And the noose continues to tighten..

[Rob Roy]

Yeah, just paying taxes on land I own or they take my land away. Lol, fucking democracy don't seem much off communism really just have a chance to work different places but you broke well they are going to take that fucking land.

Property Tax is a clear instance of an oxymoron. It combines two words which mean two distinct and separate things into one phrase, sort of like "government intelligence".

 

[ttystikk]

But at the local level, going on the cheap, We have raise that road way that now always floods, so you can make it to your job at the refinery there on the coast. Next year a new low spot. ad nauseam.

http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/1/6874925/can-a-massive-seawall-save-new-york-from-flooding

Great article, thanks for that link!

 

[ttystikk]

Property Tax is a clear instance of an oxymoron. It combines two words which mean two distinct and separate things into one phrase, sort of like "government intelligence".

Did you even read the article @Grandpapy pasted just above?

It puts the lie to your whole stupid philosophy in stark relief;

New York City needs a flood wall structure. No individual can or should be asked to pay for the whole thing. In no way is expecting individual property owners to each handle their bit going to work. This is where an aggregated payment and design and construction process really helps everyone.

Your miserable excuse for an ownership philosophy would leave everyone to their own devices. That might have worked at the village tribal level, thousands of years ago, but it's outmoded now and wholly inadequate to modern challenges.

So is your bullshit, for that matter.

 

[NLXSK1]

Did you even read the article @Grandpapy pasted just above?

It puts the lie to your whole stupid philosophy in stark relief;

New York City needs a flood wall structure. No individual can or should be asked to pay for the whole thing. In no way is expecting individual property owners to each handle their bit going to work. This is where an aggregated payment and design and construction process really helps everyone.

Your miserable excuse for an ownership philosophy would leave everyone to their own devices. That might have worked at the village tribal level, thousands of years ago, but it's outmoded now and wholly inadequate to modern challenges.

So is your bullshit, for that matter.

Actually, it would simply prevent them from building so close to the water. Society would adapt and there would be more beaches...

 

[ttystikk]

Actually, it would simply prevent them from building so close to the water. Society would adapt and there would be more beaches...

New Amsterdam, as New York was originally known, was built there because of its harbor, as were most other major cities at sea level.

Very few deep water ports very far inland, and by definition they're all still at sea level.

This is another truly stupid rebuttal; almost half the planet's population lives within a dozen feet of sea level- and you think it's cool to just tell them to move?

Calling your argument chickenshit insults the value and integrity of poultry based fertilizer everywhere!

 

[Fogdog]

Actually, it would simply prevent them from building so close to the water. Society would adapt and there would be more beaches...

New Amsterdam, as New York was originally known, was built there because of its harbor, as were most other major cities at sea level.

Very few deep water ports very far inland, and by definition they're all still at sea level.

This is another truly stupid rebuttal; almost half the planet's population lives within a dozen feet of sea level- and you think it's cool to just tell them to move?

Calling your argument chickenshit insults the value and integrity of poultry based fertilizer everywhere!

Haahahaahaaa. You nailed it as well as can be said. Ports do need to be built at sea level, true that.

The whole idea that our little village idiot looks to blame those govmint incompetents for building a port so close to sea level is absolutely hilarious.

Yeah, let those container ships land on beaches. Oh man that was rich.

 

[Rob Roy]

Did you even read the article @Grandpapy pasted just above?

It puts the lie to your whole stupid philosophy in stark relief;

New York City needs a flood wall structure. No individual can or should be asked to pay for the whole thing. In no way is expecting individual property owners to each handle their bit going to work. This is where an aggregated payment and design and construction process really helps everyone.

Your miserable excuse for an ownership philosophy would leave everyone to their own devices. That might have worked at the village tribal level, thousands of years ago, but it's outmoded now and wholly inadequate to modern challenges.

So is your bullshit, for that matter.

Can (should) a person delegate a right they do not possess ?


Also, my philosophy does not leave everyone "to their own devices". It doesn't prohibit people from forming voluntary and peaceful associations which can solve problems.

Your philosophy begins with a threat of force, vests power of life and death in a forcibly imposed hierarchy and proceeds with its mayhem from there. Peace.

 

[Rob Roy]

New Amsterdam, as New York was originally known, was built there because of its harbor, as were most other major cities at sea level.

Very few deep water ports very far inland, and by definition they're all still at sea level.

This is another truly stupid rebuttal; almost half the planet's population lives within a dozen feet of sea level- and you think it's cool to just tell them to move?

Calling your argument chickenshit insults the value and integrity of poultry based fertilizer everywhere!

Why do you think involuntary relationships backed by threats of home seizure are cool? What do you like about them ?

