307 replies to this topic

[MID]

_{It actually is amazing just how often you find people making excuses to find doom and gloom, and make a simple thing seem like a crisis...}

[Doug1o29]

OverSword, on 25 July 2012 - 07:39 PM, said:

This same thing happened in the 1930's.  North America suffered from a drought much worse than the current drought.  Guess what, eventually it rained.

There have been nine drought cycles in the central US since 1650.  Droughts are part of our climate, something we live with.  The worst drought in the tree ring record occurred in the 1670s.  Four consecutive years with a near-total lack of rainfall.  Along the Cimarron River, the sand dunes became active again.  Around here, trees died and the unprotected soil washed into the bottom lands, filling stream channels and rerouting streams.  Rocky canyons were filled and became meandering sluggish backwaters.

The worst drought of the 20th century, from the rainfall perspective was the 1950s drought which climaxed in 1956.  The Dust Bowl was dry, but it its effects were mostly man-made - favorable economics during the 1920s encouraged farmers to break out land that shouldn't have been ploughed.  When drought destroyed farmers crops, the government sat on its collective keisters, hoping that a free market would bring rain.  Sound crazy?  The Republicans still think that way - actually, its just the wingnuts, but sane, responsible conservatives are an endangered species.

Anyway, we had droughts during the Civil War, the Gay Nineties, the Dust Bowl, the 1950s, the late 1970s and now in 2001 to present.  Droughts aren't anything new around here.  But they are getting gradually worse.  This one is already the longest-duration drought in the record and we haven't reached the maximum point yet.
Doug

[MID]

Quote

The worst drought of the 20th century, from the rainfall perspective was the 1950s drought which climaxed in 1956.  The Dust Bowl was dry, but it its effects were mostly man-made - favorable economics during the 1920s encouraged farmers to break out land that shouldn't have been ploughed.  When drought destroyed farmers crops, the government sat on its collective keisters, hoping that a free market would bring rain.  Sound crazy?  
The Republicans still think that way - actually, its just the wingnuts, but sane, responsible conservatives are an endangered species.

I guess we know who we're talking to here!



When "Republican" equates to "Conservative", I'll let you know
So far. no joy.


.

[MID]

Doug1o29, on 27 July 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

The worst drought of the 20th century, from the rainfall perspective was the 1950s drought which climaxed in 1956.  The Dust Bowl was dry, but it its effects were mostly man-made - favorable economics during the 1920s encouraged farmers to break out land that shouldn't have been ploughed.  When drought destroyed farmers crops, the government sat on its collective keisters, hoping that a free market would bring rain.  Sound crazy?  The Republicans still think that way - actually, its just the wingnuts, but sane, responsible conservatives are an endangered species.

I wonder what the government is expected to do when a drought hits farmers in the midwest, where droughts are nearly annual events?

Saying that the government sat on its collective kiesters and hoped the free market would bring rain is as crazy as the Democrats saying that Romney was responsible for the death of a woman because her husband lost his job due to Romney closing a plant, and the husband losing his  health benefits.  She was diagnosed with terminal cancer weeks after, and died a short time later..all because of Romney.

Both statements are not only ridiculous and false on all count, but their dispicably inept, and weak in a degree that bears no further discussion.



An idiot contention

[Br Cornelius]

MID, on 09 August 2012 - 12:11 AM, said:

I wonder what the government is expected to do when a drought hits farmers in the midwest, where droughts are nearly annual events?

Saying that the government sat on its collective kiesters and hoped the free market would bring rain is as crazy as the Democrats saying that Romney was responsible for the death of a woman because her husband lost his job due to Romney closing a plant, and the husband losing his  health benefits.  She was diagnosed with terminal cancer weeks after, and died a short time later..all because of Romney.

Both statements are not only ridiculous and false on all count, but their dispicably inept, and weak in a degree that bears no further discussion.



An idiot contention

The point is that the Republicans and Conservatives have vedtoed effective action on climate change in the face of the overwhelming evidence - for ideological reasons.

Br Cornelius

[Doug1o29]

MID, on 29 July 2012 - 01:46 AM, said:

When "Republican" equates to "Conservative", I'll let you know
So far. no joy.

There may be a couple good Republicans left in Congress, but the "Tea Party" is rapidly driving them out, or making sure they don't get re-elected..  Ideological purity.  Maybe it'll work, and then again, ...
Doug

[Doug1o29]

MID, on 09 August 2012 - 12:11 AM, said:

I wonder what the government is expected to do when a drought hits farmers in the midwest, where droughts are nearly annual events?

Ever hear of crop insurance?  It's a government-run program and the only thing keeping some farms afloat.

