events are more frequent, and more severe. Which does not support the hypothesis. Edited to add: I will grant that there is more damage, because there are more structures now. Also that many of the structures built in the last decade or so a infill in flood-prone areas. So that's a good candidate for mal-administration. But the theory that the actual floods are worse, in terms of area flooded, flood depth, etc., is not supported IMO without better science. Could be true. But what we know for sure is it's raining more.
- melling 9y agoHey, have you followed up with this story? Turns out could be true, is true.