Government officials “don’t have a vision for a worst-case scenario”
State officials don’t have much of a plan in place because they don’t think it’s very likely that we’ll run out of water.
Tim Cash, the chairman of the state’s Drought Response Working Group said:
“We have not gotten to the planning stages for someone running out of water because we don’t think we’re even close to being there… Right now, I don’t have a vision for a worst-case scenario.“
He also said that:
“nobody out there is at imminent peril of their water supply disappearing tomorrow“.
I think we knew that. We’re more worried about next year. Mr. Cash seems to agree:
“We are trying to anticipate what could be further down the road in ‘08 if the drought continues to worsen, which I believe everyone is expecting it to do.“
Let me get this straight; he agrees that the drought will likely get worse next year, but doesn’t even need to consider a worst-case scenario? In addition, they’re…
“not talking to the city of Atlanta. The city of Atlanta water supply looks good.“
I know it looks pretty good right now, but we’re talking about millions of people, which will require the most preparation in case of disaster. You’d hope they were at least discussing things at this point.
In a similar vein Buzz Weiss, a spokesman for the Georgia Emergency Management Agency said:
“I don’t really think there’s a sense we’ll be at a point where there is no water.“
All of this worries me a little bit. We’ve still got a good bit of water left, but no one knows what next year will bring. If it’s dry, we could potentially be in big trouble. I had assumed that the state was starting to get plans to together to prepare for that possibility, but it seems I was wrong.
I’m not suggesting we panic quite yet (we’ve still got roughly 150 days left) , but the “just in case” planning needs to get in gear.
Anyhow, read the article at the AJC for the full story.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
You win the door prize with this thread subject > Georgia state officials are just praying that rain will fall to refill the reservoirs. They will worry about water shortages next summer.
December 5th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
You sure this was not in The Onion?
December 5th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
From AJC article: “Notice has been given of an impending, serious crisis,” Greenberger said. “If the federal government doesn’t want to find itself in the middle of a Katrina-like situation, it better get going.”
(Michael Greenburger, director of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the University of Maryland.)
December 5th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Well on another thread we all find out that ACE keeps watch on this site. They are very concerned about us watching their operations. Keep up the good work everybody. Lake Lanier might be saved after all in spite of stupidity.
December 5th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
My favorite part was when they boasted that they are ready because they have some experience providing water for “several days” back in 1994. You guys are screwed
December 5th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Oh, I’m sure they could provide enough water to keep Atlanta metro residents from dying of thirst. No doubt in my mind. Really - you only need what, three gallons a day maybe? To drink, to soak some clothes in to wash, and to cook with? THAT level, I’m sure they can provide indefinately. A level of water flow to keep Atlanta as a functioning city though, might be just a touch more difficult.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:16 pm
The real problem is that Georgia politics is and has been “conservative” for too long. You know, the kind of conservatives that conserve nothing.
Today’s “con”servatism is about posing and emotional appeals to seize control of government, NOT about governing. And now these same people are in charge of your lives.
It was liberal government that created the systems of modern society, but America was fooled into thinking it was a good idea to demonize liberalism and its belief in good government.
Good luck and, sadly, good night.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
“I’m not suggesting we panic quite yet (we’ve still got roughly 150 days left)”
has it rained significanlty in the “last” 150 days? how about 300? uh,…..450…..any takers?
Since the pattern has been thus, then it is likely that the future will be thus. Atlanta is making history right now. The city and surrounding areas have NEVER been here before. hence the confusion and lack of planning. what if this is to be a drought like the dust bowl of the midwest. Just not 10yrs, maybe just a 3rd, 3yrs and some change. I am sure “they” thought as you did. “It will rain soon!” or “I am sure someone will do something” or “I am sure we have plenty of water left” they just didn’t have blogs. The drought just kept going, and going, and going.
quote from from EHnet Encyclopedia: “The Dust Bowl was a coincidence of drought, severe wind erosion, and economic depression”
my quote “The Atlanta situation is a combination of drought, over population in a short period of time, lack of conservation, and political non-sense.” Parallels?
I would worry NOW………..just a little maybe?
r
December 5th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
I’m very worried — just not ready to panic quite yet.
Panic (to me) means we need to put our house up for sale and start looking for jobs elsewhere. We’re not there quite yet.
December 5th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
Paul said: “My favorite part was when they boasted that they are ready because they have some experience providing water for “several days” back in 1994.”
According to this site:
http://www.city-data.com/city/Macon-Georgia.html
Macon (in 2000, I couldn’t find the 1994 stats) only has a population of around 97,255. Fulton County alone has ten times the population.
I live in downtown Atlanta, and it was my original plan to buy bottled water to last me two weeks and wait for the mass evacuation to die down before trying to leave, but now it looks like I will have to leave ahead of the water going out. If they can’t even give me a plan for a guarantee that other people will have drinking water, I imagine there will be a panic once people realize they have only a few days left to live if they can’t find water.
Are there any other people in Atlanta who have plans if the taps run dry?
December 5th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
We’ve not made any specific plans, but we have some rough ideas just in case. My in-laws live in south Georgia and they’re in better shape water-wise…for now. If things get bad there, we’ll probably head up north to my parents area.
December 5th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
I’ve posted defending Sonny Purdue several times. While the problem isn’t of his making, I’m done defending him. This falls squarely on his shoulders.
I will say to JR though that I am more than a bit tired of all the liberals basically saying we are getting what we deserve because Georgia is a red state, conservative, republican, whatever. You liberals are really showing your stripes and it’s making me sick. Sorry - this shouldn’t be a political forum but it seems partisanship keeps getting injected - and it’s always by holier than thou liberals.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:17 pm
It doesn’t make sense to frame this issue in a partisan political light.
December 5th, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Rich,
For every ” holier than thou liberal.” I can show you double holier than thou conservatives. That said, it doesn’t matter if you are liberal, moderate (what, there’s like 10 of us?) or conservative…the fact is, we all need water. I’m appalled that there is no plan in effect for us. I mean, it would make sense to go ahead and have that “worst case scenario plan” JUST IN CASE.
I’ve said this before, I’m so thankful that we rent. We owned a house for a while, the neighborhood went to hell and so we put our house up for sale. It took 2 years to sell it and we lost 5k on it…and this is BEFORE the sub prime fall out. I told my wife “never” again.
