South Florida Wants to Be the 51st State Because of Climate Change Worries – NationalJournal.com
South Florida wants to stop sea level rise by forming a new state. Makes perfect sense if you have the IQ of a turnip.
Just one minor problem – sea level is barely rising in South Florida. What they are observing is subsidence, which has nothing to do with the climate.
Reblogged this on Eatgrueldog and commented:
Idiots…
Please desist from insulting turnips.
Most turnips are far more intelligent than South Floridans, and they have feelings too!
+1
OK. Brussels Sprouts
That is the EU approved variety I assume.
If they would get rid of that gaudy gold jewelry South Beach might not subside so fast.
If South Floridans moved to North Florida for a year, the state would reach a tipping point and South Florida would start rising again, relative to the sea level. Just like Guam did.
🙂
The move to separate seems to be the brainchild of Walter Harris, vice mayor of South Miami.
Walter is clueless about Earth’s climate and oceans so should stick to vice, something he likely knows about.
Sorry off topic but found interesting, especially the graph where amount of land used for agriculture starts to decline – 1998- (I reckon its because the climate is so benign)
http://blog.nature.org/science/2014/06/18/global-agriculture-land-sustainability-deforestation-foodsecurity/
“I found that, while the global food supply per person has increased over the last 15 years, we have simultaneously decreased the total amount of land we’re using to produce it.
Here’s why my finding could be read as good news:
? It means that, compared to a few decades ago, agriculture is the driver behind less terrestrial habitat loss. For example, in the Eastern United States, significantly more agricultural lands are being converted to forest than vice versa (Loveland and Acevedo 2006.)
? It also means that the overall intensification of agriculture — producing more crops in the same or even smaller areas — is continuing. And intensification is sometimes a process that can be made environmentally sustainable, by reducing both the use of resource-intensive inputs (e.g., fertilizer, pesticides, and fresh water) and negative outputs (e.g., water pollution and soil loss).
It also means that the widespread assumption among many environmentalists that agriculture is just chewing up more and more habitat at a faster rate each year is simply not correct”
Interesting: particularly with regard to the year 1998. Shortly thereafter the CAGW rhetoric commenced. Malthus based his carrying capacity theory on agricultural output. We have continuously expanded output per acre but also increased acreage at the same time. Perhaps CO2 was a driver in the increase?
If we were able to increase output and decrease acreage it would force a shift in strategy for the Malthusian leadership; certainly a reduction in CO2 would counter both its own benefits on agricultural output and with less acreage used it would have an compounded effect.
I live in Upstate NY. I own a farm.
What has killed farming up here is free trade. For example, the value of my sheep dropped from $250 a head to $50 a head so no more sheep. Whatever we grow up here, it is now undersold thanks to transporting food all over the planet.
So we are all doing the forestry thing instead.
The forestry thing went down the tubes when it turned out Barry Bonds didn’t really hit all those home runs because of maple bats. Everybody was making money selling off their maple trees and then…….it was steroids.
Florida has had no temp change either……
There is no math in Libstania. Just feelings.
It is a sad thing to me, that so many turnips/Brussels sprouts get elected.
The “normal” people do not seem to care, and then they are forced to put up with this nonsense
I have to skip so many articles because I am getting saturated with and can only tolerate so much in your face stupidity.
I do not think students I taught (on average) over the years were so decidedly lacking.
Is this the new norm?
Children just won’t know what sanity looks like, anymore.
They smoke jahoochie. Global warming is all about potheads. Did you smell the climate march in NYC? It smelled like a Cheech and Chong movie.
I’ma thinkin that South Florida is a Democratic stronghold and there is a strong relationship between democrats and race baiting, fear mongering, shallow thinking, emotionally crippled, I can l need to tell you how to live your life even though I can’t live mine, socialist, half-wits.
This is less about sea level rise and more about keeping their tax dollars closer to home. Of course, they’re also promoting University of Central Florida to their to public university.
But would it be renamed to University Of North Southern Florida?
