Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On a final note, the author of that piece (Kirk Myers) is a self-proclaimed global warming skeptic that can scarcely offer a thread of unbiased journalism. The man is on a mission and rarely allows evidence to speak for itself, injecting emotionalism, drama and vitriol in to every article and blog entry he writes.
There is no such thing as unbiased journalism. Journalism is taking facts and putting your own opinion or commentary on it.
Reporting on the other hand is just reporting verbatim what happened.
Being skeptical is a part of science. I think it is the pomposity of man to believe that we have it all figured out and especially on all this global warming nonsense. It has become clear that CO2 is probably minor and insignificant compared to water vapor and methane. There are too many variables and too little data out there to support anything as seen by all the models proven to be wrong.
The pine beetle I think has more to do with not letting forest fires burn rather than any minor temp fluctuations.
There is no such thing as unbiased journalism. Journalism is taking facts and putting your own opinion or commentary on it.
Reporting on the other hand is just reporting verbatim what happened.
Without diving into semantics, Kirk Myers' reporting isn't particularly unbiased, either
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo
skeptical is a part of science. I think it is the pomposity of man to believe that we have it all figured out and especially on all this global warming nonsense. It has become clear that CO2 is probably minor and insignificant compared to water vapor and methane. There are too many variables and too little data out there to support anything as seen by all the models proven to be wrong.
Completely agree with the first sentence. Completely disagree with the rest. Though issues and models can be extremely complex, consistent correlation of certain factors (particularly when placed against erratic correlation of other factors) should certainly force us to consider the possibility of causation. Add to that experimental evidence that correlating factors rise and fall together and a compelling case for causation begins to emerge. That's not to say we can know with absolute certainty (we can know very little, if anything, with absolute certainty), but still with a very high certainty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanneroo
pine beetle I think has more to do with not letting forest fires burn rather than any minor temp fluctuations.
I will agree with you that the most direct (and simplest) explanation for the pine beetle's ability to ravage Colorado woodlands so effectively has to do with our unwillingness to allow forests to burn from time to time.
Fire is inevitable or could happen just about anywhere. There were a lot of people surprised a few years ago at the number of fires that happened in the southeast, but it happens there every 30-40 years.
As I see it, humans are a part of the environment not below it. We have to live somewhere and no matter where you live I believe there is some element of mother nature that will have to be dealt with, earthquakes, tornados, ice storms, hurricanes, fire, etc.
I have a lot of experience in Australia and fire is just a part of life down there. The trees purposefully shed their bark to start a fire eventually and probably at some point every 70-100 years it is going to have to be dealt with in whatever local area you live in. A lot of places I am familiar with burnt recently but it always comes back and regenerates.
I don't see the rockies as some kind of purposeful, pristine area that cannot be touched by man. If so who makes that assumption and what is the reasoning? If you go squat in the prairie it is no better down there. Down there you have dust, wind, grass fires, etc.
Get this straight--I've have not said that people should be categorically banned from living in the mountains. What I DID say is that, if people are stupid enough to build in high-risk zones for near-certain natural disaster, then the TAXPAYERS should not be stuck with paying for their folly. If you build a $500K McMansion in the lodgepole forest because you just HAVE to live in the mountains, when the g*****ed thing burns in a forest fire, that should be YOUR problem, not the taxpayers'. Simple as that.
Oh, the "well, tornadoes happen on the Plains" argument gets thrown up every so often. Fact is, the odds of having a tornado strike a given spot on the plains are actually very small--and, even when tornadoes do strike, their damage path is usually fairly limited. On the other hand, lodgepole forests in the Rocky Mountain West--which also just happen to be where a lot of recreational development has occurred in the last half-century--are, as my forester friend says, "designed to burn." So much so, that, statistically, the odds of any give area of a lodgepole forest burning will approach 100% when that forest exceeds a century old. Since most lodgepole forests in Colorado are now about at or over that century mark in age, it doesn't take a genius to see that they are now at extreme risk for fire.