We make a modest living and could own a house if we wanted to. But I’m glad we don’t so we can get the hell outta here when the @#$ hits the fan. (Also, my job is mobile anyway…I answer to no one but myself. My wife is a spanish teacher with her masters…finding a job in another place won’t be as hard for her). Thats our worst case scenario. Or move in with my parents who live on Lake Guntesrville in Alabama until all this blows over….IF it blows over.
December 5th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Try this exercise if you want to test worst case. Turn off your water to your home for 24 hours. List the things that you are unable to do: baths, toilets, cooking, coffee pot, dishwashing, laundry, brushing teeth, washing hands, general household cleaning and wiping down of counters. It’s one thing to list it, its another to experience it. You will not believe how many times a day you turn to the “faucet”. It’s an unusual frustration that comes over you - one which will explode with 5 million residents should the “worst case” occur. If you cant turn off your water, just act like the faucet is dry - this doesn’t work too well because you will just use it anyway. Also, you have to also assume (if you do this test) that the water is out across the city so don’t expect to go to a public restroom, restaurant, laundromat, or gas station - they won’t be open either……try it, you wont like it one bit.
December 5th, 2007 at 8:34 pm
You are right concerned - there are a ton of holier than thou conservatives ( I doubt double - but I grant you there are a lot). I haven’t seen any post here though. I have seen many smug - almost gleeful posts from liberals though. And I’m glad you have an exit plan. Personally I have a well that I can tap. It doesn’t make me unconcerned about others though.
December 5th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
http://www.11alive.com/video/player.aspx?aid=84448&bw=
Finally some long-term action.
December 5th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Richs,
If you’re going to stick around with that water well, you better have a source of electricity to keep that pump running. Power grid generation requires water, and lots of it.
And, if you are inclined to help out, you need to organize in your neighborhood a water ration program so that you have water to give to your neighbors. You need to know who your friendlies are, so that thieves will have a hard time reaching and using your pump. I suggest in that case that you prepare to lock down with a minimum team of 3 people working in rotating shifts to protect that water well. One person watches the well, another watches the residence, while the third one rests, eats, and sleeps. A team of 5-8 people would be better. Use semi-automatic weapons allowed in your state to hold off sizeable gangs who might try to overwhelm with numbers.
What if La Nina does really happen? What if it doesn’t rain for several more months? What if you run out of water? Katrina will be nothing compared to Atlanta because of the sheer size of the mass exodus and extreme losses that will happen. You only have a period of time in which you have to have supplies lined up, put in your garage or somewhere you can guard it, find out a group of friends who will stick with you and preferably have survival/military training, have your vehicles checked out for any problems, jerry cans filled with gas, pile up on ammunition especially, all that stuff. It takes a while to get it together.
I’m over here in Houston, and I’m watching this closely. There is no telling where all these people will go. I remember when Katrina hit New Orleans and drove the people here. We helped out the people, only to find out there were criminal elements among us who were released and caused trouble in our neighborhoods, and there were deadbeats amongst us who would NOT try to find even a temporary job to bring in extra money for the trip back home or starting a new life here or elsewhere. I also remember Rita grazing right by us, but it seemed headed straight for us. We got out of the way, and it was scary to be evacuating and taking 3 times the time to get to our destinations. It was frightening to watch people walking on the sides of the road because their cars broke down, at night. I’ll never forget this experience.
I hope that the weather patterns change for the better and you get your lake levels back up. Good luck…
December 5th, 2007 at 11:52 pm
Worst case scenario could begin by next July or August, if heavy spring rains fail to materialize for Georgia. My belief is that Atlanta will be forced to cut-off water 3 days a week at first > Monday, Wednesday and Friday no water. Then down to a couple hours a day after that. Around that time restaurants will close and massive unemployment in and around Atlanta. People will start to leave the area in droves.
December 6th, 2007 at 12:07 am
Also begin to watch out for con-men saying they can drill you a well for a big fat wad of upfront cash, or scams to turn your small lake or pond into drinkable water. There might be private water trucks driving around to sell it at exorbitant price.
December 6th, 2007 at 12:19 am
Stephanie says: What if La Nina does really happen?
Stephanie, it is already here. You can go to the following link (2 days old):
http://www.osdpd.noaa.gov/PSB/EPS/SST/data/anomp.12.3.2007.gif
and see that there is currently a very strong La Nina. The only question is “will it persist”? Climatologists at this point do not know how to predict changes in the El Nino / La Nina cycle, but even if it started changing now, it takes a couple of months for the cycle to swing.
December 6th, 2007 at 1:10 am
I’m grateful to be in Atlanta on internship only until August, so I’ll probably be around to see the spectacle once stuff really hits the fan, but leave soon afterwards. It is scary to imagine having real roots down here though - I can only imagine how I’d feel if water were this low around my permanent home. But a comment on here recently made me realize just how much this might become an issue of law and order if taps actually go dry and people freak out. I asked my dad half-jokingly if I could borrow his Colt .45 - my plan is to keep an eye on the situation and get the hell out once the glamor runs out of my Mad Max fantasy.
December 6th, 2007 at 9:23 am
The lesson here is that you can’t depend on government to take care of you if disaster (whatever form that takes) hits. Everyone needs to have a plan to go somewhere else if we run out of water. Most people have cars and friends or relatives who live in places where there’s water. You should have a plan to secure your home, if possible, if/when you have to leave. Only those unable to take care of themselves (nursing home patients, hospital patients, the desperately poor) can be excused for not having a plan.
My concern is only about these people. We need a plan to take care of those who can’t take care of themselves. The rest of us will be ok. If you don’t have a plan and you think the government (federal, state, local) will take care of you, you’re an idiot.
December 6th, 2007 at 11:00 am
I’ve personally been purchasing 1-2 cases of water a week since late September. Cheapest water I can find now is $3.98 for a case of Wally world water. Anyone else began to stockpile?
December 6th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Ben > some water has a shelf life for drinking purposes. Still can be used for other needs anyway.
December 6th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
Folks, it stopped raining ‘normally’ in Austraila years ago, it can happen here. The assumption should be it won’t rain enough in ‘08. I had dinner with an Aussie last week. He said that it had not really rained much at all for over six years! The climate changed, pure and simple; they gave up on wishful thinking long ago. They are getting by on ‘Level 5′ water restrictions which are very tight. 4 min showers max, no car washing, and so on. But they are doing OK with it. If a household’s consumption goes up they get a letter requring them to give the reason (e.g. new member of household).
