Katrina and New Orleans

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 07:54:45

So, tell me why there is a global temperature rise on earth ?
Termits farts ?
I'm waiting for YOUR arguments.

The Moon is somewhat cheese-colored, therefore it is made of cheese.

No, you can't just dismiss that conclusion, prove to me that it isn't.

If you want to know what I think the singular cause for climate change is. . . it isn't a single cause. The Earth is a complex, self-regualting system. If you look at the history of the planet you find that dramatic climate shifts happen at regular intervals. Even in the absence of human industry. Just for "recent" examples, there is the Medeival Warm Period during which Europe was warmer than today for centuries. It was followed by a mini-ice age, which we've recently come out of. Climate change is a fact of life on Earth, suddenly blaming this particular instance on SUVs and factories doesn't make any sense. It's politically useful and psychologically more fulfilling perhaps, but it's based as much in faith as science.

Don't write off those termite farts though, a colony can kick out alot of flatulence.

BWhite · 2005-08-31 08:46:07

Okay, okay. I am too busy today to argue global warming.

How about cancelling improvements to the exact levee that broke because of the need to fund our operations in Iraq? :cry:

But the cost of the Iraq war forced the Bush administration to order the New Orleans district office not to begin any new studies, and the 2005 budget no longer includes the needed money, he said.
The Senate was seeking to restore some of the SELA funding cuts for 2006. But now it's too late. One project that a contractor had been racing to finish this summer was a bridge and levee job right at the 17th Street Canal, site of the main breach. The levee failure appears to be causing a human tragedy of epic proportions:

It appears this work was to be done in previous years but for funding cuts. Fighting a generations long global war and cutting taxes?

Guns and butter failed for LBJ and it will fail for GWB.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 09:05:27

How about cancelling improvements to the exact levee that broke because of the need to fund our operations in Iraq?

Riiiight. We all know the hurricane was caused by global warming that Bush won't do anything about and <gasp> we couldn't build levies becasue of the war in Iraq. What an evil bastard that Bush is.

First off, it doesn't hold up on either count. Second, you guys on the Left have to realize that trying to turn every bad thing that happens into political gold is hurting you. It really turns people off, it's like clapping in glee when someone gets hit by a car because you can act concerned for the cameras as they die on the pavement.

Hurricanes happen, it's just a fact. This last one was by no means unusual. Cities built on flood plains will flood. Trying to imply that a study on a single levee being cancelled somehow made the damage worse and that it's the direct result of the Iraq War is political propagandizing at its clumsiest. It's like an SNL skit. But funnier.

BWhite · 2005-08-31 09:17:20

Cobra, the Army Corps of Engineers is massively on record that they needed more money for levee work but the demands of the Iraq war meant money wasn't available. 2002, 2003, 2004 & 2005.

My solution? Honesty about the costs of Iraq and levy the taxes needed to pay for the war and levee maintenance.

= = =

PS - - your focus on a tiny portion of the issue (new studies) demonstrates that on the larger issue you are simply OUT OF AMMO!

= = =

Big, big picture? Maybe New Orleans should have been abandoned 50 years ago.

Encroachment into natural wetlands (a GOP curse word) enhances flooding damage. Keeping the Mississippi flowing along the route we "desire" is expensive.

Paying for a war and cutting taxes simply will allow vital infrastructure to deteriorate causing massive future harm.

C M Edwards · 2005-08-31 09:42:45

How about cancelling improvements to the exact levee that broke because of the need to fund our operations in Iraq?
Hurricanes happen, it's just a fact. This last one was by no means unusual. Cities built on flood plains will flood. Trying to imply that a study on a single levee being cancelled somehow made the damage worse and that it's the direct result of the Iraq War is political propagandizing at its clumsiest.

I must concur. New Orleans has known for nearly a century that its levee system was inadequate to withstand a storm of this magnitude. By the late 1990's, parents in New Orleans were no longer using only ghosts and goblins to frighten children. "The category five hurricane will get you!" was becoming the scarry story of choice. Blaming Katrina on the Bush administration is completely illogical. It could just as easily be blamed on the Johnson administration - Andrew, not Lyndon.

There was much that could have been done to prevent it over the past century, but the Clinton and Bush administrations' were the first federal efforts to even try since the 1940's.

PS: Don't count on the pumps to save New Orleans. Most are currently sitting idle until the Lake Pontchartrain levee breaches can be repaired, because, in the epitome of engineering oversights, they pump out into Lake Pontchartrain.

PPS: And have since before George W. Bush was born.