Get this straight--I've have not said that people should be categorically banned from living in the mountains. What I DID say is that, if people are stupid enough to build in high-risk zones for near-certain natural disaster, then the TAXPAYERS should not be stuck with paying for their folly. If you build a $500K McMansion in the lodgepole forest because you just HAVE to live in the mountains, when the g*****ed thing burns in a forest fire, that should be YOUR problem, not the taxpayers'. Simple as that.
Oh, the "well, tornadoes happen on the Plains" argument gets thrown up every so often. Fact is, the odds of having a tornado strike a given spot on the plains are actually very small--and, even when tornadoes do strike, their damage path is usually fairly limited. On the other hand, lodgepole forests in the Rocky Mountain West--which also just happen to be where a lot of recreational development has occurred in the last half-century--are, as my forester friend says, "designed to burn." So much so, that, statistically, the odds of any give area of a lodgepole forest burning will approach 100% when that forest exceeds a century old. Since most lodgepole forests in Colorado are now about at or over that century mark in age, it doesn't take a genius to see that they are now at extreme risk for fire.
.
What about all the people living on earthquake faults in the USA? Which by the way isn't limited to the left coast.
Anywhere we go I am convinced we will have some form of mother nature to live with.
As I said with my experience in Australia, the risk for fire is everywhere(unless you are on the Nullabor Plain) and no matter where you live it is a threat. Maybe something that might be only dealt with severely every couple of generations, but it's always there. And so it is in Colorado.
Without diving into semantics, Kirk Myers' reporting isn't particularly unbiased, either
Completely agree with the first sentence. Completely disagree with the rest. Though issues and models can be extremely complex, consistent correlation of certain factors (particularly when placed against erratic correlation of other factors) should certainly force us to consider the possibility of causation. Add to that experimental evidence that correlating factors rise and fall together and a compelling case for causation begins to emerge. That's not to say we can know with absolute certainty (we can know very little, if anything, with absolute certainty), but still with a very high certainty.
I will agree with you that the most direct (and simplest) explanation for the pine beetle's ability to ravage Colorado woodlands so effectively has to do with our unwillingness to allow forests to burn from time to time.
I don't believe your line of thinking and the reason why is that scientists became entwined with politics to achieve political objectives and to continue their own jobs. And the fact all this data you speak of is now known to be fraudulent nor complete. Taking a few temp readings from here and there for 20 years doesn't prove anything when put against 10000 years of human civilization except to say in Lopnorbang, China it was 32C on July 19, 1999 and 29C on July 19, 1981.
Also with the politics nothing proposed at Kyoto or Copenscammy has anything to with the climate. It's all about controlling people and skimming money off of them. It is the new vehicle for communism. I knew when the USSR came apart that the marxists would find a new vehicle back and they did.
In addition with this data that supposedly proved global warming, using the same numbers the temperatures have fallen for over 10 years and it's now known the warmest decade of the 20th century was in fact the 1930's. Live by the sword, die by the sword. If you believe in those numbers as your religion they you have to take the whole jalopy, you can't pick and choose to use data from 1978-1998 and then ignore everything since.
What about all the people living on earthquake faults in the USA? Which by the way isn't limited to the left coast.
Anywhere we go I am convinced we will have some form of mother nature to live with.
As I said with my experience in Australia, the risk for fire is everywhere(unless you are on the Nullabor Plain) and no matter where you live it is a threat. Maybe something that might be only dealt with severely every couple of generations, but it's always there. And so it is in Colorado.
When it comes to assessing risk for property damage from natural disasters, there are people who do that all the time. They are called actuaries and they work for the private insurance companies. When those actuaries deem the risk of a disaster as being too great to put their company's capital at risk to insure, their companies simply refuse to issue insurance for those areas. So, for example, in flood plains, the insurance companies long ago figured out that the disaster risk was too great; thus, the federal government (meaning you and me, the taxpayers) became the insurer of last resort for people dumb enough to build in flood plains. Thanks to that, the taxpayers have gotten tapped for plenty of stupidity.
