Trumpistas describe this administration as some compelling new innovation for American government. Two excellent new pieces demonstrate the opposite.

To the extent that the man has an intellectual paradigm, it's antiquarian. Hucksterism is his only connection to eternal human character: In an earlier time, his voters would have bought his snake oil, and loved him for it... As his wagon of elixirs slipped briskly but silently into a distant canyon.

Amy, what's going on with the insurance?

For this young instrument in our aging generation(s), two things in particular have been all played out and dessicated: Fretless and slap.

...But still.

FDA Designates MDMA As 'Breakthrough Therapy' For Post-Traumatic Stress:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetwburns/2017/08/28/fda-designates-mdma-as-breakthrough-therapy-for-post-traumatic-stress/

The truth is, I was up fighting via email to get the strength of the drug I need -- which has been shown to be safe in many randomized controlled trials and has been taken for 40 years in France -- but the doctor who heads the department in the big West LA facility is as clueless about that as my gynecologist. Don't assume doctors practice based on research. They mostly don't, because they have no time to read it. Don't assume the standards they go by -- in this case, of a medical society -- are current or science-based. (AHA and AMA on heart disease, statins, the high-carb/low-fat diet, anyone?)

I'm working on this -- writing a big piece -- and I'm also going to petition the State of CA to force Kaiser to give all patients the drug I'm taking, instead of the one they prescribe that increases cancer risk and does not help with a major symptom (and may cause it!).

Good news for a change

https://twitter.com/CBSThisMorning/status/902290821474549760

Some background on the Evergreen State College fiasco, from someone who was there. It digs into the motivations of the people involved and clarifies some things. Takeaway point: It's even worse than you thought. And the implications for the liberal arts in general are not good.

(Normally I would never link to a HuffPo article. But this happens to be the moment in the day when the stopped clock is right.)

Video from my area in Houston. The devastation is complete. We have been fortunate and are safe and dry, but many people I know are not.

https://cdnapisec.kaltura.com/html5/html5lib/v2.60.2/mwEmbedFrame.php/p/2031081/uiconf_id/36217061/entry_id/0_tfipdmmn?wid=_2031081&iframeembed=true&playerId=media-preview_0_0_tfipdmmn&entry_id=0_tfipdmmn&flashvars%5BstreamerType%5D=auto

That's awful, sheep mom. Stay safe!
This morning, someone mentioned on the radio that the reason the roads flood so bad in Houston is that they were designed to drain the bayous. So they designed the main roadways to flood on purpose.
But I know that a lot of what's flooding right now isn't in the flood plain.

You can bet Hollywood will make a movie about the hurricane and it's gonna be like this:

https://twitter.com/ebolamericana/status/902341741335855104

And of course it's going to be made by Sony's Columbia/Tri-Star pictures.

Caretakers of one of Georgia’s oldest cemeteries say the scene was heart-breaking: A toddler’s bones were spilled on the ground. The uniform buried with a soldier in another plot was strewn on the ground.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2311453/Outrage-graves-belonging-U-S-soldiers-child-dug-spilled-Georgia-cemetery.html

All things have their limit Ahw. Yes the road (especially the newer ones) are designed to change into canals when heavy flooding sets in. But this is a lot of water. Addicks dam looks like it may fail. So more flooding along Buffalo Bayou.

I still feel that Houston authorities made the right decision for people to shelter in place. But this is certainly far worse than anyone expected. In the end you have to be aware of your situation and take care of yourself. Relying on government doesn't work well.

Sheep Mom, I'm up in the 290 and 99 area. If I can do anything to help good people let me know. But at the moment it looks like we are cut off. 290 is flooded in multiple places as is 99.

@Sheep Mom stay safe. I can't even imagine.

It's been interesting to see how people from other parts of the country/world are reacting to this. I'm in Austin and have been getting non-stop calls and texts from everyone I know asking if I'm OK. When I say, "Thanks so much for checking in, but Austin is fine [picture of sunny sky]. Houston and the coastal cities desperately need help, as do a lot of areas south of Austin" they are confused.