BWhite · 2005-08-31 09:50:42

Nuance is everything. The Bush Administration did NOT cause Katrina and there is plenty of blame to go around.

Policies that support the commercial development of LA wetlands enhanced the damage Katrina caused. More attention and money is needed to enlarge the Mississippi watershed region to better absorb floodwaters.

Levees need continual maintenance. Ask the Dutch. Short shrifting infrastructure is not sustainable. BOTH parties are responsible for that. Since 2001 only one party has had the power to do anything about this issue.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 09:53:39

My solution? Honesty about the costs of Iraq and levy the taxes needed to pay for the war and levee maintenance.

I'll amend that. Honesty about the costs of the Iraq war, the necessity of finishing it, and honesty about the costs and state of all other federal expenses. We have plenty areas of spending that cost more than the war and deliver less than final victory in Iraq has the potential to. There are other places to get the money to build levees, but they don't have as much potential to turn into a political hammer.

Which brings me back to the main thrust of my last post. The fact that it's so easy to predict that the American Left would try to use the hurricane to bash bash Bush is illustrative of a very serious problem at that end of the spectrum. Attraction to the negative, revelling in whatever hurts America as long as it can be used to hurt the opposition too.

EDIT::
Post since I left for lunch give me cause to relax the tone of this, but the general points still stand.

C M Edwards · 2005-08-31 09:55:49

your focus on a tiny portion of the issue (new studies) demonstrates that on the larger issue you are simply OUT OF AMMO!

That's a pity, because New Orleans is going to need all the donations it can get. Cobra Commander could still contribute other materials and supplies (besides ammunition) to the effort, however.

Big, big picture? Maybe New Orleans should have been abandoned 50 years ago.

Well, the small picture is that it could be abandoned 50 days from now. Know any place we can put 1.5 million refugees?

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 09:58:25

your focus on a tiny portion of the issue (new studies) demonstrates that on the larger issue you are simply OUT OF AMMO!

That's a pity, because New Orleans is going to need all the donations it can get. Cobra Commander could still contribute other materials and supplies to the effort, however.

Not out, just hoarding it.

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 11:15:27

How about cancelling improvements to the exact levee that broke because of the need to fund our operations in Iraq?
First off, it doesn't hold up on either count. Second, you guys on the Left have to realize that trying to turn every bad thing that happens into political gold is hurting you. It really turns people off, it's like clapping in glee when someone gets hit by a car because you can act concerned for the cameras as they die on the pavement.

Yeah, the republicans are complete saints when it comes to negative campaigning. How quickly we forget Monaca Lowinski and File Gate. :rol: Or how about the attacks about John Carries War meddles.

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 11:18:31

None of which logically leads to the conclusion that human activity is the direct cause of the change or that we can reverse it. Hence the "exercise of faith" comment.
The faith is on your side, not on the scientific side.
If you cannot demonstrate that solar activity or inner earth radioactivity is on the rise,
or that astronomic conditions are responsible for earth temperature rise, then you have as only argument you stutborn conviction to deny scientific evidences.

Actually this is a bad example. The sun will put out more and more heat as it makes its transition into a red giant eventually engulfing the earth in flames. So in the long term there is not a thing we can do about global warming.

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 11:31:37

Yeah, the republicans are complete saints when it comes to negative campaigning. How quickly we forget Monaca Lowinski and File Gate. :rol: Or how about the attacks about John Carries War meddles.

Absolutely the Republicans dish out mud in equal measure. The difference is that they attack their opponents themselves. Kerry lied about his medals, Clinton is a horny lying President, on and on. Today's Democrats have as a central element of their strategy the practice of taking anything that is bad for America and using it for political gain. It puts them in the position of benefitting only when America gets hurt. That's not a good place to be to gain the support of Americans.

There I days I swear half the Democrats in the Senate would go into a mass orgasm if a nuke went off in an American city.

Yeah, it's a little over the top. But I'm not retracting it.

Palomar · 2005-08-31 11:34:54

Cobra Commander wrote:

There I days I swear half the Democrats in the Senate would go into a mass orgasm if a nuke went off in an American city.
Yeah, it's a little over the top. But I'm not retracting it.

ROFL!!! That was hilarious!

--Cindy

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 11:43:45

Yeah, the republicans are complete saints when it comes to negative campaigning. How quickly we forget Monaca Lowinski and File Gate. :rol: Or how about the attacks about John Carries War meddles.
Absolutely the Republicans dish out mud in equal measure. The difference is that they attack their opponents themselves. Kerry lied about his medals, Clinton is a horny lying President, on and on. Today's Democrats have as a central element of their strategy the practice of taking anything that is bad for America and using it for political gain. It puts them in the position of benefitting only when America gets hurt. That's not a good place to be to gain the support of Americans.
There I days I swear half the Democrats in the Senate would go into a mass orgasm if a nuke went off in an American city.
Yeah, it's a little over the top. But I'm not retracting it.

