The effects of climate-driven price drops could ripple across the economy, and eventually force the federal government to decide what is owed to people whose home values are ruined by climate change.
Why does the federal government have any obligation to these property owners? They choose to purchase property on the coast, there have always been risks associated with the reward of being on the coast.
Good idea, if necessary; e.g. Tappan Zee Replacement project in NY state across the Hudson. THAT is an example of a very outdated bridge that carries far in excess of the projected traffic voluem when it was built in the 1950’s, and it was designed /expected to last 50 years.
But, eventually, many of us will travel by air-autos and HYUUUUUGE drones. Some will tele-commute to work, as a ‘few’ million workers do now. So, why spend so much on roadways and bridges that will be used less in the future? I say spend more on landing pads in your back yards or apartment parking lots, and less on less important roads. (But what do I really know, because I commute from place to place on icebergs?)
There are eight words in the article which I find quite interesting: “….and let the land REVERT to CREEK BED.” (emphasis added) Hmmm.
Another point to ponder: IF taxpayers are to “bail out” (no pun intended) property owners whose values decline due to rising waters(?!), should the taxpayers also take any profit if the waters don’t rise, and the property values increase? Yes. If the taxpayers are to guarantee no financial loss, then property owners should be required to sign an agreement that any increase in value belongs to the taxpayers. Doesn’t make any sense to say “I lost money due to rising water, you must pay me”, and then under another scenario say “I sold my property for a profit, and it’s all mine”.
People involved in solving NFIP’s problems have some solutions which are also applicable to problems associated with SLOWLY rising sea levels… due to NATURAL forces, NOT HUMAN actions. But most people in charge over the last two decades were of the mindset to ‘tax’ more to fix the problem, however they wanted to impose or define ‘taxes’.
Insurance underwriters should be able to analyze the mitigation tactics that worked in their specific lines and apply some, albeit adapted to the specifics of flooding and receding land on bodies of water.
So, I’m calling on creative underwriters to put on their ‘thinking hats’, to counter those who are pushing Global Man-made Warming hoaxes, to suggest ways to mitigate, transfer, or eliminate risks of approaching waters… Ready, steady, … GO!
Also, to your question on property value increases if waters do not rise….
Why would the public sell the property it bought to prevent loss of property to rising waters? It has domicile property and no need to use the flood plain property. The market wouldn’t increase the value if domicile or commercial property were available elsewhere. The original proeprty owners no longer hold any claim to the sold flood plain properties…. and have no right to gains or losses in value.
Except I’ve seen you deny it, even without the qualifiers, which are unnecessary in this context, just as they are for other scientifically proven and accepted ideas.
WRONG, again! The lack of qualifiers preceding the term are what allow GLOBAL WARMING HOAXERS to continue to LIE.
April 24, 2017 at 8:48 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
6
7
Also; “scientifically proven” is a lie. Accepted is true only to the extent it applies to the naive believers who were brainwashed into thinking man has control over GLOBAL CLIMATE CHNAGES that occurred many times over many hundreds of millions of years BEFORE man appeared on Earth.
April 24, 2017 at 8:50 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
4
8
I forgot to add… based on ‘fake, censored, and otherwise falsified data’.
April 24, 2017 at 10:35 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
2
5
” Accepted is true only to the extent it applies to the naive believers who were brainwashed into thinking man has control over GLOBAL CLIMATE CHNAGES”
Which is almost 100% of climate scientists. Just stick to cartoons. You have nothing but the same, tired, pathetic BS. You and other degenerate losers like Agent can stick together, and ignore reality.
April 25, 2017 at 9:12 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
I don’t have to do anything on this issue. TrumPresident is doing all that is necessary to stop the foolish Climate Hoaxers with a revamped EPA, soon to be down-sized and brought in line with the truth, not censored, false data.
Elections have consequences. Climate hoaxers are on their way out the door, never to control taxpayers money again.
April 25, 2017 at 3:05 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
2
4
Polar,
Just because the Liberal biased MSM lies that does not mean everything you don’t agree with is untrue. Just because your enemy lies doesn’t mean everything you say is automatically the truth. Trump lies. MSM lies. Accept it already.