I always knew the rest of the country knows nothing about how big TX is (and lacks the willingness to look at maps, and like suchas), but damn.

Anyone heard anything from Bob from Texas? I hope he's okay.

From conservative David Brooks:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/opinion/trump-identity-politics.html

First paragraphs:

It’s ironic that race was the issue that created the Republican Party and that race could very well be the issue that destroys it.

The G.O.P. was founded to fight slavery, and through most of its history it had a decent record on civil rights. A greater percentage of congressional Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats.

It’s become more of a white party in recent years, of course, and adopted some wrongheaded positions on civil rights enforcement, but it was still possible to be a Republican without feeling like you were violating basic decency on matters of race. Most of the Republican establishment, from the Bushes to McCain and Romney, fought bigotry, and racism was not a common feature in the conservative moment.

Between 1984 and 2003 I worked at National Review, The Washington Times, the Wall Street Journal editorial page and The Weekly Standard. Most of my friends were Republicans.

In that time, I never heard blatantly racist comments at dinner parties, and there were probably fewer than a dozen times I heard some veiled comment that could have suggested racism. To be honest, I heard more racial condescension in progressive circles than in conservative ones.

But the Republican Party has changed since 2005...

(snip)

From the article:

The child, who is a native English speaker, also refused to take back her favourite meal - spaghetti carbonara - because it contained bacon - which Muslims do not eat.

The child, who is a native English speaker, spent the past six months in two Muslim households after being placed into foster care in Tower Hamlets, east London.

She was forced to live in Muslim foster homes where nobody spoke English and her carers took away her Christian cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic, according to The Times.

Local authority reports describe how the little girl sobbed and begged not to be returned to her niqab-wearing carer’s home, telling a social worker: ‘They don’t speak English.’

The reports detail how the child was ‘very distressed’ and claimed the foster carer had removed her Christian cross and encouraged her to learn Arabic.

https://twitter.com/LaloDagach/status/902208318957125633

Notice the comments on Twitter how convenient it is to cite Richard Dawkins? The wouldn't cite him if this were the child of Muslim parents sent into a foster Christian household.

Btw, the top-rated comments at the Brooks link took issue with quite a few things he said - especially that date of 2005.

In the meantime, from David Leonhardt:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/opinion/harvey-the-storm-that-humans-helped-cause.html

Excerpt:

...But it’s time to shed some of the fussy over-precision about the relationship between climate change and weather. James Hansen, the eminent climate researcher, has used the term “scientific reticence” to describe this problem. Out of an abundance of academic caution — a caution that is in many ways admirable — scientists (and journalists) have obscured climate change’s true effects.

We don’t display the same fussiness in other important areas. No individual case of lung cancer can be definitively linked to smoking, as Heidi Cullen, the chief scientist at Climate Central, notes. Few vehicle accidents can be definitely linked to alcohol, and few saved lives can be definitively linked to seatbelts.

Yet smoking, drunken driving and seatbeltless riding each created a public health crisis. Once the link became clear and widely understood, people changed their behavior and prevented a whole lot of suffering...

(snip)

Want to sell or import plastic bags in Kenya? Don't.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/africa/kenya-plastic-bags-ban.html

Note what the United Nations said, near the end. The year they mentioned isn't that far away - compared to predictions made regarding, say, the year 2100.

Btw, I remember that in Spain, in the 1970s, grocery customers typically used big straw(?) bags. Hope they still do. I use my knapsack, and when it wears out for good, I expect to find a replacement at a yard sale or Craigslist.

Well Lenona, smokers account for ~80% of all lung cancer deaths in the US. But increases in hurricanes and tropical storms is almost nonexistent. While there are theories to claim industrialization increases such things the data just isn't there.

So nutz to you and your desire to politicize science and natural tragedies.

