Archived Scientists say California hasnt been this dry in 500 years (washingtonpost.com)
submitted ago by brody9311
Posted by: brody9311
Posting time: 5.2 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 2/12/2017 1:51:00 AM
Views: 547
SCP: 33
39 upvotes, 6 downvotes (87% upvoted it)
Archived Scientists say California hasnt been this dry in 500 years (washingtonpost.com)
submitted ago by brody9311
Sort: Top
[–] voat-ist 1 point 3 points 4 points (+4|-1) ago
So here is my problem. Start with a fact like "hasn't been this dry in 500 years." Got it. So 500 years ago it was this dry and not since then. Got it.
Then weasel in some really weird global warming ideas...
"A study by scientists at NASA and Columbia University said California was one of several states in the Southwest facing a mega-drought that could last up to 30 years if greenhouse gas emissions are not dramatically curtailed by 2050."
Wait, what? I thought it was this dry 500 years ago. Was that global warming as well? But lets set that aside. How will curtailing carbon in 2050 prevent the next 30 years from being a drought? 2050 is 35 years away. We could stop all carbon emissions in 2049 and it will have absolutely no effect on the next 30 years environment.
I believe in global warming. I believe humans have something to do with it. I do not understand why we have to weasel it into a conversation this way.
[–] NoneOfYourBeezwax ago
The worst thing is the "boy who cried wolf" issue, but I suspect that point has already passed.
[–] crabby_rabbit 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
at what point does it stop being a "drought" - as in a brief dry period - and start being "it just doesn't rain in California anymore and that's how the climate is there now"?
[–] uncommitted 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Firefighters agree.
[–] 9-11 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
its sad on all accounts, but just think at all the profits made.
[–] uncommitted 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
Well then it's not sad on all accounts!
[–] [deleted] 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
[–] theoldguy ago
That's what the Unabomber said.
[–] darthskids ago
Between global warming, loss of diversity in the food chain, ocean acidification, etc, we may well on our way to negative population growth and lots of it.
[–] ActuallyNot ago
Population growth is locked in for a short time, but it is already negative where education is strong.
More important is to move away from fossil fuels as an energy source. And we now need to sequester CO2 from the atmosphere as well. Planting forests doesn't work if the burn. We need something permanent.
[–] Hobob 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Give us 50 years, we'll get Mad Max all over this state.
[–] psychosomatic 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
that is a scary fucked up thought
[–] DyingBloodbirds 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
He said California not Florida.
[–] Drenki 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
This guy isn't selling anything and seems to know wtf he's talking about. Scary if true: https://youtu.be/OsYG5emdZp8
Anyone with a background in geography/meterology who can comment on the cloud formations he describes? I'd really like to believe it isn't true, but if you've ever really looked into Nikola Tesla's projects, then you might have a starting point for how it could be possible.