What the government finally did after the Dust Bowl when it was apparent that the free market couldn't fix the problems was to create the Soil Erosion Service, renamed the Soil Conservation Service and now the Farm Service Agency.  It appropriated three million dollars to a program to stabilize the Great Plains by improved agricultural methods and planting a windbreak to run from Canada to Mexico.  A portion of that windbreak actually got planted and is now the Nebraska National Forest, one of the smallest National Forests (Chataqua NF is smaller.).

On the day that Congress was holding hearings on whether to establish SES/SCS, a giant dust storm blew into town.  The guy who was presenting the case for the new agency opened the window and simply pointed outside to the reason it was needed.  The bill passed.

Quote

Saying that the government sat on its collective kiesters and hoped the free market would bring rain is as crazy as the Democrats saying that Romney was responsible for the death of a woman because her husband lost his job due to Romney closing a plant, and the husband losing his  health benefits.  She was diagnosed with terminal cancer weeks after, and died a short time later..all because of Romney.

Both statements are not only ridiculous and false on all count, but their dispicably inept, and weak in a degree that bears no further discussion.



An idiot contention

I don't have the facts on that story about Romney and the woman's death, but lack of health insurance is correlated with early death in the US.  Lack of health insurance does kill.

What the government can do about heading off a drought is to adopt tillage practices that sequester carbon in the soil.  It is already encouraging the use of native grasses and shrubs on Conservation Reserve land.  The Farm Bill comes up for renewal every five years.  Next time, cost-share and other agricultural benefits could be made contingent on the application of these practices.  Seven years from right now, we could be applying these to the land.  The legal and financial machinery for this already exists.

What the government can do is to allow home owners who cannot obtain water at their homes to walk away from their mortgages.  They just hand the keys to the bank and that's it - no bad credit reports, no attempts at collection.  It's over with.  Of course, they would lose their equity, but everything has a cost.  Once the banks understand that they will have to cover the losses from their bad decisions, they will quit writing 30-year mortgages in areas that will be out of water in 20 years (Colorado Front Range).

What Federal, state and local governments can do is conserve water by replacing obsolete and decaying infrastructure, like water mains and storm water drains.  My city loses 30% of its processed water through broken and leaking pipes.  After 25 years of dithering, they finally floated a tax referendum to pay for repairs and replacement of a system they knew was inadequate when they built it.

What the Federal government could do is develop some of our native plants into agricultural crops.  The imported plums are thirsty trees, requiring lots of water.  Our native plums are edible, sweet and very small, but they can live here without irrigation.  The Crop Service needs to breed or engineer a plum with a fleshier fruit.  Same thing applies to the Desert Apricot in the Four Corners Area and the Service berry in north Idaho.  There's a tomatoe that lives in Central America that is salt tolerant.  But it has a small fruit.  If its salt-tolerant gene could be introduced to a bigger, better-tasting tomatoe, like the Beef-Steak Tomatoe, we could grow them on salty desert soils.

If we suffer the consequences of serious drought, it's our own fault.

The idiot contention is that we shouldn't do anything to help ourselves.
Doug

Edited by Doug1o29, 09 August 2012 - 02:01 PM.

[MID]

Br Cornelius, on 09 August 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

The point is that the Republicans and Conservatives have vedtoed effective action on climate change in the face of the overwhelming evidence - for ideological reasons.

Br Cornelius

Isn't it also amazing how common sense, and a genuine concern for the economic success of America is so often, by a certain non-conservative faction, spoken of as being ideological, rather than what it is:

Common Sense, and a path to the America we once had.

It's also amazing that real scientists haven't seen this overwhelming evidence, and indeed consider it underwhelming in the majority.

And there we are again, reciting the party  line--that somehow, we humans are capable of somehow affecting this amazing planet, and its climate,  and of course, can combat the "climate change" that we caused(!), (You know, climate change..that natural Earth process that cycles around in huge segments of time(thousands of generations pass before one cycle completes) , driven by a star that's fairly close by and which represents unimaginable power?).

As ludicrous as the idea is, still, it's pop, man!  Al Gore can shriek, and a whole bunch of folks buy into this moronic crap.

If you like them, go buy some of those Compact Flourescent Lamps and stockpile them for when reason  prevails and an industry isn't totally dismantled by 2014 because common sense will prevail and enforce the repeal of the 100W incandescent bulb ban.

Personally, I have a bunch of incandescent bulbs around,   Supports the manufacturers while I can, and leaves me with a much less expensive light source than one of Al's curly, expensive models...

Edited by MID, 09 August 2012 - 11:06 PM.

[Bavarian Raven]

Climate change has always been happening - duh. It's the human contribution that is the question

[Br Cornelius]

MID, on 09 August 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

Isn't it also amazing how common sense, and a genuine concern for the economic success of America is so often, by a certain non-conservative faction, spoken of as being ideological, rather than what it is:

Common Sense, and a path to the America we once had.

It's also amazing that real scientists haven't seen this overwhelming evidence, and indeed consider it underwhelming in the majority.

