• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Scientists warn California could be struck by winter ‘superstorm’

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,244
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
AP050221017135.jpg



A group of more than 100 scientists and experts say in a new report that California faces the risk of a massive "superstorm" that could flood a quarter of the state's homes and cause $300 billion to $400 billion in damage. Researchers point out that the potential scale of destruction in this storm scenario is four or five times the amount of damage that could be wrought by a major earthquake.
It sounds like the plot of an apocalyptic action movie, but scientists with the U.S. Geological Survey warned federal and state emergency officials that California's geological history shows such "superstorms" have happened in the past, and should be added to the long list of natural disasters to worry about in the Golden State.
The threat of a cataclysmic California storm has been dormant for the past 150 years. Geological Survey director Marcia K. McNutt told the New York Times that a 300-mile stretch of the Central Valley was inundated from 1861-62. The floods were so bad that the state capital had to be moved to San Francisco, and Governor Leland Stanford had to take a rowboat to his own inauguration, the report notes. Even larger storms happened in past centuries, over the dates 212, 440, 603, 1029, 1418, and 1605, according to geological evidence.
The risk is gathering momentum now, scientists say, due to rising temperatures in the atmosphere, which has generally made weather patterns more volatile.

Scientists warn California could be struck by winter ‘superstorm’ - Yahoo! News

It's happened in the past... but now WE MAKING IT MORE LIKELY!!!

Hide the dogs, save the cats, children get on the roof! Daddy's SUV is gonna GET YOU!!!
 
AP050221017135.jpg





Scientists warn California could be struck by winter ‘superstorm’ - Yahoo! News

It's happened in the past... but now WE MAKING IT MORE LIKELY!!!

Hide the dogs, save the cats, children get on the roof! Daddy's SUV is gonna GET YOU!!!

Why do I suspect that the actual report is nowhere near as sensational as this news story?

Reading the report, yeah, it's as expected. The USGS does some disaster preparedness research. The previously did one for "the big one," the big earthquake that might eventually hit CA. They ran through a hypothetical 7.8 magnitude earthquake and tried to determine what sort of damage it would cause, and how best to prepare for and respond to such an event. They've done the same for this superstorm, something that has happened periodically before, and there's no reason to suspect it can't happen again. The report was two hundred pages of the impacts of such a storm, and how to prepare for such a thing, and how current policies are not sufficient to respond. Remember Katrina? Yeah, weren't very well prepared for that, were we?

The report doesn't even mention climate change, as far as I can tell. (granted, I skimmed only appropriate sections, it's 200 pages long)

Not that I would have expected you to actually look at the source, Mr. V.

Could a warmer planet make such storms more likely? Theoretically. More heat means more energy, which could lead to stronger precipitation events. A lot of this would depend on local variables, though, so it's hard to say whether it would have an impact on this particular type of storm. This would be true whether or not the rising temperature is our fault, though. You do agree that the world is getting warmer, right?

edit again:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1312/of2010-1312_text.pdf
The actual USGS report.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, my wife drives a Yukon XL and I drive a F-350 diesel.

Neither of us will give up our vehicles.
 
Blessing in disguise.

A massive disaster could help solve Ca's mongo Budget problems... clearing the way/an excuse for 10's of billions in federal aid.
 
But then I don't live in CA, thank God.
 
Its funny how much conservatives yearn for the demise of California. True patriotism means you love all American states, not just red ones.
 
Its funny how much conservatives yearn for the demise of California. True patriotism means you love all American states, not just red ones.

We don't want it destroyed, just cleaned up.
 
Its funny how much conservatives yearn for the demise of California. True patriotism means you love all American states, not just red ones.
What's really funny is when out-of-staters start ranting about "liberal California."

California is probably one of the more moderate states in the US
 
We don't want it destroyed, just cleaned up.

Worry about your own state. Especially the hospitals that give birth to tens of thousands of anchor babies each year, the drug cartel crime in the border cities, and the hate crimes against blacks in which at least one happens every year that reaches national media.

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?...You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." -Jesus Christ
 
Worry about your own state. Especially the hospitals that give birth to tens of thousands of anchor babies each year, the drug cartel crime in the border cities, and the hate crimes against blacks in which at least one happens every year that reaches national media.

"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?...You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." -Jesus Christ

I wouldn't worry bout Cali if it wasn't in danger of going insolvent and then requiring the Fed's to bail it out.

We can't stop the anchor babies, that's a federal thang. The Feds are also about the border, we can do only so much. And hate crimes? Really? Coming from someone in Cali? What is a hate crime? It's a crime the PC crowd has determined is more heinous then a normal kind because of skin color.
 
Weeee bit off topic, folks.

The more pertinent question:
Is it "alarmism" when the potential for disaster is actually there? How do you draw that line? As Mr.V says in the OP, it's happened in the past. If laws of probability say it will probably happen again, is that not something we should at least discuss?
 
Discussing it is fine. Using it to push the political agenda known a AGW is not fine.
 
Discussing it is fine. Using it to push the political agenda known a AGW is not fine.

So your beef is with this Yahoo blogger, it seems.
 
No, he's you but with an openly paid position to push AGW.

Maybe I'll just use this tactic from now on. Climate skeptic? Eh, he just gets paid to cloud the truth. Much easier than actually talking about the merits of the discussion.

Or reality, for that matter.

But hey, at least you've stopped accusing ME of being paid to push AGW.
 
What's really funny is when out-of-staters start ranting about "liberal California."

California is probably one of the more moderate states in the US

No it's not. California is the home of leftist extremism in all its dystopic forms.
 
Maybe I'll just use this tactic from now on. Climate skeptic? Eh, he just gets paid to cloud the truth. Much easier than actually talking about the merits of the discussion.

Or reality, for that matter.

But hey, at least you've stopped accusing ME of being paid to push AGW.

You aren't very perceptive. Re-read my comment a little closer.
 
Maybe I'll just use this tactic from now on. Climate skeptic? Eh, he just gets paid to cloud the truth. Much easier than actually talking about the merits of the discussion.

You and your buddies already claim every skeptic is paid off by big oil, so why change now ???
 
You and your buddies already claim every skeptic is paid off by big oil, so why change now ???

Some of them do get funding from big oil, which I point out when people say OMG THE SCIENTISTS GET PAID BY GOV'T!!!

I've only said such a thing sarcastically in response to an equally idiotic claim like all proponents of AGW are paid off by ____.
 
Some of them do get funding from big oil, which I point out when people say OMG THE SCIENTISTS GET PAID BY GOV'T!!!

I've only said such a thing sarcastically in response to an equally idiotic claim like all proponents of AGW are paid off by ____.

Most of the claims of payment by big oil are absurd. Belonging to an organization that received money from oil does not mean that the individual received any money.

Yet, I dare you to find an alarmist scientists that does NOT receive government money.
 
Most of the claims of payment by big oil are absurd. Belonging to an organization that received money from oil does not mean that the individual received any money.

Yet, I dare you to find an alarmist scientists that does NOT receive government money.

Getting paid, however, doesn't actually mean you're biased in any way.
 
We don't want it destroyed, just cleaned up.

I say the same about most of the South. Sadly, you can't clean up history. Unless you're a Southerner. Then you can pretend your ancestors were fighting for states rights and not the 'right' to keep slaves.
 
Last edited:
I say the same about most of the South. Sadly, you can't clean up history. Unless you're a Southerner. Then you can pretend your ancestors were fighting for states rights and not the 'right' to keep slaves.

Congratulations on another vacuous post, your forte.
 
Back
Top Bottom