North GA should be starting now to work out how to drop consumption dramatically during these winter months, not in heat of next summer. 50 days or 150 days supply is not really different in the larger scheme - you end up in the same place either way if the rain fails next year.
December 6th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
Ben - is it really cheaper to buy cases of small bottles rather than gallons? Around here (St. Louis - no water issue here), a gallon of water in a jug goes for about 0.49 - so six gallons (equal to a case of quart bottles) is about $3.00.
December 6th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
Whenever we have an empty milk jug, juice bottle, 2 ltr. soda bottle, etc we rinse and fill it for possible use down the road if we get to that point. So far we have 57 gallons set aside.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
we have roughly 70 gallons set aside.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:40 pm
Folks - I knew that this would be an interesting thread. Nonetheless, my stomach tightened considerably at the comments that are starting to “game out” the worst case scenarios. The neat and orderly fabric of society could unravel a bit. How far it unravels depends upon many factors, most of them human-related.
And before commenting further, I will transparently state that I do NOT disagree with any of the pro-active thoughts or suggestions written here. I have researched and produced scholarly reports on climate change for over 20 years on subjects ranging from sustainable development, meeting future energy needs, vast environmental changes, AND, relevant to this thread here, the possible erosion or disintegration of the fabric of society as we currently know it and love it. Make no mistake that, as resources tighten, Climate Change world-wide will ultimately be responsible for the deaths of billions of people.
But the point here is limited to a drought in the south-eastern United States. “Stephanie” began the outlines of a “survivalist” plan to protect RichS’ well water. This is the first time I’ve seen the survivalist scenario openly discussed, and I dare say that this thinking may well be helpful. I both applaud that level of forethought, but doubt that the situation needs to come to the level where you are defending your source of water simply to survive. It will continue to rain in the south-east, even if the rainfall is far below what is necessary to return the regional hydrology to pre-drought conditions.
But on the downside, nobody can presently predict what effect, if any, the accelerating climate change effect is having upon the present drought. Climate change is a huge and worrisome wild card. The question I’ve asked before is: “how many people say that the Sahara desert region is presently experiencing a drought?” Not many, despite the fact that the region has historically been a well watered and productive savannah eco-system. A shifting climate left the Sahara hot and dry. The question is: which regions of the US and the world are at risk of becoming a Sahara-like desert. The 1930’s dust-bowl was certainly a taste. Many people’s comments here have been along the line of “if things get bad, I’m going to go elsewhere to find relief.” The point is that millions of other people will be doing the same thing. Where exactly is “elsewhere”? What if elsewhere also happens to come under the grip of a drought?
What I do think will happen is this. If the situation continues to worsen (as it will in the future, not necessarily in 2008, but sometime in the future) the people who will stay will get very smart about recycling water. The people who stay will learn how to catch, store, filter, and treat rainwater from roofs and other large catchment areas. People will learn water-conservation methods of farming (the Israelis are very good at it). Usable water will still collect in rivers and lakes. In a worst-cast scenario, life will not be the same, but it will go on.
It is also possible that there may be a silver lining in a worst-case scenario: People will have a chance to come together, to cooperate with each other, come together with people in other cities, to form a new community with a common purpose: to survive, and possibly even thrive. People faced with disasters may well panic, but panic is the WORST possible response. I absolutely believe that one cannot and should not count on the government for a disaster response that makes sense. One need look no further than the Katrina response, past and present, to know that you are much better off organizing with your neighbors than relying on government solutions. Thus, I do put my faith in the energy and ingenuity of people to construct an orderly, fair, and workable solution to a looming disasters.
The overall point I am coming to is this: I believe that people will need to learn to adapt and survive to a future that (for multiple reasons having to do with energy, drought, and other issues) will be different than the past we have enjoyed, and perhaps taken for granted. I believe that we must learn to be more efficient with our precious resources.
As I write this, I feel myself damming Dick Cheney for his asinine comments years ago that “conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy”. That kind of thinking is why we are where we are.
December 6th, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Good point Rkolter. I’ll have to see how much water is in the gallon jugs. Probably is a good bit cheaper. We also fill old milk jugs and juice bottles. Just have to wonder if we’ll visit that doomsday scenario. The weather models I look at on NOAA and the weather boards I visit seem to paint a somewhat gloomy picture.
Here’s a running thread I check out from time to time.
http://www.easternuswx.com/bb/index.php?s=63165dbcc48699bdd4639c60d800845d&showtopic=143851
December 6th, 2007 at 6:55 pm
Tim,
I hope you’re right about coming together as a community and working things out… We have to focus on that. Just remember that we have flawed attributes about us that have not been bred out of us in the last 30,000 years…
I was looking at photos of Lake Lanier’s expanding shorelines, and I couldn’t help but be reminded just how much they resemble the rocky landscape of Mars… I wonder if that’s what happened there. I would not be surprised if one of the Rovers stumbled upon evidence, like bits of trees, roots, even house foundations, metallic parts, buildings, etc.
December 6th, 2007 at 10:42 pm
I honestly don’t think our problem is “climate change”. Two years ago, the lake was full and you couldn’t get out on it during the weekend because it was constantly raining. Climate change is a slow gradual change not a drastic difference between 2005 and 2007. What we have is a two year long drought (so far) that has been made worse by poor policy regarding the use of the main reservoir which feeds the ACF system (lake Lanier). The lake which should be sufficient to sustain a minimum level of use for several dry years has been decimated in a few dry months. In fact, Lanier has dropped appox 12 feet in just the last four months. That’s not climate change - it’s just poor stewardship.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:18 am
I wish Georgians would all work together to handle this drought water shortage crisis, but the longer water is scare then the more friction between small towns and big cities like Atlanta. Many in Georgia are bitter that Atlanta gets favored, so if they get water and the rest of us none, then watch out.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:19 am
scarce not scare > error in my above post.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:39 am
RichS is right. It’s not “climate change.” My hometown of Tuscaloosa, Alabama has PLENTY of water. They have it because they planned way ahead…about 30 years ago. Built a huge reservoir. They have plenty to drink, and they have a huge lake for recreation.
The whole problem has been caused by poor management on the part of Georgia. It is due to uncontrolled growth in Metro Atlanta. There are too many people in Metro Atlanta needing to use Lanier for drinking water and it was never designed for that.