And there we are again, reciting the party  line--that somehow, we humans are capable of somehow affecting this amazing planet, and its climate,  and of course, can combat the "climate change" that we caused(!), (You know, climate change..that natural Earth process that cycles around in huge segments of time(thousands of generations pass before one cycle completes) , driven by a star that's fairly close by and which represents unimaginable power?).

As ludicrous as the idea is, still, it's pop, man!  Al Gore can shriek, and a whole bunch of folks buy into this moronic crap.

If you like them, go buy some of those Compact Flourescent Lamps and stockpile them for when reason  prevails and an industry isn't totally dismantled by 2014 because common sense will prevail and enforce the repeal of the 100W incandescent bulb ban.

Personally, I have a bunch of incandescent bulbs around,   Supports the manufacturers while I can, and leaves me with a much less expensive light source than one of Al's curly, expensive models...

Same old BS from a conservative - why am I surprised at this stage. You are living proof that the Conservatives are Luddites

Br Cornelius

[MysticStrummer]

I just don't understand why the concept is so hard to grasp. Our planet's atmosphere is a mix of chemicals. Human activity is adding chemicals to that mix, including some that don't even occur in nature. You really think that has no possible consequence?

[MysticStrummer]

Oops double post

Edited by MysticStrummer, 10 August 2012 - 08:02 AM.

[docyabut2]

A hot summer we fear gobal warming, a cold winter we fear ice age:) I guess there always been climate changes in the earth, weather man was around, or not.

[Doug1o29]

docyabut2, on 10 August 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

A hot summer we fear gobal warming, a cold winter we fear ice age:) I guess there always been climate changes in the earth, weather man was around, or not.

We need never fear another ice age.  We know how to warm the earth - the output from one CFC plant is enough to head off an ice age.  It is warming we can't control.

The central US has had nine drought cycles since 1650.  The last four have been getting progressively worse.  Measured by precip, not temp.  The drought cycles are just weather; it's the "getting worse" part that is the climate change.


The denialists like to attack climate models - like there are only two or three of them (There are over 300.).  Global models now work pretty well.  But regional models leave a lot to be desired - so denialists try to paint all climate models with the same regional-model brush.  Because the general public does not understand the difference, they can get away with it.

But when all regional models predict the same thing, what does that tell you?  They are all predicting drying in the American Southwest and northern Mexico.  We're already on the edge of a desert and further drying will send us over the edge.  My town gets its water from Kaw, Blackwell and MacMurty reservoirs.  They are all runoff reservoirs.  City officials are worried about the low water levels in them right now and have instituted water conservation measures (Last year, MacMurtry dropped below the intake level.).  If it gets dryer, the day is coming when all three will be dry - and that means no water for any purpose.  Suddenly, you can't get a drink or wash the clothes or cook dinner.  You have to leave, move somewhere where there is water.  And that will turn most of western Oklahoma into ghost towns.  Not to mention devastating the livestock and farming industries (Conservation Reserve land has already been released in an attempt to provide ranchers with feed for their animals; and the current drought is the fifth-worst one we can see in the tree ring record and pretty minor compared with what is coming in another 35 to 50 years.).

The American Midwest is the breadbasket of the world.  It will be hit hard.  What do you think that will mean to prices in your local grocery store?  Or worse yet, to the people who can't buy food when America pulls its farm products off the international market?  I'm wondering if this year's drought is about to turn America into a net importer of food.

I expect the shift in Oklahoma will come suddenly, over perhaps three to five years.  Three years of drought will deplete reservoirs and set up a high-risk fire condition.  Massive wildfires like we had two years ago will destroy the grass cover, allowing wind erosion of the soil (This year's fires are nothing to sneeze at.).  The dunes will begin to move again, preventing plants from growing back (Most of western Oklahoma is covered by grassed-over sand dunes.).  Lack of water in the reservoirs will force people to leave in droves (A mild version of this happened during the Dust Bowl.).  I think Oklahoma has one more wet period left and I expect it will begin in 2017, lasting through 2026.  After that, we will see from five to 20 years of "normal" weather and then go into another drought.  That is based on what drought cycles have done in the past allowing for a slight increase in drought intensity.

I think our "grace period" is about to run out.  Deforestation of the American west has already begun.  Bark beetle attacks are getting worse throughout the country and in Canada.  We are at 400 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere right now and increasing about 3ppm per year.  450ppm is considered the threshhold of severe ecosystem disruption - the point when we can expect to see ecosystem collapses.  Do the arithmetic:  we're 16 years from reaching that point.
Doug

Edited by Doug1o29, 10 August 2012 - 01:35 PM.

[Br Cornelius]

docyabut2, on 10 August 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

A hot summer we fear gobal warming, a cold winter we fear ice age:) I guess there always been climate changes in the earth, weather man was around, or not.

You may fear these things but I certainly don't. They are all evidence of climate change which is an aspect of global warming.

Br Cornelius