5 ms·

I understand the sarcasm, but gun-to-your-head what do you think that one place would most likely be?

jedberg 3y ago
Atlanta. Not a lot of natural disasters there, far enough from the ocean to be insulated from rising sea levels as well as hurricanes. Too warm for ice storms.
- emodendroket 3y ago
  Hot and humid could be undesirable depending on how much temperatures rise.
emodendroket 3y ago
I recall reading several years ago that a climate researcher had chosen the Midwest, which intuitively makes a certain sense — not very hot, no ocean coasts to worry about, lots of fresh water.
- gensym 3y ago
  As someone from the midwest, I can confirm that midwesterners tend to be pretty smug about climate change. ("It'll make our winters milder!" is a common sentiment.). They probably shouldn't be, though: https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/june-2017/climate-change-could-make-illinois-dangerously-hot/ https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/june-2017/climate-chang...
Schiendelman 3y ago
The Olympic coast. The smoke tends not to hit, there’s lots of fresh water, and temperatures are mediated by latitude and ocean effect.
- emodendroket 3y ago
  I wouldn’t be so sure. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big...
  - Schiendelman 3y ago
    That piece is so so bad. There were several “wow that’s ridiculous” rebuttals after it was published. Some about how Seattle is really far away from the coast (and therefore would see far less shaking than implied), some about how tsunamis will dissipate in the Sound, some about how we’ve been building everything to survive this for decades. My ex-partner’s a geologist. She hated that article.
    - emodendroket 3y ago
      Not sure how convincing I find assurances that an ex-girlfriend of yours and some other, unnamed people disagreed with it. Either way, it’s a seismically active area, there are volcanoes, there are landslides, and the PNW has not been untouched by wildfires.

Atlanta. Not a lot of natural disasters there, far enough from the ocean to be insulated from rising sea levels as well as hurricanes. Too warm for ice storms.

emodendroket 3y ago
Hot and humid could be undesirable depending on how much temperatures rise.

emodendroket 3y ago

I recall reading several years ago that a climate researcher had chosen the Midwest, which intuitively makes a certain sense — not very hot, no ocean coasts to worry about, lots of fresh water.

gensym 3y ago
As someone from the midwest, I can confirm that midwesterners tend to be pretty smug about climate change. ("It'll make our winters milder!" is a common sentiment.). They probably shouldn't be, though: https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/june-2017/climate-change-could-make-illinois-dangerously-hot/ https://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/june-2017/climate-chang...

Schiendelman 3y ago

The Olympic coast. The smoke tends not to hit, there’s lots of fresh water, and temperatures are mediated by latitude and ocean effect.

emodendroket 3y ago
I wouldn’t be so sure. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big-one https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/20/the-really-big...
- Schiendelman 3y ago
  That piece is so so bad. There were several “wow that’s ridiculous” rebuttals after it was published. Some about how Seattle is really far away from the coast (and therefore would see far less shaking than implied), some about how tsunamis will dissipate in the Sound, some about how we’ve been building everything to survive this for decades. My ex-partner’s a geologist. She hated that article.
  - emodendroket 3y ago
    Not sure how convincing I find assurances that an ex-girlfriend of yours and some other, unnamed people disagreed with it. Either way, it’s a seismically active area, there are volcanoes, there are landslides, and the PNW has not been untouched by wildfires.