4 ms·

I think we are already doing that, albeit in typical human style of waiting for a local disaster before moving people completely out of the danger zone. The da

I think we are already doing that, albeit in typical human style of waiting for a local disaster before moving people completely out of the danger zone. The danger zones are huge, and understandably people,ant to keep using them until the last possible moment. Like all projections show Manhattan may one day be under water, but we will only slowly abandon it as it floods rather than evacuating dry land in advance.

EricE 5y ago
Manhattan has been under threat of flooding for centuries yet we have figured out ways to prevent it. Same for Holland, Venice, etc. Hell as I pointed out above the Obama's just built a luxury mansion right on the beach in Marthas Vineyard. I guess they are utterly ignorant of the climate change threats, eh? Much of the climate change hysteria is only viable if you assume that human ingenuity and innovation will utterly cease for some reason. Not a very smart bet. Instead it's far more likely much of the climate change hysteria is merely a way to exert control that governments wouldn't otherwise have. For example, this article didn't even mention China or India once. If you are going to screech about carbon and not even mention the two biggest producers of atmospheric carbon then it's not a serious discussion - at all.
- redisman 5y ago
  Manhattan and Amsterdam can afford to mitigate due to being filthy rich. They’re hardly the median coastal global city
- triceratops 5y ago
  > For example, this article didn't even mention China or India once. If you are going to screech about carbon and not even mention the two biggest producers of atmospheric carbon then it's not a serious discussion - at all. Let's talk about China and India. These are the only ways they can keep their carbon emissions from going up: 1. China and India stop economic growth, remain poor - Easy for us in the West to say as we live in large houses, drive SUVs to the Starbucks drivethru. Difficult for them to accept because they're just trying to get enough food, clean water, and medical care. 2. Invent clean technologies that can replace fossil fuels 100% in every application. Rich countries pay the full cost (maybe adjusted for India and China's historic emissions contributions) for immediate rollout in every developing country. 3. Do neither and wait for the inevitable riots and wars to break out. What option is the best one?

EricE 5y ago

Manhattan has been under threat of flooding for centuries yet we have figured out ways to prevent it. Same for Holland, Venice, etc. Hell as I pointed out above the Obama's just built a luxury mansion right on the beach in Marthas Vineyard. I guess they are utterly ignorant of the climate change threats, eh? Much of the climate change hysteria is only viable if you assume that human ingenuity and innovation will utterly cease for some reason. Not a very smart bet. Instead it's far more likely much of the climate change hysteria is merely a way to exert control that governments wouldn't otherwise have. For example, this article didn't even mention China or India once. If you are going to screech about carbon and not even mention the two biggest producers of atmospheric carbon then it's not a serious discussion - at all.

redisman 5y ago
Manhattan and Amsterdam can afford to mitigate due to being filthy rich. They’re hardly the median coastal global city
triceratops 5y ago
> For example, this article didn't even mention China or India once. If you are going to screech about carbon and not even mention the two biggest producers of atmospheric carbon then it's not a serious discussion - at all. Let's talk about China and India. These are the only ways they can keep their carbon emissions from going up: 1. China and India stop economic growth, remain poor - Easy for us in the West to say as we live in large houses, drive SUVs to the Starbucks drivethru. Difficult for them to accept because they're just trying to get enough food, clean water, and medical care. 2. Invent clean technologies that can replace fossil fuels 100% in every application. Rich countries pay the full cost (maybe adjusted for India and China's historic emissions contributions) for immediate rollout in every developing country. 3. Do neither and wait for the inevitable riots and wars to break out. What option is the best one?