Translation; They want to offset Republican advances in the Senate by gaining two more Democrap votes for stupid.
We should give it to Castro… there are more Cubans in Miami than anything else (except illegals)… and very few native Americans. We joke here in Florida that the last American to leave Miami is tasked with bringing our flag with him.
I think the sea level thing is something that can sway people on this issue. I remember reading a story about climate change on some mainstream site with a forum, and one of the true believers was posting charts and graphs. One of the charts she posted showed the increase in sea level since ~1850. When I pointed out that there was zero “acceleration” in the rate of sea level rise after 1950 when CO2 levels started climbing, she was a bit taken aback and said it was an interesting point that she couldn’t explain and would have to research some more.
I don’t see how anyone can look at charts of sea level taken at a variety of sites around the globe (showing an increase in a straight line for 100+ years), without realizing that it has nothing to do with CO2. People may dispute atmospheric temperature readings at a handful of sites as cherry picked, but people intuitively understand that the sea level at various sites around the globe should all rise and fall in unison.
Good grief.
I read articles like this, and I think – “If ebola was to take hold and kill of a few hundred million people, would it really be a bad thing?”
Quite apart from the total non-event of sea level rise in Southern Florida, I can see that the potential Sea-Mountain east of the Philippines is still there and presumably still stacking up. I wonder how long it will be before we can get a few photos of this startling feature of the Nartural World? It must already be providing some good surfing potential.
http://www.cavemandoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/SeaSaltMound.jpg
Surf’s Up in the Philippines!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p5pUjCH3os
Nice barrels!
These people in south Florida don’t seem too concerned:
http://www.bdcnetwork.com/arquitectonicas-hairpin-shaped-tower-breaks-ground-miami
I actually think the building is kind of ugly; but little regard for the so-called catastrophic sea-level rise.
I call it The Ski Jump.
When the snow reaches Florida, they’ll have their fun park right there! If you own an apartment on the 42 floor, strap on the board, step out and woosh, you flying to your office across town!! Need to work on the landings. All in all – It’s an engineering marvel.
NPR had a story on our local station here in Seattle last night (10/23/14) on how historic Boston is only 3 or 4 feet about sea level and to be drowned by rising seas by the end of this century. The story focused on a plan developed by a local group to allow the seas to rise and implement a canal system similar to Venice. There was a glib, passing reference to the fact that historic Boston is built on fill but no dots connected that this is negatively affecting local land elevations. One dissenting view noted that none of the historic buildings were designed to cope with submerged foundations. The same dissenter observed that sewer outfalls & other infrastructure would also not function if submerged. Here is a link to the story they were discussing: http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-10-22/climate-change-bostons-future-could-be-filled-gondolas. This is relevant to this Florida post in that I could quickly observe from the same map that local sea level rise is at best 6 mm/yr. If that is true, then by 2100, the purported sea level rise would be about 1.7 feet. Or rise 3 feet in 152 years (the year 2166).
The City of South Miami (who conducted this vote for itself, not all of South Florida) is a neighborhood, pop 12,000, and a bit of a Democrat stronghold (67% D) surrounded by highly conservative Cuban-American neighborhoods who know Communism when they see it and generally want no part of anything that leans that direction. So that little burg to demands control of the entire southern half of the state because, well, that’s the hard part. Because their little enclave is nowhere near the beach? Because it makes perfect (zero) sense to draw state lines right through the middle of two of Florida’s larger cities? (Tampa, Orlando). And what exactly is the connection between someone else’s neighborhood being maybe-in-my-dreams threatened by rising seas and my claim to half the state? Sounds like CAGW logic to me.
Being a turnip from Miami, I follow the biannual surge of interest in SLR, which coincides with King Tides. Since this year there was no effect what-so-ever, I conclude it is about getting federal or state funds to upgrade the Miami Beach sewer system for which the residents are too cheap to do without a subsidy.
We even have distinguished earth scientists that apparently don’t know the difference between maximum and average when it comes to the already exaggerated predictions of SLR.