Catception

https://twitter.com/tatuya01/status/902367068418449408

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/28/world/europe/niels-hogel-german-nurse-killed-at-least-86-patients-officials-say.html

Socialized medicine. No incentive to investigate suspicious deaths because there is no accountability.

No individual case of lung cancer can be definitively linked to smoking, as Heidi Cullen, the chief scientist at Climate Central, notes. Few vehicle accidents can be definitely linked to alcohol, and few saved lives can be definitively linked to seatbelts. ~ lenona at August 29, 2017 10:19 AM

While individual cases cannot be linked, non-partisan and mathematically verifiable correlations can be shown in cases of lung cancer, seatbelt, and drunk driving. Smoking cannot be shown to cause lung cancer, but it can be (and has been) highly correlated with it. Increased seatbelt usage and sobriety are highly correlated with reductions in traffic fatalities, despite the lack of an individual link. Causality, however, remains elusive.

No non-partisan and mathematically verifiable correlation can be shown with "anthropogenic climate change," as defined by activists, and increased hurricane activity, despite a deluge of self-serving articles arguing it; or arguing that while not caused by anthropogenic climate change, Harvey was worsened by it.

I'll say it again: "Climate change" theory is constructed so as to be non-falsifiable. Every weather event "proves" global warming! Including wet weather, dry weather, hot weather, cold weather, hurricanes, no hurricanes, blizzards, no blizzards, etc. Remember the thesis of the movie The Day After Tomorrow which had the entire Earth flash-freezing as a result of... global warming.

Over time, climate changes. That's what it does and always has done. Solar output varies. Continents drift. The Earth's rotational axis precesses, as does the aphelion of Earth's orbit. Comets and asteroids strike. The entire solar system is perturbed by the gravitational influence of the gas-giant planets. Nothing in this universe is constant.

Know what's great?

What's great is not giving a fragrant fig about Game of Thrones, the teevee tits-and-dragons adventure program.

BECAUSE I AM NOT TWELVE.

It's great not to care about Game of Thrones, because I am older than twelve.

Are you older than twelve?

Do you care about Game of Thrones, the teevee tits-and-dragons adventure program?

Why?

Eff everything, 1976 was a great year.

Are you older than twelve?

Do you care about Game of Thrones, the teevee tits-and-dragons adventure program?

Why?

Crid at August 29, 2017 1:46 PM

No, I dont *care* about it. I am entertained by it. Perhaps because I read the books first.

I care about my family, my livelihood, my friends, Army beating Navy, and making sure Hillary Clinton is never president of the United States. 2016 was a good year for stuff I care about. The Cubs winning the World Series was just gravy.
:-)

Thank you all. Houston is going to need a lot of resources to recover. When a reputable charity gets started, i.e. one that donates everything to disaster relief, I can let you all know. I know that I hesitate to give to larger organizations such as the Red Cross, which cannot always be trusted to spend the money directly on relief.

Thanks Ben! The roads between here and there are mostly closed. As I understand it, only 249 is really open right now, but there will be plenty to do after the water recedes. The big problem is that the water has a large amount of sediment in it bc a lot of water will be coming from the controlled releases they are performing now. So, water is only half the problem. Thank goodness for people willing to come here with their boats and get people out of their homes bc the controlled release is forcing even more people out of their homes.

Lenona, thank you for staying true to form. Never change. It is great to know we can rely on you to post a completely tasteless article on how we brought this on ourselves. I am sure Miss Manners would be proud! You are pure class girlfriend! What is it you people believe? Never let a crisis go to waste.

For the record, David Brooks is NOT a conservative. Second, "climate change" did not cause this. This event was caused when a tropical storm came up from South America and hit the Gulf where the water temp was about 85 degrees. That heat provided the "fuel" the storm needed to turn into a hurricane. Because there were no winds behind it, it stalled and dumped all of its water here. There is NOTHING you, me, or ANYONE could have done to avert this. It is pure arrogance and ignorance to think otherwise.

Well, whaddya know? His topless-model wife WORE STILETTO HEELS TO A FLOOD...