A similar thing is happening with earthquake insurance. A lot of private insurers will no longer cover earthquake damage in areas where earthquakes are a virtual certainty. No doubt, the taxpayers will get stuck for that, too. Finally, the private insurers are also wising up to the wildfire risk in a lot of the Rocky Mountain West--a lot of companies are now refusing to insure structures in high risk areas. Good. But, we taxpayers--either through socialized insurance, or just through funding of the Forest Service protecting private structures (how the Forest Service suffered from "mission creep" to let themselves in for that would be an interesting study)--will probably get stuck again (well, we already are) for people's stupidity.
One of the problems with overpopulation is that people are often forced to live in high-disaster-risk areas because they have no choice (think the coastal areas in places like Bangla Desh), but in Colorado, people are voluntarily choosing to build their crap in very fire-prone areas, then they expect "Uncle Sugar" to protect their property against fire. That is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Here's an interesting article on an impending lumber shortage caused by the pine beetle in BC.
Pine beetle epidemic will have continent-wide economic impact: report (http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Pine+beetle+epidemic+will+have+continent+wide+econ omic+impact+Wood+Markets+Group/2697580/story.html - broken link)
We can always go back to using aluminum for making 2x4's and floor joists and other parts of homes. We had a home back in VA that had aluminum joists and studs for all the interior walls. The aluminum wall studs required different hardware for hanging heavier pieces of art on the walls. There's a rather large community called Sterling Park back in VA, near Dulles Airport, which was built in the early 1960's by a sub of U. S. Steel, and it used as much metal framing as possible. One notable benefit to these metal framing members is that the termites cannot eat them, a big problem in areas that have a lot more moisture than here in COLO. The interior walls of most commercial / retail spaces are made of metal studs, check out any store that's under construction or renovation. A darned shame the beetles have done this, but we'll adapt to any lumber shortages.
__________________
- Please follow our TOS.
- Any Questions about City-Data? See the FAQ list.
- Want some detailed instructions on using the site? See The Guide for plain english explanation.
- Realtors are welcome here but do see our Realtor Advice to avoid infractions.
- Thank you and enjoy City-Data.
In watching a news report on how our government spends huge amounts of money to keep adding sand to beaches which then lose it again, it occurred to me that in the relatively near future this world of ours can expect to enjoy far fewer beaches of any kind. If acting as a natural transition between land and sea, they take time to form and thus exist in a certain balance. With ocean levels now rising faster all the time, such pleasant transitions more likely to devolve to badly eroded soil inland.
If this has little to do with a state such as Colorado, with no known ocean shoreline, then the underlying causes will affect it as much, if in different ways. Lodgepole forests do naturally burn, or in any event the Lodgepole tree is one of the best adapted to first growing back in areas that have. It might easily be seen that the stage is set for massive forest fires. Our 'Forest Service' is out there busily butchering forests in the name of preserving them, but the result will be seen largely in vain. If we really cared, in perhaps more than .5 acres with some dwelling on it, then we would take more interest in our climate and what we are doing to it. We would not lie to ourselves and others that what we do has no effect, when we might know it very much does.
It shouldn't take millions upon millions of acres of dead and dying trees to remind us of as much.
We can always go back to using aluminum for making 2x4's and floor joists and other parts of homes. We had a home back in VA that had aluminum joists and studs for all the interior walls. The aluminum wall studs required different hardware for hanging heavier pieces of art on the walls. There's a rather large community called Sterling Park back in VA, near Dulles Airport, which was built in the early 1960's by a sub of U. S. Steel, and it used as much metal framing as possible. One notable benefit to these metal framing members is that the termites cannot eat them, a big problem in areas that have a lot more moisture than here in COLO. The interior walls of most commercial / retail spaces are made of metal studs, check out any store that's under construction or renovation. A darned shame the beetles have done this, but we'll adapt to any lumber shortages.
Yeah, there are always alternatives for things, but usually at much higher cost. This is another example of resource depletion/destruction that is going to result in big inflation problems here in the US and elsewhere. The problem with commodity price inflation is that it nearly always leads to a diminished material standard of living for many people, it not for everyone. That is the future that we had better be preparing for. But, as usual, we are not, because we want to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that it's not happening.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which by the way isn't limited to the left coast.
) and no matter where you live it is a threat. Maybe something that might be only dealt with severely every couple of generations, but it's always there. And so it is in Colorado.
Forests as beaches
