🚨 Watch the video for 911 🚨

Sign in to follow this  
society

Trump Takes Back Help As Chicago Slowly Submerges

Economy
10 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

I know lol I live in Chicago. I’m just saying that the implication of the photo is that this is what Chicago looks like on a regular basis due to climate change which is patently false. The water levels are higher, true, but it normally looks like those photos, calm. Those pose problems of their own, absolutely, and things need to be dealt with especially as it relates to the ecology of the Great Lakes, but to paint cataclysm by wave like the headline photo is doing is misleading. If we’re going to talk about the effects of climate change, we can’t be hyperbolic. Australia and the amazon have both burned this past year in incredible fires, Puerto Rico is still without aid after terrible earthquakes, let’s not exaggerate on other things since it diminishes the incredible devastations going on. Chicago is not devastated (yet), the problem should be dealt with, but if we’re informing the public, being realistic and accurate should be first priority. The photos you posted should be the kinda dealt with.

 

my issue is in painting climate change as really only happening in doom and gloom apocalypse when in reality, it shows up for much longer in the “little things” like rising sea levels, animals leaving or becoming extinct, etc. first. The narrative should be “these are the warning signs of things to come” because that’s true. Chicago waves are always like that in bad storms. It has nothing to do with rising water levels, but it *is* made worse by rising water levels. That nuance needs to be discussed. That’s my thing: the photo lacks nuance of the issue.

No I agree. I think some ppl overdramatize it. When it's colder than usual it's "weather" and the moment it's above normal it's always global warming to some people (as if above normal weather could never happen before climate change)

 

Also a lot of fires world wide have gotten worse due to arsonists with special land interests. Portugal has that issue a lot for example. So does the Amazon in Brazil. Environmentalists always ignore that factor when trying to insinuate that forest fires are going up exclusively because of global warming. So I also think we need to be truthful about global warming because if we purposely exagerated some skeptics are only given reason to doubt us further

 

I agree it's dramatic to take every little incident as climate change and that long term trends with hard evidence (which there's plenty to look at) is better than trying to find every aberation

 

But this thread was about a trend that's been going on for 7 years (lakes rising further and further) and then Trump taking back help despite the dangers

 

The pic shows how dangerous the waters have become with the high levels. I certainly wasn't trying to imply that every day it looks like this

 

But as u can see from pics taken in calm days, the waters are indeed very high

 

Beaches I used to see driving to Toronto to my grandparents on the shore are gone. It's not just lake Michigan it's all the great lakes. Lake Ontario has also been high AF :deadbanana:

 

Last year I wanted to go to Toronto island cuz it's a fun tourist place and again it was closed because too many areas of the island were under water. That used to never happen and 2019 was the 3rd time in last few years that it happened :neyde:

Edited by Economy

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mister G
7 minutes ago, Economy said:

Agreed... Although the lakes water problem isn't so much a specific natural disaster as it is commutative

 

For years there has been more precipitation than evaporation and runoff to ocean (since 2012/2013 so like 7 years) so it's a long term cummulative effect from global warming that keeps adding

 

Experts still disagree with eachother if this is the new long term trend or if the lakes will fluctuate wildly because up until 2012/2013 the lakes had the opposite problem where they were getting too low and dropping for 30 years since the 1980s

 

So the last 7 years were either an aberation, or wild fluctuation, or the trends changed

 

Some say we crossed a threshold that will keep bringing more precipitation than evaporation increased so the lakes this century will have a tendency to stay very high and possibly go even higher. But not all experts agree

 

Guess time will tell. 7 years is less than a decade trend so it's still hard to know if it is an aberation or a new long term trend :shrug:

The lakes are just the beginning. I expect storms to get worse and more aggressive creating more chaos with time. The problem I have with a raging **** like Trump and his base that denies climate change, are the lasting effects. It’ll have been too late when people in power decide to start taking preventative action.

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doot

Like someone else said, the pics are misleading as all of these are either during or directly after a storm. 

They don't normally look like that. 

This is typical summer look:

 

ᴡᴀꜱ ɪᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴏɢᴇʏᴍᴀɴ?

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
5 minutes ago, Doot said:

Like someone else said, the pics are misleading as all of these are either during or directly after a storm. 

They don't normally look like that. 

This is typical summer look:

 

Yeah the water levels fluctuate throughout the year and the weather affects the waves it's obviously not gonna be like that all the time

 

But I also posted pics of how high the water has also frequently gotten in low level areas even during calm sunny days

 

Also the point of that pic was to demonstrate the risk the levels are posing to low level areas not to say that every day it looks like that

 

Again, flood damage can happen in only 1 day. It doesn't matter if for 364 days in the year the water managed to stay below the line, that one day if submersion is all it takes to make damage. The fact that most days it doesn't look like that doesn't mean the danger isn't there

 

And the levels have gotten high to the point that every storm stirs the water and waves dangerously close to inland as u can see

Edited by Economy

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doot
2 minutes ago, Economy said:

Yeah the water levels fluctuate throughout the year and the weather affects the waves it's obviously not gonna be like that all the time

 

But I also posted pics of how high the water has also frequently gotten in low level areas even during calm sunny days

 

Also the point of that pic was to demonstrate the risk the levels are posing to say that every day it looks like that

 

Again, flood damage can happen in only 1 day. It doesn't matter if for 364 days in the year the water managed to stay below the line, that one day if submersion is all it takes to make damage

 

And the levels have gotten high to the point that every storm stirs the water and waves dangerously close to inland as u can see

They need to simply raise those areas. 