...But in the actual appearance, Trump hit all the right notes! ♫ ♬ Wasn't self-centered at all!

He must be just the bestest president EVAR!!!!!!!

Whatta dreamboat!

Anyone heard anything from Bob from Texas? I hope he's okay.

Sixclaws at August 29, 2017 10:08 AM

Do you care about Game of Thrones, the teevee tits-and-dragons adventure program? ~ Crid at August 29, 2017 1:46 PM

Care about it? No. Watch it? I typically watch on my iPad while on the treadmill.

Like Isab, I'm entertained by it. Why? Because George R.R. Martin incorporated semi-realistic economic and social issues into the source material (Note: I only read the first book). The show's writers closely followed the source material and were unafraid to include those underlying concerns into the show. What happens when the king/queen refuses to pay the kingdom's debts? What happens when the currency is devalued? What happens when necessary commodities become scarce? How does religion impact society? What is the role of a peasant religion in an oligarchy?

Most swords and sorcery works are all about the swords or hobbits or rings or dragons and have absolutely no realism baked in. This one tries for a degree of realism, you know, in between the swords and tits and dragons.

Also, it was interesting watching the queen deteriorate into madness. The writers of the show were unafraid of taking 5-6 seasons to show her gradual descent - with each humiliation, tribulation, and catastrophe piling onto the heap of predecessors and slowly unhinging her. It certainly made more sense than the formulaic and almost instant descent depicted in Star Wars episodes 1-3.

Now that the show has outpaced the source material, it will be interesting to see if the writers can keep the show interesting.

Sheep Mom, the offer will remain open after the waters recede. I'm not interested in complete strangers in my home. But if someone is willing to vouch a bit for them I'll take a chance.

"There is NOTHING you, me, or ANYONE could have done to avert this. It is pure arrogance and ignorance to think otherwise."

I'm an engineer. So I'm arrogant enough to think I could do something about future storms. But the environmental impact of building and distributing devices intended to churn and hence cool the surface water would prevent me from ever getting permission to implement anything useful.

"No, I dont *care* about it. I am entertained by it. Perhaps because I read the books first."

Dear lord, better you than me Isab. I found them to be quite poorly written. A great tale and it is wonderful he incorporated the elements Conan likes but I cannot stand Martin's writing style. Very Tolkenesk.

Dear lord, better you than me Isab. I found them to be quite poorly written. A great tale and it is wonderful he incorporated the elements Conan likes but I cannot stand Martin's writing style. Very Tolkenesk.

Ben at August 29, 2017 3:17 PM

This kind of begs the question of what you consider to be *good writing*.

Somehow I suspect that this is an unwindable argument. What is good writing?
Tried to read a book by James Lileks once. Great writer of columns and opinion pieces. The book was unreadable. Too much fluff, too many descriptions, not enough story line. Damn thing wandered all over the place, and lost the reader.

I minored in English Lit in college. Hemingway bored me to Tears. (Too sparse) My English professor said a lot of people felt that way, including a lot of lit professors.

Most Engineers I know can't read fiction with much interest. I know only a few exceptions.

I agree with Conan's assessment. ( I thought the conversation about cocks between Jamie Lannister and Bron on the battlements was really quite profound)

There is a lot of humor in the show and very complex characters.

For the record, David Brooks is NOT a conservative.
_________________________________________

Sure you aren't confusing him with David Leonhardt? I certainly didn't. I've also never heard anyone accuse Brooks of not being a real conservative.

Cousin Dave said:

I'll say it again: "Climate change" theory is constructed so as to be non-falsifiable. Every weather event "proves" global warming! Including wet weather, dry weather, hot weather, cold weather, hurricanes, no hurricanes, blizzards, no blizzards, etc.
_______________________________________

I take it you didn't read the first paragraphs?

Leonhardt said:

Even before the devastation from Harvey, southeastern Texas was enduring a year unlike any before.

The daily surface temperature of the Gulf of Mexico last winter never dropped below 73 degrees. You can probably guess how many previous times that had happened: Zero.