December 7th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Carol > since you claim Alabama has plenty of water, then give up your claim to Lake Allatoona water in our state. Atlanta’s over-development is an issue that even I have remarked about. Even your state is doing building boom around Mobile. Georgia would like to build more dams, but your Governor and Florida’s Governor threaten to sue our state for stealing their water???
December 7th, 2007 at 9:38 am
Jay, I said TUSCALOOSA has plenty of water. That’s because the local officials planned ahead. That’s the way it should be. Local communities, when they can, need to plan for themselves, rather than relying on the state or the feds to take care of them. If a city’s infrastructure can’t support the people in the city, then that city needs to regulate its growth. It’s really that simple. Atlanta is like the fat lady at the buffet table taking all the food, leaving none for the healthy, fit, thin people.
And I don’t live in Alabama. I live right in the middle of Atlanta (Virginia Highlands). My family is from Tuscaloosa.
I don’t know about the problems in Mobile. As far as I know, they are not about to run out of water.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:31 am
Carol - apparently Tucsaloosa doesn’t have communities downstream demanding the water in their reservoir. It’s a little simplistic to say that Atlanta needed to plan for itself. The problem is that Atlanta can’t just build a reservoir when it wants. Downstream communities scream, sue, and block the projects. More reservoirs would have been nice but they have been blocked multiple times.
December 7th, 2007 at 11:42 am
Lake Lanier’s primary purpose when it was built was for hydroelectric power. Drinking water was an incidental use. Those downstream communities have the legal right to the water from Lanier. Tuscaloosa doesn’t have communities downstream demanding the water because when they built the reservoir, that wasn’t part of the plan. They were smart, and planned ahead.
My point is, that no matter what the reasons, fair or unfair, if you govern a region that cannot support its population, then rather than whine and complain, you have to take action to stop the problem.
In my opinion, proper action would involve two things:
increase water rates
place a moratorium on building permits
Our governor (whom I voted for, by the way) and our city and county officials are not acting responsibly.
I believe that they are deliberately minimizing the problem to the public because they do not want to discourage individuals and businesses who may be thinking of locating here and developers who may be thinking of investing here. It is very short-sighted and very irresponsible in my opinion.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Carol > when ACE built Buford Dam, that created Lake Lanier, the primary purpose listed for the lake is drinking water for Atlanta and its suburbs. The secondary usage is for producing electricity, then use for recreation stuff.
The mistake that Georgia made was allowing federal government to build the dam, thus ACE controlling it, so it should have been built with state funding.
Now that you live in Atlanta this drought crisis will effect you, unless you go back to Alabama. Drought is also occurring in Alabama, but the Governor just does not tell the citizenry about water rationing yet.
December 7th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Carol - I agree with you about increasing water rates. If they are increased enough, it will slow the growth of the area by itself. I don’t know that a moratorium on building permits is feasible, but I would propose a meaningful tax on building permits. The revenue of both the water price increases and building permits to be used toward fixing the water problem.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:03 pm
There is always a danger in quoting original uses.
Carol is correct Jay - The lake was NOT created to provide drinking water to Atlanta. It was created as a result of the Dam, which is there to provide power and to control flow rates on the river basin. Drinking water is clearly described as an incidental use by the ACE at the time of the Dam’s construction.
Likewise, the dam was never built to provide water to nuclear power plants, or to protect endangered species, but it does that too, and at significantly higher than an incidental use.
We need to worry about the current uses of Lake Lanier and the water being released from it, not what it was originally designed for 50+ years ago.
December 7th, 2007 at 1:23 pm
I basically agree with you rkolter, but when Buford Dam was built it was mentioned as drinking water use to supply Atlanta and surrounding towns. I think one mistake was to allow private ownership of lakefront property, since ACE and other government agencies have decided to treat the lake as a recharge for Lake Seminole/Woodruff Dam to maintain an artificial flow of 3.2 billion gallons of water on Apalachicola River to supply power plant needs. Now the homeowners have property that is going down in value, especially if the lake is completely emptied out and takes years to refill. Lanier should have had a state park around it and then if empty no property values affected.
December 7th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
I can’t disagree with you there - and I think the people of Georgia would have benefitted from a public park like that.
December 8th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Enjoyed this thread until I came across Tims.
“Make no mistake that, as resources tighten, Climate Change world-wide will ultimately be responsible for the deaths of billions of people.”
I am wondering how many global warming “meet up” groups you are in. You people need to stop trying to scare people with these types of statements. Global warming doesn’t exist. In some parts of Greenland, ice caps are actually growing. Until someone provides me an optimum (not an average!) temperature for the “globe” (realizing it’s always winter for someone when’s its summer for the others) I won’t listen. Since there is not an optimum I suggest the global warmers stop blaming our drought condition on it - its just a weather cycle. Stop the nonsense and scare tactics, Tim.
December 9th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
Not prepared? Not only are the governments not prepared to handle the impending crisis, they don’t even have a clue. The Army Corps is at best hiding the truth and at worst is outright lying about the water supply. Just check the website http://www.lakelaniercountdown.info and the links to the usgs data. But in the end, if you are waiting for the government to save you butt, you will be stone cold dead and gone. Get a reality check and get your family prepared with stored drinking water, while you can. It isn’t a matter of if, but when the pipes run dry.
December 9th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
How does that site calculate the “last day of drinking water”?
December 9th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
I think http://www.lakelaniercountdown.info is just trying to scare people into buying jugs and tanks.
December 10th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
You people are acting crazy. I have a degree in Meteorology. I’ve also spoken with the head of the Atlanta watershed management dept. The media has blown this way out of proportion.
If the drought continues through 2008, we’ll tighten restrictions, but we won’t run out of water. This drought is a pattern, probably exacerbated by global warming (yes, that is REAL, conservatives). However, the pattern means that we’ll go back to a wet cycle again. yes, within the next year or two.
THEN we should learn to store the extra water. It’s all about poor planning. I blame our local and state governments (mainly the state) for not getting our act together around PLANNING for our water needs.
Yes, this is a political issue as these people who are the planning process are related to and are our POLITICIANS.
Vote in people who are sensible and not beholded to big business and big industry. Start thinking about our future - not some measley minor tax cut.
December 10th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Probably a sensible post Steve other than like all the liberals here you seem to have to get your political jabs in.
I will ask though - How many lives are you willing to bet that we won’t run out of water? Shouldn’t we maybe be doing a little more right now to make absolutely sure that catastrophe doesn’t happen?
