Is Leaving California More Practical Than Water Rationing? (Orange: credit, hotels)

[revelated]

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

Venus Greenhouse Effect

You could just look it up. Carl Sagan is not a middle school teacher I might add.

Again, it's based on assumptions made with whatever current knowledge was available when that determination was made. What happens 5 years from now when they're like "oops!!!! Sorry. Not greenhouse, it's prox to the sun. Our bad...heheheh..."

[NativeOrange]

Originally Posted by revelated

Again, it's based on assumptions made with whatever current knowledge was available when that determination was made. What happens 5 years from now when they're like "oops!!!! Sorry. Not greenhouse, it's prox to the sun. Our bad...heheheh..."

These are not "assumptions". That would make it a theory. With relatively simple science, we can determine every gas present in Venus's atmosphere, the concentrations of each gas, as well as the surface temperature of the planet. Through telescopes we can clearly see the thick smog like cloud that covers Venus, and we already completely understand how greenhouse gases work.

Like I said, you can read all about it on the Google.

http://pages.uoregon.edu/jimbrau/Bra...gure_09_20.jpg

[revelated]

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

These are not "assumptions". That would make it a theory.

A theory is something attempted to be proven but not. We never attempted to prove Pluto was a planet because there is no method to prove that - these people in the past assumed a certain size = "planet". They just defined that and left it there. Later, others saw the same size and went by that assumption.

Later, people questioned that assumption: is it really as simple as size given other larger bodies are not called planets? Hmm, somebody wasn't thinking fourth dimensionally. Pluto isn't a planet anymore.

We can't say it was planet makeup because Pluto never had a similar makeup to any other body.

We can't say it was existence in the solar system because the moon is a satellite, not a planet, yet it's here.

No. People just assumed a thing and others started teaching it because they didn't know any better at the time.

If it were a true theory, there would be a poor likelihood of getting overridden without evidence. Like Einstein's Theory of Relativity.

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

With relatively simple science, we can determine every gas present in Venus's atmosphere, the concentrations of each gas, as well as the surface temperature of the planet. Through telescopes we can clearly see the thick smog like cloud that covers Venus, and we already completely understand how greenhouse gases work.

Which can all be theorized. And until we drop a rover onto that planet, that's all it is - a theory not yet proven (or disproven).

Could be that the the planet itself is generating more heat than Earth, thus the perception that it must be a greenhouse gas effect when in reality, it's a radiation issue.

Could be that Venus' core has attributes that contribute to a hotter climate.

Could be that the absence of certain minerals is a contributor.

We don't know for 100% certain. It's all theory based on what we know at the time.

It's surprising to me that people don't get this. I mean does nobody else remember when every scientist in the world swore up and down the world was flat simply because that's all we saw? Photos and diagrams and all sorts of garbage showing a box instead of a globe, and it took some crazy nut to actually brave it to disprove the theory.

[ashpelham]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

LOL agreed. What irks me is people actually believing the entire state is running out of water. And then posting in the CA forum, where they don't live, and don't know how much water we know we have - and then telling us we don't know what we're talking about.

And they actually believe that millions of Californians are going to decend on other states, and that somehow this is going to destroy the entire nation of the United States somehow.

And the doomsday people live on.

My theory is that the ones who profit by this particular doomsday theory in other states, are the ones trying to sell garbage real estate to newbie investors, convincing them that there will be a huge demand soon because millions of thirsty Californians will be moving in to buy up all their garbage real estate.

I can't think of any other reason they care to promote the insanity.

But, hey, in the meantime, the rich rice growers in California are pushing their public service announcements of how they are saving the migratory birds by keeping water in the rice paddies - because there isn't enough water in their natural habitats anymore.

Can you believe how they spin this stuff? Uh, why isn't there enough water in their natural habitats? Would that be because the water is being diverted to rice paddies?

Yeesh. Common sense button long gone.

take it from this Native Alabamian: those of us who would really like to live in your state, to enjoy the sunny skies more commonly, the lack of a harsh winter, etc, are tired of hearing the curmudgeons talk about how bad CA is, and how the drought is "deserved" or was "bound to happen".

I feel bad that Birmingham gets 1000 inches of rain a day, and CA gets nada. Wish I could spread the wealth. But, I'd take living in your dry arid climate ANY DAY over the cold, drizzly 35-40 degree days of an Alabama winter.