This sort of heat has a specific effect on storms: Warmer weather causes heavier rainfall. Why? When the seas warm, more moisture evaporates into the air, and when the air warms — which has also been happening in Texas — it can carry more moisture.

The severity of Harvey, in other words, is almost certainly related to climate change.

Yes, I know the sober warning that’s issued whenever an extreme weather disaster occurs: No individual storm can be definitively blamed on climate change. It’s true, too. Some version of Harvey probably would have happened without climate change, and we’ll never know the hypothetical truth...

(and, later on)

...Obviously, some extreme weather events are unrelated to climate change. But a growing number appear to be related, including many involving torrential rain, thanks to the warmer seas and air.

“The heaviest rainfall events have become heavier and more frequent, and the amount of rain falling on the heaviest rain days has also increased,” as the National Climate Assessment, a federal report, found. “The mechanism driving these changes,” the report explained, is hotter air stemming from “human-caused warming.”

Heavier rain can then interact with higher sea levels to increase flooding, as seems to have happened with Harvey. In Houston’s particular case, a lack of zoning laws has led to an explosion of building, which further worsens flooding. The city added 24 percent more pavement between 1996 and 2011, according to Samuel Brody of Texas A&M, and Houston wasn’t exactly light on pavement in 1996. Pavement, unlike soil, fails to absorb water.

Add up the evidence, and it overwhelmingly suggests that human activity has helped create the ferocity of Harvey. That message may be hard to hear — harder to hear, certainly, than stories of human kindness that is now mitigating the storm’s toll...

...What’s happening in Texas is heartbreaking, and yet it will be a more frequent part of modern life unless we do something about it. That, ultimately, is the most compassionate message about Harvey.

(end of excerpts)

Ben, Thank you for your generous offer! You are why Texas is a great place to live. I don't know of anyone who doesn't already have family or friends to stay with, but you are so good to offer. I am worried about Bob too. If I have read his posts correctly, I think he lives somewhere in South Houston. Hopefully he will check in soon.

Lenona. Of course you don't know anyone who holds that opinion of David Brooks bc, based on what you post here, you don't read anything outside of advice columns, Brat Free, some really weird anti-religion websites and possibly Mother Jones. You are not nearly as open minded and objective as you believe yourself to be.

Finally, I don't need you to explain to me how weather works. I have never mentioned it before bc I don't want to get into it, but my husband is an ACTUAL climate scientist. He holds a PhD in climatology from one of the best schools of meteorology in the country. And this event was NOT caused by global warming, climate change, or whatever other voodoo you want to attribute it to. People like you can not appreciate the raw power of nature and believe just like the ancients did that if you perform enough ritual sacrifices, you can control its forces. The only difference is they sacrificed cows and you want to sacrifice tax dollars. Worship your own idols lady and leave the rest of us "unbelievers" alone.

I like a lot of science fiction and fantasy Isab. I quite enjoyed the wheel of time and I find Sanderson who finished it up very good. But like I said I found Martin to be very Tolkenesk in his writing. Personally can't stand it. I got half way through the first book and tossed it. Boring and muddled was my take on it.

If you want I'll list other works. But things get pretty obscure pretty fast.

Lenona, good to see you're still lost. We'll light a light for you to find your way out of the darkness when you are ready.

This thread just brightened my day. Going through my book proofs, still have to write back to Kaiser doc, etc. Thank you all.

Well, whaddya know? His topless-model wife WORE STILETTO HEELS TO A FLOOD...

...But in the actual appearance, Trump hit all the right notes! ♫ ♬ Wasn't self-centered at all!

He must be just the bestest president EVAR!!!!!!!

Whatta dreamboat!

Crid at August 29, 2017 2:43 PM

That comment is the result of the vapors. Dude Crid is devoid of being one to present a valid argument, just pearl clutching. By the way, FLOTUS arrived in tennis shoes.