December 10th, 2007 at 5:23 pm
Please look at his latest issue of The Economist where extreme drought issues are discussed.
December 10th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9071007
Here is the link to the aforemenioned article on extreme drought.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
Sponge - I’m responding to your post above, not to speak with you but to do what I can to make sure other people are hearing the message. I can’t begin to dignify your response or denial. And I won’t attempt to persuade you or even debate with you. As long as you are comfortable where you are, then there will be no getting through to you. I will say that your post denying climate change is both interesting and stunning in light of your proposed exercise regarding lack of water available in your faucet. Then again, I do agree with you that you, me, and all of us, our children and grand children, have real reason to be “scared.”
The science of climate change is well established and beyond debate. The open ended questions now that are still subject to legitimate scientific debate are 1) How much overall temperatures rise will we see and how quickly will it occur? 2) What other feedback mechanisms will occur that will amplify climate change effects that we have yet to learn about? 3) What are the climate “tipping points” and what will happen when we reach them? etc. etc. etc.
Finally, a little further global education might go a long way to understanding the bigger issue. For example: The Darfur genocide in Sudan is directly related to climate-change-induced scarcity that set the two historically abiding ethnic groups against each other.
December 11th, 2007 at 10:57 pm
Tim, no need to be scared. It was an exercise to understand and prepare yourself for a possible short term shortage of water. I don’t think we will be committing genocide here over temporary conditions. You have gone over the edge with global warming. The only thing that heats the globe is the SUN and the sun is in a phase where its slightly hotter. If the sun went out tomorrow, we would have an ice age, so your so called problem is NOT on earth - see how silly you guys sound. By the way, I am still waiting for the “optimum” temperature of the “globe” - if its a global body issue, what is the “globe’s” optimum temperature? Just like the human body has an optimum temperature, what is the globe’s? If Al Gore says the earth has a “fever”, then just tell me what the incremental degrees above the “optimum” temperature is that would indicate a “fever”. It’s a fair question and logical one, one that neither you nor your global fanatics has an answer. Case closed. Cheers everyone…Merry Christmas.
December 12th, 2007 at 11:19 am
Sponge - The case you make is anything but closed, and the point you are trying to make reveals a breathtaking sweep of ignorance. But to keep the discourse civil and on point, I will not offer a response.
December 12th, 2007 at 11:22 am
Gotta agree with Sponge on this one. Global warming has become the religion of the left. As with any religion there is no debating, no argument will be listened to, and no matter what happens it will be taken as a sign of global warming. Lots of hurricanes - global warming. No rain - global warming. And yes the earth is slightly warming up. It has gone through warming and cooling periods throughout history. Attributing this warming period to human activity is VERY MUCH NOT “beyond debate”.
Anyway, this isn’t a global warming forum so I’m done with that topic.
December 12th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Tim, not even the Pope is with you on this one (speaking of Global Warming as a religion of the left)
Pope Benedict XVI has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology.
The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501316&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490
I too am now done on this topic, just as is RichS. Cheers….
December 12th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
Thanks for the link.
Now, how about going back and actually reading the article, or is pompous buffoon a prefered status?
Cheers! And Merry Christmas!
December 12th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Sponge, your “the sun is causing global warming” statement is simply juvenile. The Stanford Solar Center, which knows a few things about the Sun, can chime in here.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html
December 12th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
hmm…. The pope says “The 80-year-old Pope said the world needed to care for the environment but not to the point where the welfare of animals and plants was given a greater priority than that of mankind. ”
Now that relates directly back to this forum doesn’t it????
December 12th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
The arguments advanced by Sponge on Climate Change are impressive in their simple-minded absurdity. After Exxon-Mobile started changing it’s tune on climate change, I thought the remaining climate-change naysayers had finally pulled their heads out of the……sand.
Hopefully there are more impressive minds at work dealing with the very real problems of water shortages in the south than Sponge.
December 13th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Lol -
“simple-minded absurdity”
“simply juvenile”
“pompous buffoon”
“breathtaking sweep of ignorance”
See what happens when you attack someone’s religious dogma?
December 13th, 2007 at 10:28 am
The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics is not by default a respected scientific authority. Whether you choose to accept global warming as fact or not is irrelevant - regardless of your stance, you should choose to draw on the advice of experts in the field when you form your opinion.
This is why I won’t buy that cold medicine “made by a school teacher” - I choose to put more weight in drugs formulated by chemists. I also don’t let my accountant work on my plumming, or buy life insurance at lemonade stands.
December 13th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
“You liberals are really showing your stripes and it’s making me sick. Sorry - this shouldn’t be a political forum but it seems partisanship keeps getting injected - and it’s always by holier than thou liberals.”
“I have seen many smug - almost gleeful posts from liberals though.”
“like all the liberals here you seem to have to get your political jabs in.”
“Global warming has become the religion of the left. ”
Sound familiar RichS? It seems that we all believe what makes sense to us. I don’t see anybody attacking anybody else here because they are a Christian. Or a Jew. Or a Muslim. Why are you wielding the science of climate change as a cudgel against those that believe in science?
And why liken the science of climate change to religion? Your posts speak to a reasonably educated mind, so I have to presume that you are familiar with the who/what of the IPCC, the UNFCCC, and the atmospheric departments of dozens of leading Universities performing fundamental research and review of hard climate science…not religion… but directly observable, documentable, reproducible, and peer-reviewable data and facts, which Sponge, and to a smaller degree, you seem unaware of.
The Arctic region research scientists are screaming the alarm about what is happening in the Arctic, (loss of ocean ice, rapid glacial melting, thawing permafrost on a scale unimaginable in fossil and geologic record). The canary in the coal mine has died and it is time to leave the coal mine. Climate Change is already underway, whether it is convenient or not to admit it.
What about climate change and the south-east drought? If your post, (essentially blaming all weather patters on “climate change”) is intended to advise a cautionary approach before saying “all adverse weather is because of climate change”, then I agree with you. But the take-home point is that in addition to an overall general warming in average global temperatures, climate change will will increase the frequency, and AMPLIFY the severity of all types of weather patterns. We can expect more frequent, and more severe droughts, floods, heat waves, violent storms, and yes, even occasional winter-type storms.