April 25, 2017 at 3:19 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
1
3
(although I don’t vote on this site) +1 for basically saying everyone lies, but it doesn’t mean that source lies 100% of the time.
Generally speaking (not specific to Trump or MSM), even a compulsive liar tells the truth now and again.
You should have great skepticism about the veracity of a compulsive liar’s statements, but you can’t just dismiss everything that’s said as false because the source is a compulsive liar.
April 25, 2017 at 4:16 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
It sort of comes down to the “a broken clock Is right twice a day thing”.
Trump has proven himself grossly incompetent and a complete egomaniac, narcissistic liar – however – that does not mean EVERYTHING he says is a lie, just most. hahaha. He is no worse than MSM, though. I don’t agree with Polar much but he isn’t wrong when he says MSM has an agenda and has a way of…”augmenting” the truth.
April 25, 2017 at 4:41 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
I hear you, CTT. I certainly don’t believe the MSM is unbiased and, like Ron, I’ve posted when I have supported Trump’s actions.
I feel like understanding nuance is a lost art. Nearly every argument here is black or white; no gray. Either you’re a progressive libbiteral socialist millenial or a blind sheep republicon who will be dead of old age soon.
How dare anyone be a liberal on social matters (legalize weed & give women the ability to safely abort unwanted pregnancies) AND a conservative on fiscal matters (reign in the budget and reduce the deficit).
Anyway, back to the topic: can we (not you and me, the general we) stop arguing about WHY the climate is changing and start talking about HOW we can keep this planet churning safely for the next few generations of humans?
April 25, 2017 at 6:20 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Confused,
Even in my days of blind support for the Republican party I still believed there was something going on with our climate. I simply do not understand how Agent, Polar and whoever can not only deny climate change but also mock people who do. I don’t think they realize how they come across. Maybe they do but just don’t care. Anyway, to your point. A few states are taking big steps in reducing emissions as well as supporting industries that clearly are our future (clean energy). Here is a fun fact – did you know Arby’s (yes the fast food chain) now employs more people than the coal industry? So long as we have people in charge who are worried about trivial matters – weed, bathrooms, walls, etc – nothing will be done about our environment. Hell, look at our new EPA head. Dude is insane.
April 25, 2017 at 10:50 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
I thought this guy couldn’t a bigger a-hole, but now he’s topped himself…..
So dumb. So shortsighted. So blinded by partisan loyalty. You parrot everything your orange overload pushes, true or alternatively true. Doesn’t matter. Just that the liberterrals and libtards and hoaxers are wrong and you’re right, because you know what you know. Exhausting.
I denied the MAN-MADE SIGNIFICANT impacts long before TrumPresident became a candidate. Search for my posting history…
And, I’ll continue to deny Al Gore and all his robotic followers… who parrot his empty claims…. based on a handful of scientists who FALSIFIED DATA to support their ‘scientific method research’ (quotes used to convey my sarcasm).
I hope to buy Al Gore’s beach front villa at a hyuuuuuge discount because he thinks it will soon be submerged. But he hasn’t budged off his marked-up price that would yield a hyuuuge profit, almost as much as he makes in a week by selling carbon credits.
Bill Nye has a mechanical engineering degree from Cornell, a top school, and took extensive chemistry, astronomy, and physics courses; you lie about having a statistics degree and the jobs you hold.
You lie about me lying because you don’t have a clue as to who I am, what I know, what I did, where I worked, and what I’ve studied and written.
Your posts are devoid of substance. You merely object and try to discredit others instead of providing a refutation or rebuttal. Your contributions to these comment boards are nil, even negative.
You said you had a degree in statistics. You couldn’t answer basic questions about statistics. You don’t have a degree in statistics. You lied. I have never lied about you. You are a person with no real education who feels, and is inferior, and thinks briefly reading a few blog posts is the same as a real education because you don’t believe in college. You are a liar and a joke.
Anybody that is a Birther and a climate change science denier is a POS, not a serious person.