I like a lot of science fiction and fantasy Isab. I quite enjoyed the wheel of time and I find Sanderson who finished it up very good. But like I said I found Martin to be very Tolkenesk in his writing. Personally can't stand it. I got half way through the first book and tossed it. Boring and muddled was my take on it.

If you want I'll list other works. But things get pretty obscure pretty fast.

Lenona, good to see you're still lost. We'll light a light for you to find your way out of the darkness when you are ready.

Ben at August 29, 2017 6:39 PM

There are a lot of characters to keep track of, and many different plot lines. Some are more compelling than others. This shouldnt be confused with poor witing skills. Martin is a first rate writer.

How did you feel about Dune? Not the sequels, the original book?

So I just read where a bunch of corporations are donating millions to aid in relief efforts

Is it odd that the only response I have to this news it the thought that those corporations are charging thier customers too much money of they can afford to do this?

> Dude Crid is devoid of being one
> to present a valid argument,
> just pearl clutching.

That's a perfect footer for the Dude Crid office letterhead:

Devoid of being one to present a valid argument

"Even before the devastation from Harvey, southeastern Texas was enduring a year unlike any before."

Yeah, right. It's maybe a unique event over the last 100 years or so for which written records exist. A probable Cat 5 hurricane completely wiped Galveston off the map in 1900, resulting in somewhere around 9,000 deaths. The Earth is about 4 million years old, and the continents have been in their present alignments for around 100,000 years. So 100 years of records represents a significant amount of data from which trends can be inferred. Yeah, right.

I'll also point out what the global-warming religionists (and it is a religion) say when you point out the historical dearth of hurricanes over the past 15 years: "Weather is not climate." Yet Harvey somehow "proves" that global warming is occurring. So weather is not climate, except when it is. That's not science. That's narcissism.

The phrase "climate change" really means nothing useful. Climate changes. That's what it has done as long as Earth has existed. The actual theory being presented is that global warming is occurring, and it that it is caused by the actions of human beings, specifically the emissions of carbon dioxide caused by burning fuels for heating and industry. That's a testable theory. People who first advocated this theory in the 1990s made several predictions. None of them have come true. Manhattan is not under water. It still snows in England in the winter. The Earth has not experienced a year with 25 or more major hurricanes -- not even close. The advocates have developed climate models that predict dire outcomes in the future. However, if you take conditions that existed in 1990 and plug them into the models, they grossly fail to predict conditions that exist today. The theory is being tested, and so far, it hasn't passed the tests.

IMO there is only one person in climate research that's doing it right, and that's John Christy. He's the only person out there using satellite data instead of surface thermometers. And his data shows that average global temperatures have been flat, or very slightly declining, since 1998. Amy has another column today in which she mentions that one of the problems she has in being taken seriously as a researcher is credentialism; people in the field ignore her because she doesn't have that Ph.D. Christy has the same problem; he has a Ph.D. but it's not from an Ivy. So most climate researchers dismiss his work out of hand, without looking at it.

I thought Dune was well written. But I did find the Cliffnotes at the beginning of each chapter annoying. I get that he was trying to give some sort of prophetic feel to add to the mysticism. But putting a summary at the beginning of each chapter just felt stupid.

Of late I've been reading translated asian novels on novelupdates.com. Everyone else is a Returnee is a pretty good one which is a mix of the Japanese 'summoned to another world to become the hero' line and Home Alone. I don't know what bastardized Korean translation of Home Alone Toika sat through but it did inspire a good read.

It is great to know we can rely on you to post a completely tasteless article on how we brought this on ourselves. I am sure Miss Manners would be proud!
_________________________________________

Sheep Mom, there is nothing rude or tasteless about issuing a warning based on scientific research. Miss Manners would agree with that. It's all in HOW one says it. Leonhardt didn't say we could have prevented Harvey; he made it clear that a hurricane would likely have happened anyway. Even if he's wrong about humans aggravating the intensity of that particular hurricane, what's wrong with the saying "better be safe than sorry" when it comes to alleviating future hurricanes, if possible?