Right, it is better to judge a politician based on there personal life then how good or bad their policies are for America. :rol:

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 11:47:25

John Creighton wrote:

Yeah, the republicans are complete saints when it comes to negative campaigning. How quickly we forget Monaca Lowinski and File Gate. :rol: Or how about the attacks about John Carries War meddles.
Absolutely the Republicans dish out mud in equal measure. The difference is that they attack their opponents themselves. Kerry lied about his medals, Clinton is a horny lying President, on and on. Today's Democrats have as a central element of their strategy the practice of taking anything that is bad for America and using it for political gain. It puts them in the position of benefitting only when America gets hurt. That's not a good place to be to gain the support of Americans.
There I days I swear half the Democrats in the Senate would go into a mass orgasm if a nuke went off in an American city.
Yeah, it's a little over the top. But I'm not retracting it.

Right, it is better to judge a politician based on there personal life then how good or bad their policies are for America. :rol:

edit: and you really think GW is an honest politician?

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 11:53:32

Right, it is better to judge a politician based on there personal life then how good or bad their policies are for America. :rol:

You miss my point. Using Iraq as an example, questioning the need for the war is a valid position. Raising doubt about is it perfectly reasonable. However the Left has moved past that. We now have politicians and reporters alike gleefully harping on the death toll from Iraq. You could almost sense the salivating anticipation from teh Media and Democrat activists as the count approached 1000. It's sick.

Getting back to Hurricane Katrina, not even a day passed and they were trying to make a political issue of it. Bush didn't give money to build more levees, He's on vacation instead of being there helping.

Incidentally, anyone remember the hurricanes in Florida, when George W and Jeb Bush were down there? The party line then was that they're holding up relief efforts for a photo-op. Just can't win.

While the American Right has no qualms about viciously smearing their opponents, the Left happily smears America in the hope that it hurts their opponents. That's a profound difference. That is largely why the Democrats continue to lose elections.

edit: and you really think GW is an honest politician?

I really believe that "honest politician" is an oxymoron.
And if I were a true believer Democrat strategist I'd tell them the same thing I wrote here.

DonPanic · 2005-08-31 11:58:51

The Moon is somewhat cheese-colored, therefore it is made of cheese.
No, you can't just dismiss that conclusion, prove to me that it isn't.

Right, everybody knows that Apollo crews brought back on Earth samples of Camembert instead of moonstones, and that's why Moon conquest was abandonned, as theses samples were much more expensive than french imported cheeses in spite of heavy luxury taxes.
Bright scientifical argument indeed, congratulations, CC

If you want to know what I think the singular cause for climate change is. . . it isn't a single cause. The Earth is a complex, self-regualting system. If you look at the history of the planet you find that dramatic climate shifts happen at regular intervals. Even in the absence of human industry. Just for "recent" examples, there is the Medeival Warm Period during which Europe was warmer than today for centuries. It was followed by a mini-ice age, which we've recently come out of. Climate change is a fact of life on Earth, suddenly blaming this particular instance on SUVs and factories doesn't make any sense. It's politically useful and psychologically more fulfilling perhaps, but it's based as much in faith as science.

You can't compare middle ages with nowadays, human population exploded in number and denying human activity impact on Earth is closing eyes in front of realdom.
Anyhow, now, we know that there have been iceballs eras showing that the so-called self regulating system can get out of self regulation limits as a chaotic system in which small causes can bring tremendously big effects.
Therefore, nothing can allow you to say that human activity that you seem to reduce to little causes will not bring dramatic effects.
So, taking care of reducing human possible causes on climate is just wisdom.
And notice that there is nothing politically left-sided in theses arguments.

We now have politicians and reporters alike gleefully harping on the death toll from Iraq.

Back to politics, there is a deadline in Iraq war. If ever the number of US soldiers killed in Iraq should exceed the number of victims of the 9/11, Bush's pretention to protect american people from terrorism will prove to be a total failure, as his action will have brought more US citizens death than terrorists' action.
I can't imagine what would be the US opinion reactions if there happened to be only one terrorist attack on the US soil, but for guys like Bin Laden, no use to try, knowing that, objectively, this administration is the best terrorists recruiting agent.
Did he not publicly enjoyed on Bush's reelection ?