I doubt Sponge was expecting an articulate response to his question about what “the optimum temperature is” (and I argue that the question sets-up a false-premise), but I would offer that the optimum temperature is the one that the earth has been experiencing in relative equilibrium for the past thousands of years. What is very dangerous to life on earth is the kind of climate change that normally occurs over ten-of-thousands of years occurring in the space of a few decades to a century.
I agree with RKolter’s point. I’ll refer to the pope for spiritual guidance. I’ll refer to the scientists for hard facts.
December 13th, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Peak, Jangle, Baez and Tim - you guys are so caught up in your own babble that pure common sense isn’t even coming through to you.
Peak, I am still waiting for the “optimum temperature” please! As I said above, none of you can answer that. If Gore says the planet has a fever, then tell me the temperature that indicates a FEVER - period. No false premise implied, you fanatics say it and set up the premise, so don’t blame me. I just want to know the temp in degrees and not theories of equilibrium.
Galileo developed the first thermometer in the 1600s (lived between 1564 - 1642) and it was a thermoscope with no calibrations. Just how do you even know what the temperature of the world was “thousands” of years ago, let alone “equilibrium”. Galileo’s thermoscope was not even calibrated and that was just 400 years ago. You guys are claiming one or two degree shifts and there is no way to measure that precision over “thousands” of years.
Rkolt, no one is getting their info from the Pope, especially me, I was playing off the religion concept. The pope is no more an expert than Tim or Peakman are, so you proved my point (and the fact they can’t give an optimum temp). Pretty much the same reason I don’t totally rely on your estimates on pool levels - just like climate change, it all varies from day to day and is pretty much dubious.
I do agree with RichS on that liberals are secular and tend to treat global warming as a religion. Basically worship of the earth is a form of idolatry.
I respect the earth and it will survive, its been here billions of years through many types of “ages”, a little co2 from plants or exhaust from a car or Al Gore’s jet isn’t going to end the world.
When you guys say the temp is rising by a degree or two, tell me the baseline/optimum temperature and I will be in your camp. It’s like trying to measure the lake level decline without knowing full pool!
Be calm, my children, be calm, everything is going to be fine.
December 13th, 2007 at 5:55 pm
One last thing on Global Warming - It’s just a ploy by the elite to take MORE of your MONEY and restrict your FREEDOM and LIBERTIES. Watch what people start proposing that will dig into your wallet and your constitutional rights. This, you can bank on and is the only outcome of the warming babel.
December 13th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Hey Peakman - As I said, this isn’t a forum about global warming & I’m not really that interested in debating it. I just find it amusing how riled up you true believers become when someone wants to debate with you about it. There are brilliant minds on both sides of the issue. Those who choose to only pay attention to the brilliant minds on one side of the issue can’t claim science is on their side. The scientific approach is unbiased and does not discard facts which don’t follow their dogma.
And sadly I can’t lay claim to original thought about the religion of global warming. It is just a position I agree with. But I’m no scientist so don’t believe me. You can argue with a professor at MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences and tell him how simple minded he is. http://www.cdfe.org/global_warming_religion.htm
Global warming isn’t my fight. I just find the parallels to religion amusing. And I find it that much more amusing that most of the true belivers are pretty fervently anti-religious so pointing out the parallels pisses them off doubly.
December 13th, 2007 at 10:39 pm
Sponge -
Approx 15.08 C., or approx 59 degrees, average world wide temperature is presently optimum. As always, there will be variation in local temperatures, because, as I’m sure you are by now well aware, the weather at a given time is anything but normal.
Your saying that you can’t measure the lake level decline without knowing the full pool? That cinches it for me. What is entertaining about your posts is how seriously you take yourself, when either you know nothing about what you write, or you pretend to know nothing.
I’m outta here. Have fun with your drought next summer.
December 14th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Peakman Says:
I’m outta here. Have fun with your drought next summer.
RichS Says “I have seen many smug - almost gleeful posts from liberals though.”
Thanks for helping prove my point peak. See ya.
December 14th, 2007 at 10:33 am
Sorry Peak, you gave me an average temp - swing and a miss, strike one. If you have fever you don’t tell the doctor on average my temp is…sorry, won’t fly…
By the way I TOLD YOU SO! Here we go…check this out…
Global Carbon Tax Urged at UN Climate Conference
BALI, Indonesia – A global tax on carbon dioxide emissions was urged to help save the Earth from catastrophic man-made global warming at the United Nations climate conference. “Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, told Inhofe EPW Press Blog following the panel discussion titled “A Global CO2 Tax.” Schwank is a consultant with the Switzerland based Mauch Consulting firm The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d5c3c93f-802a-23ad-4f29-fe59494b48a6&Issue_id=
Grab your wallets. By the way, Peak, I’m sending my bill to you - can you send me your address? you must at least know your address…
December 14th, 2007 at 11:11 am
I note that a grand total of .04 inches of rain fell at Buford dam yesterday. I guess the weather forecast 48 hours before this rain event wasn’t enough to whip Sonny P. into a prayer mood.
On a serious note, it seems that, with very few exceptions, everybody on this discussion thread is saying nearly the same thing: that there is an immediately pressing issue (a real water shortage) coupled with a longer-term problem, (governmental ennui or laissez-faire approach to smart policy and planning). The differences seem to be in the approach used to view the issues, which I would gently assert is a matter of respectful and open-minded communication…skills we all learned in the sand-box.
I would pick-up on the comments advanced by Tim that times of crisis do present a silver-lining…an opportunity to come together and act cohesively as a city and community.
BTW, I know a “Tim” doing post-doc work at Georgetown, who in addition to owning a top-notch “green” engineering firm, has multiple doctorates in global economic restructuring from Princeton, atmospheric geophysics from Cambridge (UK), and at least two masters from Harvard, an MBA, and Policy from the Kennedy School. He’s likely qualified to offer a few comments here.
Tell Tim that Paul says hello.
December 14th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Sponge, you conveniently ignored the scientific evidence collected by the Stanford Solar Center rendering your “the sun is causing global warming” theory to be simply juvenile. Good job…
December 14th, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Sponge - It doesn’t make sense to me that you advance the argument about optimum global temperatures, and then about carbon taxes. I ask you seriously and respectfully now: What point are you trying to make? Please put your cards on the table. The Peakman quoted number of 15.08 C is a widely accepted historical global average temperature, and any climate scientist will state that it is a sound climate bench-mark for global temperatures from which to measure recent anomolies.