 

[Fogdog]

NASA had released a statement last year revealing that Antarctica's ice was increasing in comparison to the decreasing level of ice in the Arctic. The discovery had left researchers and scientists perplexed about the reason for such a phenomenon. However, now the space agency reportedly has an answer for the sea ice difference at the two poles.

http://www.scienceworldreport.com/articles/40333/20160524/nasa-explains-sea-ice-increase-antarctica-melts-arctic.htm


Sorry, I forgot NASA just makes shit up.

Sea ice decreasing in arctic but inceasing in antarctic. Counter intuitive with AGW theory or seemingly so. But then again, the earth is a dynamic system with lots of twists in how the physics of energy flow affect local conditions. Here is how a climate scientist explains it:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154639113640008

From what he said, I get the following: The effect is explained by two mechanisms in play. One is wind patterns shifting, which I admit I don't understand but that's what he said, so listen to the video because I can't explain. The other is land ice melting into the sea which adds a layer of cold fresh water into the seas surrounding the continent. Fresh water freezes at a higher temperature than salty sea water. A layer of fresh water on top of very cold antarctic sea water would lead to an increase in the ice sheet.

 

[ttystikk]

Sea ice decreasing in arctic but inceasing in antarctic. Counter intuitive with AGW theory or seemingly so. But then again, the earth is a dynamic system with lots of twists in the physics of energy movement how it affects local conditions. Here is how a climate scientist explains it:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154639113640008

Basically the effect is explained by two mechanisms in play. One is wind patterns shifting, which I admit I don't understand but that's what he said, so listen to the video because I can't explain. The other is land ice melting into the sea which adds a layer of cold fresh water into the seas surrounding the continent. Fresh water freezes at a higher temperature than salty sea water. A layer of fresh water on top of sea water would lead to an increase in the ice sheet.

My takeaway here is that more fresh water ending up in the southern ocean is an indicator of AGW and global climate change- and that keeping it frozen is a natural brake on the process we should all be happy to know is still working in our favor. Imagine what would happen if that brake wasn't there... Lots of people living at sea level would become climate refugees. BILLIONS of them. Even Americans!

 

[Fogdog]

My takeaway here is that more fresh water ending up in the southern ocean is an indicator of AGW and global climate change- and that keeping it frozen is a natural brake on the process we should all be happy to know is still working in our favor. Imagine what would happen if that brake wasn't there... Lots of people living at sea level would become climate refugees. BILLIONS of them. Even Americans!

Actually, all that matters with regard to sea level rise is how much land ice melts. Sea ice is just water in a different form. Put a cup of water in a bucket and the water level goes up by one cup. Freeze a cup of liquid water and put it into the same bucket and the level of water rises by one cup.

 

[NLXSK1]

New Amsterdam, as New York was originally known, was built there because of its harbor, as were most other major cities at sea level.

Very few deep water ports very far inland, and by definition they're all still at sea level.

This is another truly stupid rebuttal; almost half the planet's population lives within a dozen feet of sea level- and you think it's cool to just tell them to move?

Calling your argument chickenshit insults the value and integrity of poultry based fertilizer everywhere!

If the sea level rises it seems stupid to build yourself into a bowl... Just ask New Orleans.

 

[ttystikk]

Actually, all that matters with regard to sea level rise is how much land ice melts. Sea ice is just water in a different form. Put a cup of water in a bucket and the water level goes up by one cup. Freeze a cup of liquid water and put it into the same bucket and the level of water rises by one cup.

Yes of course. I'm referring to the follow-on effect of more sea ice helping to keep Antarctica cold, thereby slowing the rate at which ice above sea level slides down into the ocean and raising global water levels.

 

[londonfog]

Can (should) a person delegate a right they do not possess ?


.

Can a person be free and still file taxes ?

 

[Fogdog]

The article linked below describes an instability developing in Antarctic glaciers will eventually lead to sea level rise of 4 feet. The process is driven by warming ocean water that is melting the foundation of glaciers and will eventually cause them to slide into the sea. Its not imminent but inevitable if sea temperatures continue to rise.

http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/news/antarctic-ice-sheet-20140512/#.V0cyb5ErIdU

Why is West Antarctica's ice sheet considered "unstable"?

The defining characteristic of West Antarctica is that the majority of the ice sheet is "grounded" on a bed that lies below sea level.

In his 1968 paper, Mercer called the West Antarctic Ice Sheet a "uniquely vulnerable and unstable body of ice." Mercer based his statement on geologic evidence that West Antarctica’s ice had changed considerably many, many millennia ago at times when the ice sheets of East Antarctica and Greenland had not

In 1973, University of Maine researcher Terry Hughes asked the question that scientists continue to investigate today. The title of his paper: "Is The West Antarctic Ice Sheet Disintegrating?" In 1981, Hughes published a closer look at the Amundsen Sea region specifically. He called it "the weak underbelly of the West Antarctic ice sheet."