You also repeatedly cite studies “debunking” climate change from people with fewer, less relevant qualifications than Nye, but now change your tune. Go away, you are a useless, sad, Dittohead.
I could answer questions about statistics anytime for someone who is paying me, but you aren’t. I don’t ‘manage stats’, I manage higher level matters.
Find someone else to type trivial answers to trivial stats questions; e.g. a recent college grad or a current college student.
Who is a ‘birther’? You’re as confused as Confused. Go set up an anti-TrumPresident protest; I need some amusement this week.
April 26, 2017 at 1:38 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
For the record, one posted a citation proving Yogi to be a Birther 3-4 times abs it has been deleted each time. The site is an absolute joke now, I can’t imagine a person doing business with Wells Media. We canceled our ads long ago.
April 22, 2017 at 9:53 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
3
8
This excerpt from Wiki is not a good endorsement of Bill Nye’s deceitful character:
Nye announced his engagement during an appearance on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and was married to his fiancée of five months, musician Blair Tindall, on February 3, 2006. The ceremony was performed by Rick Warren at The Entertainment Gathering at the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles. Yo-Yo Ma provided the music.[66] Nye left the relationship seven weeks later when the marriage license was declared invalid.[67] In 2007, Nye received a protective order against Tindall after an incident in which she came onto his property and used herbicide to damage his garden. Tindall admitted this but denied being a threat to him.[68] In 2012, Nye sued Tindall for unpaid attorney’s fees he incurred while he went to court in 2009 to enforce the protective order against Tindall after she allegedly violated it. According to Nye’s court filings, she was ordered to pay these fees; to date, she has not paid any of it.[69]
Perhaps he should be called Bill ‘Nuptia-lie’, the Invalid Licenses and Degrees Guy?
Nothing in your post supports that he has been deceitful. Also, a person not following through on a marriage due to an invalid wedding license and an unstable mental state of the parter has nothing to do with anything on this topic.
Care to discuss how coastal residents of Florida and/or any other coastal state has to deal with increasing sea level rise (putting aside any percentage, if any % at all, of that sea level rise is attributed to humans)?
Do you think the NIFP should reduce subsidies?
Should the NIFP be defunded and made obsolete?
Can we keep this thread on-topic since it did not mention Bill Nye or anthropomorphic climate change even once?
I should have been clearer. Care to discuss *actually useful and non-snarky* ways coastal residents can deal with increasing sea levels as well as your stance towards the NIFP?
April 25, 2017 at 7:01 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
That is a useful avoidance approach to the flood peril.
‘Move out of the flood plain’ is similar to ‘don’t play in traffic’. Didn’t your parents teach you that? Go upstairs right now and ask them.
My other opinions on NFIP issues are ‘off limits’ to you.
April 25, 2017 at 8:16 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
“That is a useful avoidance approach to the flood peril.”
There are already people living in the areas you’re suggesting where coastal folks should move – that is not a useful suggestion.
April 25, 2017 at 9:15 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
I didn’t suggest anything but “move OUT OF FLOOD PLAINS”.
Straw Man argument.
April 25, 2017 at 9:39 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
He has already presented a plan. He thinks government should buy all coastal land. He isn’t in reality.
April 25, 2017 at 10:02 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Why buy the land when they could just take it for free as eminent domain? And who cares that 53% of the US population lives in coastal flood areas – let’s just move ’em all, right Yogi?
April 26, 2017 at 3:47 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
No, you see, they will buy it over time, so it’s not a moronic plan only supported by full-blown imbeciles. Moving 53% of the population, and abandoning most of the most expensive real estate and infrastructure in the US is a great plan, and the fiscally responsible thing to do..or it’s so stupid people pushing it shouldn’t be, and are not, taken seriously on anything.
April 26, 2017 at 10:00 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
Pssst; if the govt doesn’t BUY coastal properties, the current owners wouldn’t move out of the area.
But since ‘the Govt’ [ state or Fed ] isn’t moving toward any such plan, THEY ARE IMPLICITLY DENYING ANY DANGER OF RISING WATERS EXISTS. Alternately, they are implying the public can fend for themselves while contradicting that by selling NFIP policies.
