GolfHos

Not really [Politics/Religion] but just in case the thread goes that way:

Am I living in a good place or would closer to the mountains in the plains area be better? I know there are a lot of factors but this was just one of those stupid things that popped into my head.

Minnesota is full. Sorry.   ;) ;D

I should probably be nice though because we'll need a place to stay once the glaciers come. Dennis Quaid can't save us all.

Just in case you're serious. And the lack of goofy emoticons makes me think you are.

It sounds the real damage to the continental US is a 100-200 hundred years in the future. That is not to say that there aren't people seriously suffering now, northern native tribes near the north pole etc.

Both poles are changing and melting, you mess with the food chain and you get into trouble.

Soylent Green burger anyone.

Half serious, who am I kidding I am never really serious. I was just wondering to myself what the world might be like and where the best place to live will be. Just sort of question to start a somewhat edumicated and entertaining discussion.

 [sm_laughatyou] 


I thought we had The Day After Tomorrow Last weekend.  Whoa Nellie!  That *feces* was cold.

Imagine a diaspora like the one from New Orleans occurring from every major population center throughout the US coastline.

I don't know about moving to the mountains just yet, but I'd certainly recommend a bullish position on highland real estate.

(http://www.ekasbury.com/word/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/pluto-planet.jpg)

[/serious] I just watched a show the other night that touched on this topic. At one point they showed where the water would reach for 1m to 10m rise in sea levels. By "they" I mean scientists who study such things.

This may be hyperbole but I'm not sure most folks can begin to imagine the implications. It is an ominous scenario. [/serious]

global warming, pfft. [sm_bs] :tinfoil:

I totally agree.  This is serious facking ship.  A lot of people who think about a one meter sea rise pity the poor in Bangladesh and fail to realize it will displace tens of millions of residents from US coastal areas.  And the greater the rise the more millions who will be affected.

The most logical thing I've seen lately is the idea of looking at how New Orleans was affected and its people displaced and imagine that happening over and over and over again.  Maybe sooner than later.

The projections for a while have been this won't be evident until the end of this century.  But this timing is being revisited because of the acceleration of ice melting at the poles and at Greenland is much more rapid than previously assumed.  As a scientific issue, how quickly we'll see the sea rise seems the hottest right now in the climatology field.  no pun intended.

life after man   was quite the interesting show also

Consulting the all-knowing almost accurate Google - seems I'm about 550ft. above sea level at my domicile.  Safe or no?

As far as staying dry,  [sm_thumbsup2]

Down the list of your worries though {see SoCM's post above}. Those people will have to go somewhere and there are a lot of them.

This book (http://www.amazon.com/World-Without-Us-Alan-Weisman/dp/0312347294/ref=pd_bbs_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1201489895&sr=8-1) is high on my list to read. It came out last summer and I saw him on The Daily Show. Sounded very interesting.

Are you kidding - I'm counting on it!  My application and interview tactics will make Hooters jealous  ;D

 ;D

The question that came into my mind with this show was, where are the 6 billion bodies, something wiped out all of humanity but left all the animals? I kept trying to read a rapture like scenario, but that doesn't work either, an alleged rapture takes only the believers.


I watched (again) the history channel show that you were referring to earlier, and it touched on SOCM's point of the ice caps melting faster that previously estimated. If both ice caps melt it would add, I think the scientist said, 40 feet to the oceans levels, which in the US would wipe out most of Florida and your coastal cities would be devastated, Manhattan, the Gulf Coast. Worldwide it would displace (they estimate) maybe 250 million people, Bangladesh would be covered, London would be under water, major cities in China. Hurricane Katrina displaced something like 100,000 people, imagine if it reached 1 billion.

If the current picture of the antarctic ice cap compared to the picture 20 years ago doesn't scare you, nothing will.

Here's an interesting map (http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/23/us/24katrina_graphic.html) that shows the diaspora, how people had relocated a year and longer after Katrina.

One big destructive storm is a bit different situation from permanently flooded population center, in the sense that one can return and rebuild their homes. 

Still, one can imagine a situation where after the storm moves on, there is no real estate to return to.

IIRC, and I could be wrong, but most models predicting end of the century sea levels (less than a meter higher than present) are based entirely on thermal effects--warmer global temperatures causing a warmer sea to expand--and don't take into account an increase in sea volume due to the melting of stored water (e.g., ice in poles, Greenland).

I think the reason is they simply lacked the data to accurately predict how much melting would correlate with a specified atmospheric temperature rise.

This accelerated melting that seems evident right now is providing some missing data, causing the geoscientists to go back to the blackboard and run some more calculations.  My sense is that in another couple of years, another consensus will have been settled upon, and the subsequent predictions and probabilities will be sound much more alarming than they do right now.

The head-in-the-sanders will have no place to hide.

(http://www.mnwest.edu/uploads/pics/00-mnwelcome.jpg)

until everyone fleeing below overruns your property, kills you, and takes it for their own . then flees when it gets underwater
 ;)

Isn't that the plot of Machete?