MAYBE there are some scientists being bribed to lie about how much humans aggravate climate change, for the sake of putting money in the pockets of the solar power industry, etc. However, I would think it's a lot more likely that oil companies and so on would be much better able to bribe far MORE scientists into lying for their sake. Even the oil barons know they can only live so long, so since they live in great comfort, far from the Cancer Belt, they don't necessarily care what happens to anyone soon after they die, or later. Hence, they have an incentive to lie.

It reminds me of how some churches (and the politicians who have to please them) still claim that AIDS can't be prevented with condoms and that those who claim otherwise are profiting from a lie and trying to destroy society. (As if AIDS doesn't already destroy poor communities.) Clearly, such churches don't want their authority (and thus their wallets) undermined by the acceptance of condoms. Not to mention, there are at least THREE other STDs that really ARE difficult to prevent, even with condoms. HPV is one of them, and it can be deadly, but the same churches want to block a vaccine for it.

More on that, if you like:

https://www.thenation.com/article/virginity-or-death/

And aside from the fact that Brooks didn't write Leonhardt's column, could you please tell me WHO in the public eye claims Brooks isn't really a conservative? Or less of one than, say, Ross Douthat, who also writes for the NYT, but no one accuses HIM of being a moderate, IIRC?
____________________________________________

Cousin Dave said: The Earth is about 4 million years old
____________________________________________

I assume you meant to say 4.54 billion?
__________________________________________

The phrase "climate change" really means nothing useful. Climate changes. That's what it has done as long as Earth has existed. The actual theory being presented is that global warming is occurring, and it that it is caused by the actions of human beings, specifically the emissions of carbon dioxide caused by burning fuels for heating and industry.
____________________________________________

I'd love to know who (aside from amateurs, not real scientists) claims that modern climate change is ONLY caused by humans. In 8,000 BCE, there were only about 6 million people on the planet. So anyone can figure out that, since there were possibly fewer than 1 million people when the last ice age ENDED, humans did not affect the climate back then. (Which is not to say they couldn't have been responsible for exterminating the mammoths, but that's different.)

But again, better be safe than sorry, when it comes to the hundreds of ways 7.5 billion people can seriously aggravate the problem. How many honest scientists really think we aren't?

Even if he's wrong about humans aggravating the intensity of that particular hurricane, what's wrong with the saying "better be safe than sorry" when it comes to alleviating future hurricanes, if possible?

Yes. Full stop

60% of fossil fuel consumption goes towards food production. Less consumption equals less food equals more starvation and war

The problem is they dont have a proposed solution becuase as SheepMom pointed out they still havent figured out the root cause

its like the people who think circumcision is great becuase (once you crunch the numbers) we only kill one child per 50 UTIs we prevent in children under 18 moths of age

Better safe than sorry leads to corpses

lenona, are you on the autism spectrum? This is a sincere question.

"He's the only person out there using satellite data instead of surface thermometers."

Speaking of satellites:

NASA photos of the disappearing arctic ice -- totally unrelated to a planet that couldn't possibly be undergoing a change in climate and if it is it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the greenhouse effect and if it is it couldn't possibly have anything to do with pumping millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere because, um, liberals suck.

Thanks, Gog.

Roughly 12,000 years ago the last ice age ended. The polar caps have been melting since then. That they are still melting doesn't support the argument that human industrialization is causing them to melt.

You need to get some historical perspective on things here.
1. The climate is never at a fixed point. It is always changing.
2. At the hottest point in the geologic record Denver isn't beach front property. But it isn't that far from the beach either.
3. At the coldest point Texas is under ice.

Those are the 'normal' (i.e. no human involvement) bounds. Showing things are different than they were 20 or 40 years ago is meaningless.

"You need to get some historical perspective on things here. "

And you need to relate that historical perspective to the rate of change experienced in the last century vs the previous 9900 years.

Or not. The ice melts either way. We can try to do something or we can shrug our shoulders (not that Al Gore's 'carbon credits' are the way, though).