BWhite · 2005-08-31 12:51:28

Crumbling infrastructure is a bi-partisan disaster unfolding in slow motion. Just like NOLA slowly filling up with water.

However, ever since 2001 only one party has held national political power. And the simple fact remains that levee maintenance funds were slashed over the past few years. Now we need to pay for shelter for 1.5 million refugees.

= = =

Global warming of sea water will increase the ferocity of hurricanes. If global warming is a myth, nothing to worry about. If global warming is not a myth, those more ferocious hurricanes will continue to batter the United States.

We will see what happens in the future.

= = =

Paving and draining have removed the safety valve that prevented devastating flooding along rivers and in low-lying cities like New Orleans. Thousands of acres of swamp used to surround New Orleans, and it sponged up excess water and reduced the pressure on the levees. Same deal along the Miss.
When the hell will people ever learn to work with the land and water, and not against it? Water always wins.

Water always wins!

But zoning and sensible land management (like using flood plain land for farms and parks, not condos and parking lots) is SO VERY socialistic, now isn't it.

= = =

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati … nworld-hed

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 13:41:57

One of many articles with credible sources saying the same thing.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8046526/

But hurricane experts say the unusual series of hurricanes, four of which slammed into Florida in a six-week period, was the result of a natural 15- to 40-year cycle in Atlantic cyclone activity.
After a lull between 1970 and the mid-1990s, the number of storms picked up dramatically from 1995 and higher-than-normal activity is expected for the next five to 30 years as a phenomenon known as the “Atlantic multidecadal mode” holds sway.
“Really, for the folks that are doing work on hurricanes, there isn’t a debate (about global warming),” said Chris Landsea of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s hurricane research division in Miami.

It then goes on to address the opposing view, climatologists who say:

Many climatologists disagree. They say the large, decades-long swings in hurricane activity may mask, but do not rule out, longer term climate change trends.

Not exactly a conclusive rebuttal.

Essentially what we have is this. Most likely temperatures in parts of the world are in fact rising, it happens through natural processes at predicatable intervals and we're due. Most likely "global warming" has precisely zilch to do with increases in hurrican activity, which also moves in predicatable cycles and we're due. Most likely human activity has some affect on climate just as forest fires, ocean currents and cow farts do. In near certainty human activity is not the driving force of climate change as evidenced by past patterns. Most likely we can't stop it if we wanted to. With total certainty measures such as the Kyoto Protocol would have no measureable effect.

Conclusion: Reality of global warming probably but not certain. Will reverse according to natural cycles as it has always done. Advise preparations for new projected conditions.

In short, the world changes and there's nothing you can do about it. if you think your land is gonna flood, don't build below sea level. If you think your land is gonna dry out, don't start a farm. Shit happens, it isn't fair, deal with it.

I don't expect to convert any of the true believers, but your priests are spouting nonsensical doctrine.

I here I thought I'd be in a better mood today. :?
Must be the global warming. Stupid Bush.

BWhite · 2005-08-31 14:16:58

Cobra, I read the article you linked. One guy (Landsea) was given equal time with many scientists who took the opposite view.

Landsea and Trenbreth are in a mudslinging contest over this exact issue. And this:

Some government scientists, such as James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, have complained they are forced to downplay evidence of climate change, which most scientists link to manmade emissions of carbon dioxide and other so-called greenhouse gases.

and then there is this quote:

According to meteorologist Thomas Knutson of NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, higher carbon dioxide levels have probably resulted in a 1/7th of a category increase in Atlantic cyclone intensity in the past century, and likely will raise a storm’s potential by half a category in 80 years.
Hurricanes are graded under the Saffir-Simpson scale based on wind speeds, with a Category 5, marked by winds higher than 155 mph , the strongest and most destructive.
Similarly, studies by Kerry Emanuel, a professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, indicate the 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit increase in sea surface temperatures predicted by the IPCC would raise the upper limit on a storm’s intensity by 10 percent.
Landsea said those changes were largely imperceptible given the overall ferocity of hurricanes.

Half a category? Cat 3.5s will become Cat 4? Imperceptible? Irrelevant?

Wow!

= = =

Frequency needs to be discussed also.