[LexusNexus]

Originally Posted by la_fuerza

With the drought ongoing in California and water rationing in effect has anyone thought about relocating for that reason?

California is overpopulated and I'm sure if 2-3 million people spread to other parts of the country (or elsewhere) it would ease the burden on the state's limited water supply.

Plus the drought will have an impact on property values as it goes on so if you're an owner that might be something to consider.

No, water rationing is not a reason for me to leave California, any more than the threat of the "big one" is.

I also don't get this "overpopulated" claim. How so?

Property values are not affected by the drought, particularly in the region I call home.

What I'd like to see happen is that if the states of Washington and Oregon have an abundance of water, we should get it somehow.

[znlwovuhrjw]

Originally Posted by LexusNexus

I also don't get this "overpopulated" claim. How so?

California has a population of 40 million people, the largest state population in the United States in the 3rd largest state, and among the most urban states in the entire country at ~90% urban only beaten by Washington D.C., New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts but beats them all in overall size combined. The best urban wasteland IS California.

How Rural Are the States? | Daily Yonder | Keep It Rural

[NativeOrange]

Originally Posted by revelated

A theory is something attempted to be proven but not. We never attempted to prove Pluto was a planet because there is no method to prove that - these people in the past assumed a certain size = "planet". They just defined that and left it there. Later, others saw the same size and went by that assumption.

Later, people questioned that assumption: is it really as simple as size given other larger bodies are not called planets? Hmm, somebody wasn't thinking fourth dimensionally. Pluto isn't a planet anymore.

We can't say it was planet makeup because Pluto never had a similar makeup to any other body.

We can't say it was existence in the solar system because the moon is a satellite, not a planet, yet it's here.

No. People just assumed a thing and others started teaching it because they didn't know any better at the time.

If it were a true theory, there would be a poor likelihood of getting overridden without evidence. Like Einstein's Theory of Relativity.



Which can all be theorized. And until we drop a rover onto that planet, that's all it is - a theory not yet proven (or disproven).

Could be that the the planet itself is generating more heat than Earth, thus the perception that it must be a greenhouse gas effect when in reality, it's a radiation issue.

Could be that Venus' core has attributes that contribute to a hotter climate.

Could be that the absence of certain minerals is a contributor.

We don't know for 100% certain. It's all theory based on what we know at the time.

It's surprising to me that people don't get this. I mean does nobody else remember when every scientist in the world swore up and down the world was flat simply because that's all we saw? Photos and diagrams and all sorts of garbage showing a box instead of a globe, and it took some crazy nut to actually brave it to disprove the theory.

This topic never deserved this much discussion. This isn't the Middle Ages buddy. Even if this is a "theory", there's much more evidence stacked against you than for you.

[Wanderin Poet]

As a personal matter, if you have the resources, yes.

With Moonbeam proposing 10k fines, and our snowpack at less than 10%, Feds giving 0% to farmers, and our el nino arriving in early April and not being very wet at all, I'd consider strongly leaving for wetter climes if you don't want to ration.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by LexusNexus

What I'd like to see happen is that if the states of Washington and Oregon have an abundance of water, we should get it somehow.

Washington does not have an abundance of water. Drink Lake Tahoe.

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by NativeOrange

Wait. You do realize that the greenhouse effect on Venus is common knowledge that they teach you in middle school right?

Mercury is much closer to the sun than Venus, yet has a lower surface temperature.

You do realize that Venus is far closer to the Sun than Earth??

Taught to me in elementary school in CA.

Yes the cloud cover does trap heat, but without it, Venus would still be ... far, far hotter than earth.

With a true cloud cover like Venus has, earth would be kinda like Hawaii most everywhere as it would tend to even out the temperature over the surface.

As to temperature difference, it ain't much different as far as we are concerned.

Temperature on the Surface of Mercury

Temperature on the Surface of Venus

Yes the gasses trap heat and make it hotter than Mercury as it holds the heat in. However the closeness to the Sun is the major issue and green house just an aggravating issue.

The greenhouse effect here on Earth may be an aggravating factor, but the lack of rain and snow is the main one and ................ if it doesn't change soon, what will CA do next year?