Frankly, I don't know the solution with today's technology, beyond building more nuclear power plants, getting off coal, and subsidizing the hell out of wind, solar, geothermal, and other expensive approaches.

Meh. Whatever. The kids can deal with it.

Look at those rates of change over that full historical cycle, Gog. The current rates of change are actually normal. Even the predicted rates of change are within the normal range. And the predictions so far have been substantially higher than what happened.

Getting off of coal and other carbon based energy sources flat isn't good enough. That is like showing up at a hospital with a knife stuck in your chest and the doctor says, 'Well, I'm just going to stop pushing it in any further.' You are still going to bleed out if you just let nature take it's course. Unless you are willing to opt for full on geoengineering then you just aren't even trying to solve the 'problem'.

Youse guys get so sarcastic I can't tell which direction you're arguing.

Gog, climate.nasa.gov is pretty much James Hanson's personal play toy. You'll notice there are no dates on those photographs. It would not surprise me at all if one of those was a winter photo and the other one was summer. I say that because the Northwest Passage is normally clear in midsummer, so I seriously doubt that the photo on the left is a summer photo. It may be that both are winter photos, but the Web site doesn't say. Hanson has so far been very wrong about a whole lot of things, and his models are among those that have failed to predict conditions as they exist now.

Regarding John Christy's data, you have to realize that he's taking an average for the entire globe. Localized and regional fluctuations take place all the time, and documentation of such exists well back into human history preceding the industrial era. Notice how completely covered with ice Greenland is in both of those photos? Vikings once settled there and grew crops there. Can't do that now.

Don't blame your reading comprehension problems on other people Crid. This really isn't difficult stuff.

To put things another way Gog if your friend talks about how he went to the hospital with multiple gun shot wounds and a knife in his chest and then the doctor gave him an Advil and he was all better your friend is full of shit. Same with these climate guys. Everything they say is the end of the world is normal. Beach front property in Colorado has happened before. Multiple times. This is normal. If you don't want that to happen then you need to take action to prevent it. And producing a little less atmospheric CO2 isn't going to get the job done.

It gets hot in summer and cold in winter. Sometimes it rains. That is normal. So we wear clothes and build houses. Some of us install AC. We take control of our environment. Same thing with climate change. If you want a specific climate then you need to take control over your environment. Build a planetary AC unit. At that point atmospheric CO2 is irrelevant. Just kick up the AC a little harder. This whole stop burning fossil fuels to save the planet stuff is moronic. It is no different than someone giving you a tissue when you are but naked shivering in the rain. That tissue flat isn't going to keep you dry and warm. And the guy who gave you one either is a moron or an asshole.

Or, to put it another way: I'll line up with the global-warming advocates when they launch an all-out political effort to support and greatly expand nuclear power. Until then, they're just dictator wannabees.

Even nuclear power isn't going to get the job done. But at least it would show global warming advocates actually believed some of what they were saying. Still the equivalent of handing out those tiny toy umbrellas for your drink instead of real ones to someone sitting in a rain storm.

Sea Level Rise Swallows 5 Whole Pacific Islands

Thanks again, Gog.

I was going to mention the following in some future thread, but why not here as well.

Namely, even if it's eventually proven that rising sea levels, increasing drought, and other long-term environmental changes are only 5% due to human influence (or not at all), how does that change the likelihood that at the least, humans everywhere need to have fewer children, since the increasing disappearances of good habitats for humans means more and more crowding, fewer resources to go around, and likely fewer jobs? Especially with increasing automation?

I wonder how many record setting hurricanes will be required to get climate change deniers to admit their understanding of this issue is extremely limited?

Clearly Harvey wasn't enough... I wonder if Irma will get any of them to recognize their own lack of predictive power... or maybe Jose also has to make landfall for these folks to consider the possibility that the scientists know what they are talking about.

My guess is that they will skip all of the science and just declare that it is gods wrath and blame it on some group of "sinners".