BWhite · 2005-08-31 15:05:47

From the Times-Picayune, June 8, 2004:

For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area's east bank hurricane levees, a complex network of concrete walls, metal gates and giant earthen berms that won't be finished for at least another decade.
"I guess people look around and think there's a complete system in place, that we're just out here trying to put icing on the cake," said Mervin Morehiser, who manages the "Lake Pontchartrain and vicinity" levee project for the Army Corps of Engineers. "And we aren't saying that the sky is falling, but people should know that this is a work in progress, and there's more important work yet to do before there is a complete system in place."
...
"I can't tell you exactly what that could mean this hurricane season if we get a major storm," Naomi said. "It would depend on the path and speed of the storm, the angle that it hits us.
"But I can tell you that we would be better off if the levees were raised, . . . and I think it's important and only fair that those people who live behind the levee know the status of these projects."

= = =

Infrastructure investment is an essential bi-partisan topic of discussion.

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 15:12:40

I wonder about this whole levy thing. Is it a good idea? It can increase the areas we can live in but what are there probabilities of failure. How robust can they be made and what measures are in place for if they fail. I really can't gauge the whole cost benefit of them.

John Creighton · 2005-08-31 15:14:54

Half a category? Cat 3.5s will become Cat 4? Imperceptible? Irrelevant?
Wow!
= = =
Frequency needs to be discussed also.

That could be true and if it is what does it mean? Does it mean less CO2 should be omitted, people should move away from the cost or build structures better able to withstand hurricanes. Also who should pay for it?

Trebuchet · 2005-08-31 17:48:26

IMHO valid evacuation plans should be made - realistic plans able to actually evacuate an urban area within a set time period, complete with neccessary improvements to infrastructure to effect such a plan. Perhaps portable train stops - most urban areas have track running through them, and such emergency evacuation centers could efficiently get people out of harm's way. FEMA needs to network cities together so that they can assign people to different cities, and municipalities should share evacuation plans with citizens. A pre-printed flyer mailed to neighborhoods which listed suggested evacuation plans - say, Plan A for a weak storm making a direct hit, Plan B for a sidewipe to the west, Plan C for a sideswipe to the east, and Plan D for a direct hit from a monster hurricane, which advises people to either sit tight or go a certain distance to suggested destinations, would be a great help.

Another interesting idea would be to somehow get Visa or Mastercard on board and come up with special 'emergency credit cards' which could only purchase certain goods and services up to a certain limit per card when the government declared an emergency in an area. This would limit the number of people who elect to stay behind for money reasons, although fraud would probably be a show-stopper, which is bad, because that would greatly simplify the accounting for disaster relief - aid could be directly distributed to victims without much in the way of middlemen.

Grypd · 2005-08-31 18:04:59

As I mentioned earlier today most experts agree that there is the phenomonom called global warming and that it is affecting our enviroment. The disagreement is what is causeing it. But we have to look at what has changed on the planet in the last millenia as an answer. There is no volcanoes, Earth has not wobbled, our orbit has not changed, the sun is not emitting more energy so that leaves mankind.

One other phenomonom that we do agree is man related is global dimming. This is where more sunlight is blocked from the Earth by particulates in the atmosphere especially the upper atmosphere. Some of these particulates are caused by planes travelling high and some by extreme fires. But most of the new particulates there are industrial by products and as such show up in like the Ozone layer being weakened.

Global dimming has reduced the sunlight reaching the Earths surface by about 20% in some areas around the equator. Our problem for Global dimming is that though it reduces the amount of water evaporated in the equator it actually heats up the upper atmosphere. This upper atmosphere is where the powerful storms get there power from. Hurricane Katrina is an example of a storm that was boosted by its reaction to a high pressure area of heated air in the high atmosphere. What this means is that global dimming and those heated upper atmosphere increases the power of storms and changes how air currents operate.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2005-08-31 07:54:45

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#27 2005-08-31 08:46:07

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#28 2005-08-31 09:05:27

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#29 2005-08-31 09:17:20

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#30 2005-08-31 09:42:45

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#31 2005-08-31 09:50:42

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#32 2005-08-31 09:53:39

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#33 2005-08-31 09:55:49

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#34 2005-08-31 09:58:25

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#35 2005-08-31 11:15:27

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#36 2005-08-31 11:18:31

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#37 2005-08-31 11:31:37

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#38 2005-08-31 11:34:54

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#39 2005-08-31 11:43:45

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#40 2005-08-31 11:47:25

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#41 2005-08-31 11:53:32

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#42 2005-08-31 11:58:51

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#43 2005-08-31 12:51:28

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#44 2005-08-31 13:41:57

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#45 2005-08-31 14:16:58

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#46 2005-08-31 15:05:47

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#47 2005-08-31 15:12:40

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#48 2005-08-31 15:14:54

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#49 2005-08-31 17:48:26

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

#50 2005-08-31 18:04:59

Re: Katrina and New Orleans

Board footer