Here's the cause for concern: When the ice sheet is attached to a bed below sea level, ocean currents can deliver warm water to glacier grounding lines, the location where the ice attaches to the bed.

There seems to be a relatively ignorant concern regarding the cost of action to reduce the magnitude of AGW. A few inches rise in sea level results in huge costs to the world's economies. Four feet sea rise is beyond calculation in cost in terms of displaced populations, loss of arable land, infrastructure and so forth. And it will happen given the foot dragging going on due to disinformation put out there by Exxon and others in the fossil fuels industries.

 

[Fogdog]

Yes of course. I'm referring to the follow-on effect of more sea ice helping to keep Antarctica cold, thereby slowing the rate at which ice above sea level slides down into the ocean and raising global water levels.

I wish that were true.

Antarctic glacier melt 'accelerating'
Warmer waters surrounding the ice-covered continent are having a dramatic effect, according to a new study.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/05/antarctic-glacier-melt-accelerating-150522092601543.html

For much of the first decade of the new millennium, satellite data indicated that glaciers were gaining snow and ice at the same rate they were slipping into the sea. But it appears that from around 2009/10, the surface of the ice began to reduce at an alarming rate - up to four metres per year in some locations. The loss of ice is estimated to be around 60 cubic kilometres per year.

Antarctic ice and snow melt is estimated to contribute just 0.5mm to global sea rise each year. These findings raise the possibility of a rapid increase in this figure.

 

[ttystikk]

The article linked below describes an instability developing in Antarctic glaciers will eventually lead to sea level rise of 4 feet. The process is driven by warming ocean water that is melting the foundation of glaciers and will eventually cause them to slide into the sea. Its not imminent but inevitable if sea temperatures continue to rise.

http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/news/antarctic-ice-sheet-20140512/#.V0cyb5ErIdU

Why is West Antarctica's ice sheet considered "unstable"?

The defining characteristic of West Antarctica is that the majority of the ice sheet is "grounded" on a bed that lies below sea level.

In his 1968 paper, Mercer called the West Antarctic Ice Sheet a "uniquely vulnerable and unstable body of ice." Mercer based his statement on geologic evidence that West Antarctica’s ice had changed considerably many, many millennia ago at times when the ice sheets of East Antarctica and Greenland had not

In 1973, University of Maine researcher Terry Hughes asked the question that scientists continue to investigate today. The title of his paper: "Is The West Antarctic Ice Sheet Disintegrating?" In 1981, Hughes published a closer look at the Amundsen Sea region specifically. He called it "the weak underbelly of the West Antarctic ice sheet."

Here's the cause for concern: When the ice sheet is attached to a bed below sea level, ocean currents can deliver warm water to glacier grounding lines, the location where the ice attaches to the bed.

There seems to be a relatively ignorant concern regarding the cost of action to reduce the magnitude of AGW. A few inches in sea level results in huge costs to the world's economies. Four feet sea rise is beyond calculation in cost in terms of displaced populations, loss of arable land, infrastructure and so forth. And it will happen given the foot dragging going on due to disinformation put out there by Exxon and others in the fossil fuels industries.

Maybe we should sue ExxonMobil for pursuing a campaign of deliberate deception, and the damages figure could cover the cost of relocating a billion people.

Even ExxonMobil couldn't afford that.

 

[ttystikk]

I wish that were true.

Antarctic glacier melt 'accelerating'
Warmer waters surrounding the ice-covered continent are having a dramatic effect, according to a new study.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/05/antarctic-glacier-melt-accelerating-150522092601543.html

For much of the first decade of the new millennium, satellite data indicated that glaciers were gaining snow and ice at the same rate they were slipping into the sea. But it appears that from around 2009/10, the surface of the ice began to reduce at an alarming rate - up to four metres per year in some locations. The loss of ice is estimated to be around 60 cubic kilometres per year.

Antarctic ice and snow melt is estimated to contribute just 0.5mm to global sea rise each year. These findings raise the possibility of a rapid increase in this figure.

Wellllllll... It was a nice thought while it lasted!

 

[Fogdog]

Maybe we should sue ExxonMobil for pursuing a campaign of deliberate deception, and the damages figure could cover the cost of relocating a billion people.

Even ExxonMobil couldn't afford that.

I think there is an inquiry into exactly that kind of action by the govt. Tobacco settlements are a precedent.

 

[Fogdog]

Wellllllll... It was a nice thought while it lasted!

Sorry about harshing your buzz.