Galileo’s thermometer is not remotely at issue. There are innumerable and accurate ways to calculate historical global conditions from the fossil records going back hundreds of thousands of years, and innumerable ways to compare the fossil-climate records with today’s record. But surely you know this.
I would argue that a carbon tax makes sense, if for no other reason than our dependency upon oil, principally from a volatile and unstable region of the world, needs to be reduced for multiple reasons….even if no politician has had the courage to advocate such (as it would have been political suicide.)
Consider the “heretical” policy position of a $.50/gl gasoline tax to fund a “Manhattan”-style program for new energy R&D, and recent energy price history:
9/12/01, world oil prices were approx $18/bbl (approx $26 inflation adjusted 2007 dollars).
Average US 9/12/01 unleaded gasoline prices were $1.56 (2007 no inflation adjustment), and would later fall to $1.12 by December 2001. Oil prices today have fluctuated between $90-$98/bbl in the last month, and average US unleaded gasoline prices between recently $3.05-$3.15. (DOE/EIA source, all price data.) For On the demand side, US consumption increased from 2001 19.6m-bbl/day to projected 21.2 2007 m-bbl/day.
THE POINT? For $.50/gl tax on gasoline (and other oil products) the US could have moved heaven and earth to become a global leader in R&D for fossil-fuel alternatives. Instead, we now pay more than double the 2001 price of gasoline, and fully treble the price for crude oil…payments to countries that are happy to produce oil at $15/bbl, who are now receiving $90/bbl…some of whom, btw, are countries actively fighting a terrorist ghost-war-by-proxy against the US. HOW STUPID IS ALL OF THIS?
So, all the SPONGE-SPEAK of oil and gas taxes being the worst thing in the world…its nonsense. High oil and gas prices are here. Where would you prefer that all the excess profits go: US R&D, or the pockets of terrorist-supporting oil-sheiks and oil monarchies?
As to high gas prices, I’m buying one of those 60 mpg hybrids. And if the electricity supply becomes shaky at my house, I’m plugging my hybrid into my house to run my household. Almost anybody would agree that’s smart.
December 14th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Dear Atlanta-people;
I write from the solidly blue state of Vermont, not to gloat, but to suggest that attempts to polarize and partisan-ize the drought issues and the comments coming in on this topic, cannot help you.
I’m moderately over-educated in various legal and scientific disciplines. From reading down the comments (and the lead story that stirred these discussions) suggests some very intelligent readers on this blog. The answer to so many human issues lies in harnessing the creative and intellectual energies of people.
Stop shouting at each other. Start listening to each other.
December 14th, 2007 at 5:42 pm
swing and a miss - strike two, swing and a miss - strike three. Global warming guys, you struck OUT. At least you are swinging the bat, however. Talk amongst yourselves if you must and pay your carbon taxes! How stupid.
December 14th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
Sponge -
I get it. You’re not here to contribute anything. You’re here just looking for a fight. I get it.
You’re an idiot, a coward, and a looser. You have nothing to say, and you’re no longer fooling anybody. Go back to your 24-pack of bud-lights, reminisce about the good ‘ol days when you and your klan of rabid, red-neck boys roamed the country-side in search of lynching parties. Grab yourself a couple of sheep or whatever it is your type dreams about. Leave the more strenuous intellectual activities to the folks who actually have a few functioning brain-cells.
December 14th, 2007 at 10:22 pm
Lake Lanier settles in at the 1051.00 level. Keeping fingers crossed that Saturday’s rain amounts to something.
December 15th, 2007 at 12:57 pm
Jangle, you are way out of line with that post. Since it’s apparent that you have now succumbed and also relegated to personal attacks, it is clear that something I said has painted you into a corner regarding your theories. I understand its frustrating. Based on what you wrote with anger, incorrect spelling and something about sheep, I believe you are probably the one who imbibed last evening with a 24 pack.
ps. Not looking for a fight, just credible postings by those who posed the the unverifiable premise of global warming. I did not bring up this topic, you and your ilk did. I won’t pay idiotic “co2 or carbon” taxes to the UN or anyone…its all about money and redistribution of people’s wealth towards socialism.
Here’s to Jingle Jangles next 24 pack! Cheers! Game over….
December 15th, 2007 at 11:08 pm
It looks a tad-bit hot on this thread. What’s going on here? It seems there are two ideas expressed here: many posts consisting of climate theories and related energy threads (which seems a far cry from the immediate matter which seems to be the lack of planning in the greater Atlanta metropolitan area) and those rebutting climate change. I don’t know any of the contributors here in this thread (at least I don’t think I do) so I don’t know what I’m stumbling into.
I will say that I am perplexed with the baseball metaphors. And I don’t get what the person above me is driving at, although they do seem to have an annoying agenda that is not clearly articulated. Liberal capitalist? However, I would be curious to learn his method of avoiding carbon taxes (if and when they come)? Not drive? Bio-diesel? I’ve been trying to figure out for years how to avoid taxes.
December 15th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
I would also add that the Jangle-post about energy prices and energy taxes is provocative, and I mean that in the intellectual sense. Real change is never easy. Nor pretty. Can you imagine after 1905 how disruptive the automobile industry was to the horse-and buggy industry? I, for one, am very excited about some of the events coming in the future.
December 16th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Here is what is meant (since you are having a hard time, droughtwatch, if you would read the threads, you would understand the metaphor) but written by 100 scientists this time…
Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
Dec. 13, 2007
His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General, United Nations
New York, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Secretary-General,
Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction
It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages….
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164002
Listed below are the names and credentials of the 100 scientists who signed the letter, again dispelling the myth that the man-made explanation behind global warming is an overwhelming”consensus” view.
Signatories of an open letter on the UN climate-conference… Read it and weep.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164004
It’s ALL about socialism and taking money and liberty from people, period!
once again, Game Over
December 16th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
Sponge - I just got here so why do you feel you need to be harsh with me? This is not what I expect from southern hospitality.
So you’ve got a difference of opinion, and rely on your own facts to support it. GREAT!! Where I come from, that’s called debate. Good debate is an art. Tying to beat people up because they have a different opinion than you is called thuggery. Thuggery shows that you’ve long ago lost the debate.