And...you know...stop climate change lol

But this is Trump we are talking about. 

ᴡᴀꜱ ɪᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴏɢᴇʏᴍᴀɴ?

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
1 minute ago, Doot said:

They need to simply raise those areas. 

And...you know...stop climate change lol

But this is Trump we are talking about. 

I know. But raising those areas costs money which is hard for a city alone to pay for and Trump isn't wanting to spend the money either

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doot
30 minutes ago, Economy said:

I know. But raising those areas costs money which is hard for a city alone to pay for and Trump isn't wanting to spend the money either

Chiraq has pot now. 

That's going to help a lot with the debt. 

ᴡᴀꜱ ɪᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ʙᴏᴏɢᴇʏᴍᴀɴ?
  • YAAAS 1

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ziggy
1 hour ago, Economy said:

No I agree. I think some ppl overdramatize it. When it's colder than usual it's "weather" and the moment it's above normal it's always global warming to some people (as if above normal weather could never happen before climate change)

 

Also a lot of fires world wide have gotten worse due to arsonists with special land interests. Portugal has that issue a lot for example. So does the Amazon in Brazil. Environmentalists always ignore that factor when trying to insinuate that forest fires are going up exclusively because of global warming. So I also think we need to be truthful about global warming because if we purposely exagerated some skeptics are only given reason to doubt us further

 

I agree it's dramatic to take every little incident as climate change and that long term trends with hard evidence (which there's plenty to look at) is better than trying to find every aberation

 

But this thread was about a trend that's been going on for 7 years (lakes rising further and further) and then Trump taking back help despite the dangers

 

The pic shows how dangerous the waters have become with the high levels. I certainly wasn't trying to imply that every day it looks like this

 

But as u can see from pics taken in calm days, the waters are indeed very high

 

Beaches I used to see driving to Toronto to my grandparents on the shore are gone. It's not just lake Michigan it's all the great lakes. Lake Ontario has also been high AF :deadbanana:

 

Last year I wanted to go to Toronto island cuz it's a fun tourist place and again it was closed because too many areas of the island were under water. That used to never happen and 2019 was the 3rd time in last few years that it happened :neyde:

I know, I see the water of Lake Michigan every day. I live along it and it has definitely gotten higher; I just mean to say that it seems a bit hasty to use an image from a freak storm to illustrate that. Show the dog beaches completely flooded over, or the paths under bridges that you can no longer walk on because they’re flooded. Trump pulling aid didn’t cause a storm but it does contribute to the everyday, though less editorial (lol) problems of flooding. That’s my thing. The storm and flooding are only related by the fact that the water went higher since levels are higher, but the waves themselves were not really related lol I’m sure in some capacity the intensity of storms is related to climate change, but it doesn’t really bear relevance for the story here imo

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites
Economy
43 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

I know, I see the water of Lake Michigan every day. I live along it and it has definitely gotten higher; I just mean to say that it seems a bit hasty to use an image from a freak storm to illustrate that. Show the dog beaches completely flooded over, or the paths under bridges that you can no longer walk on because they’re flooded. Trump pulling aid didn’t cause a storm but it does contribute to the everyday, though less editorial (lol) problems of flooding. That’s my thing. The storm and flooding are only related by the fact that the water went higher since levels are higher, but the waves themselves were not really related lol I’m sure in some capacity the intensity of storms is related to climate change, but it doesn’t really bear relevance for the story here imo

I guess that depends on what u take as the point of the article. U seem to be getting a different message from what the article is actually talking about

 

The main point of the article is the threat and danger higher levels are posing and the fact that Trump went back on helping finance certain projects to help mitigate the risks from it

 

When it comes to the danger the levels are posing, the worst days are the relevant ones. As I said, you can have water stay below the line for 364 days out if the year and if it goes over just once damage is done. When the levels are higher to begin with, storm surges are therefore more dangerous and problematic

 

If the article was just about global warming and that levels are rising as a result, if it was some deep analysis on water level changes I think the picture the article used would be problematic because it would imply that waves like that were the norm.

 

But the point of the article was about the threat of damage the higher levels are posing. And in terms of threat, the highest levels throughout the year and worst storm days are what matter cuz that's when the threat and damage risks which the article talks about come

 

If your house by the shore ends up getting flood damaged, it literally did not matter that most of the time the lake didn't look this bad. One day is all it takes

 

The record high water levels are not high enough (at least for now) to pose any major threats on normal days, but they are high enough now that any time there's bad weather, the water and waves get dangerously up there to risk damage and that's the point :shrug:

 

The are predicting millions of dollars in damage in Michigan alone this year for parks and trails. I'm sure they aren't predicting it's gonna be flooded all year. The damage is predicted to come regardless and certainly it would be from the worst days not a calm sunny day with no wind

Edited by Economy

Share


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...