I recognize many the signatories on the open letter to the UN Climate Conference as the predictable circuit against climate change. But half of their point is absolutely correct: climate change has been a natural occurence in earth’s history, and some aspects of climate change (solar fluctuation, lont-duration precessional wobbles in earth’s rotation, volcanic outgasing) are beyond human control. What we can control is the human element to the story. You likely know the rest of the story but seek to deny its import: human activity has raised the global atmospheric CO2 levels from near-term historical average of approx 270 PPM to 384 presently. Rail against the UN if you must. I presume you vote. But if carbon taxes become reality, you’ll be paying, just like me. Learn to compete or get our of the way, lest you get run over.
Game over? The game is just starting. Unless you’re talking about the Braves, or soon to-be-Falcons. Their game is over.
PS - Where’s the misspelling in Jangle’s post?
December 17th, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Droughtwatch - When you say someone has an “annoying agenda that is not clearly articulated”, you really can’t fault them for being “harsh” with you. When Jangle called sponge “an idiot, a coward, and a looser” I think he was taking quite a bit more abuse than you did. And you can probably find the misspelling in my quote from Jangle if you try really really hard. (Now I’m being harsh with you too. LOL)
December 18th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
RichS - You’re right…”annoying agenda that is not clearly articulated” is stronger language than necessary. My apologies to this list.
However, I’ve read the above posts. It’s interesting how you consistently side with Sponge…through all his “gleeful” and “smug” comments while castigating the “liberal” opinions expressed here which he clearly disagrees with. You Sir, gain nothing in the way of credibility siding with a highly partisan opinion guilty of the same tone that you take issue with from liberals.
BTW - Isn’t the use of the phrase “game over” what Jigsaw said in the gore movie “Saw”? That’s a heckuva rhetorical device here.
December 18th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Dunno Droughtwatch - never saw the movie. Honestly I don’t know about global warming - I just believe there are two sides to the debate and like to poke fun at those who have closed their mind. I’m not even entirely sure you are one of them. Pretty sure Jangle is. Look at how furious he got that someone might question his belief system. You’ve gotta be able to laugh at this stuff. Anyway, I’m done with this thread. Join in on another. I will be happy to debate something that I care more about.
December 19th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I see Drought, it appears you can’t logically debate the subject (which I did not bring up on this post), so you try to attack and wedge against sensible people who side with me. Now that is “thuggery” and is a clear sign that you have lost the debate. By the way, I don’t watch gore movies whether they are Al’s or a genre so I don’t know what you mention above.
I too am done with this subject. I recently realized that by discussing it, I basically break one of the ten commandments, “thou shalt not have any god’s before Me”. Clearly, global warming is quasi idolatry/religious when the only question people ask about it is “Do you BELIEVE in global warming?”. To engage in discussion implies that it may exist. I only believe in one God and global warming religion doesn’t play. There is no proof that global warming exists, so therefore it falls into a “faith” category.
Merry Christmas…I am going to go put a sweater on, its getting downright cold today.
Sincerely, Thug
December 19th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Ok. That’s it.
Santa Claus Is NOT Coming! ’cause everyone here is B A D!
BAD!
…and Jesus didn’t join with SATAN to cause the Drought either, so there!
Just kidding, some of you are reasonable and humorous.
SAK
December 19th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
I agree, Don’t put god on the hot seat by accusing him of creating Global Warming. I mean, wouldn’t that be anthropomorphic, er I mean anthropogenic?,…grrshh…Ok I mean BOTH! (I sees dem brainies achurning!)….what the hell does he mean? ?pongie wanta sizpack? Caw!
I shall retire now from this boring and telling fray and simply wish beautiful, large raindrops for Everyone! Merry Winter Solstice!
December 20th, 2007 at 9:35 am
This thread has degenerated into a “debate” (term used loosely) reminiscent of something I learned long ago: that it is impossible to debate the existence of god when one’s opponent puts full faith and trust in ONLY the bible. Some people worship at the alter of science. Some worship only theology. Perhaps a rare few can do both.
Sponge believes in god, perhaps at the expense of science. I respect his right to do that, and it clears up a lot. So be it.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
Thug…errrrr Sponge I’m certain you would recognize the following sentiment as a similar theme among the more christian Christians: it doesn’t matter if you believe in Climate Change, climate change will still find you. Regardless.
And then this, from a source you may be familiar with:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1220/p04s01-wogi.html
Leaders from the US Catholic Conference of Bishops, the National Association of Evangelicals, the National Council of Churches, and the Union of Reform Judaism are pushing Congress and the Bush administration to fund efforts for poorer areas to adapt to drought, flooding, and other effects of climate change.
“Christians, noting the fact that most of the climate change problem is human induced, are reminded that when God made humanity he commissioned us to exercise stewardship over the earth and its creatures…. Climate change is the latest evidence of our failure to exercise proper stewardship, and constitutes a critical opportunity for us to do better.”
You’ll have a hell of a lot shorter wait to see real climate change than you will the second coming of Christ. It’s fine with me that you put your faith in the bible. But suggesting that there is a legitimate debate going on here is like arguing that up is down, the sun rises in the east, bad is good, Jesus is Satan. When in it comes to facts, you and Sonny are cut from the same cloth. Let us prey….errrr pray.
“Jingle” Jangle
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Hey Jingle, I am back from Christmas holiday break. I see you guys continued to talk without me. Have you seen this article that is out? I know it’s a russian scientist but I am sure they believe the same scientific stuff you do…And, I just finished buying all my new light colored shirts, shorts and swimwear for the coming heatwave - oh well, I kept the reciepts…
“A cold spell soon to replace global warming”
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20080103/94768732.html
You guys are hilarious!
January 8th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Sponge - Don’t worry about the receipts. You’ll be using that summer gear by February.
Who’s the lone Russian scientists who’s forecast of global cooling has you all excited? The guy’s theory must carry a lot of weight because it has been endorsed by the entire scientific world of….SPONGE!…who believes in Ron Paul, and Santa Clause.
Sponge is hilarious.
January 8th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Sponge-pants.
Welcome back from Christmas break! I’m sure your village is glad to have it’s id*ot back. Now we can all get back to business.
Thanks for the link. Interesting theory. Hhhmmmm. I wonder why the rest of the scientific community hasn’t been smart enough to recognize the effects discussed here. Ohhhh right, because they’re bogus.
The article itself is internally contradictory. Sorokhtin is talking far ourside his depth, whatever it is. I’ll keep a watch out for any Nobel Peace Prizes for Sorokhtin, but I think he’ll have stiff competition in his category from G. W. Bush.
Give me a Jingle sometime on private email if you are enjoying this conversation.
Jangle