Key question: will any govt continue to sell NFIP covers in coastal areas if GLOBALLY rising waters are a CERTAINTY? ANSWER THAT QUESTION or expect no further response.
April 26, 2017 at 10:23 am
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
The Earth will eventually be destroyed when the sun dies. The FACT that government isn’t relocating us to another solar system despite it being too expensive to happen is PROOF they are implicitly denying the scientific fact that the sun will one day die. Stupid beyond belief.
April 26, 2017 at 10:24 am
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
yes
April 26, 2017 at 1:07 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
@UW; you fail, again! The migration away from Earth has MUCH MORE time to do than migration from rising seas.
The government isn’t doing the latter, but NASA has always been studying migration to other planets and solar systems.
YOU FAILED.
April 26, 2017 at 1:31 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Government hasn’t stopped murder, so it’s not a problem. Duuuuur
April 26, 2017 at 2:47 pm
Conserving the Truth says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
UW,
You are arguing with someone (Polar) who doesn’t use logic to form thoughts thus logic will not change his mind. The sun is dying. The earth is dying. At what speed…I don’t think we are quite sure of that yet but this absurd belief that humanity will persist forever is simply wrong.
April 26, 2017 at 4:23 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Enjoy your travel down your new rabbit holes.
April 26, 2017 at 10:12 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Govt can’t stop murder. Dur squared.
April 22, 2017 at 9:54 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
4
I took a lot of different college courses, BUT I ALSO PASSED THEM ALL.
CAPTION UNDER THE SCREEN OF THE ABOVE VIDEO: “The fake science guy, without a science degree calls this his new show…which is the most ridiculous thing you will ever see in science up until this point.”
Just stop. No one cares. You are like the kid who breaks a lamp because his parents don’t give him enough positive attention. Negative attention is better than none at all, right? By the way, based on my analysis you should be in 10th grade now. Good luck buddy! Hope your parents increase your bedtime!
I am not sure what is more entertaining – your complete delusion or the fact you don’t know how to respond appropriately to others’ comments. I didn’t mention Bill Nye. I don’t care about Bill Nye. Polar, I agree with you that the Liberal MSM and a lot of progressives are interested in silencing the opinions of others. I agree that if they don’t like something they normally claim its sexist, racist or any other ism or ist they can think of. That being said, honestly, you are no better. You aren’t dumb but you are severely misguided and so trapped by party affiliation that you refuse to believe anything other than that which you are told . When is the last time you disagreed with the GOP? Open your mind. This time, please, please try to respond with something of substance. Do you realize you come across as a troll a majority of the time? I am telling you this as a fellow human. You aren’t making a dent in anyone’s opinion here. You are simply giving them more ammunition. When is the last time you questioned something told to you by Fox, Breitbart, Infowars or whatever else you may listen to?
Nye is not a Science Guy. He has elected himself to be a SILENCER GUY, to silence those who know the truth about Climate Change NOT being significantly influenced by humans, and is thus a part of the topic of this article…. i.e. fair game to discuss.
YOU don’t set rules as regards what is fair game to discuss, within the umbrella of the topic.
The effects of climate-driven price drops could ripple across the economy, and eventually force the federal government to decide what is owed to people whose home values are ruined by climate change.
Why does the federal government have any obligation to these property owners? They choose to purchase property on the coast, there have always been risks associated with the reward of being on the coast.
These climate change hoaxers are sure worried about a lot, aren’t they? What a joke!
Simply rebuild a taller bridge.
Good idea, if necessary; e.g. Tappan Zee Replacement project in NY state across the Hudson. THAT is an example of a very outdated bridge that carries far in excess of the projected traffic voluem when it was built in the 1950’s, and it was designed /expected to last 50 years.
But, eventually, many of us will travel by air-autos and HYUUUUUGE drones. Some will tele-commute to work, as a ‘few’ million workers do now. So, why spend so much on roadways and bridges that will be used less in the future? I say spend more on landing pads in your back yards or apartment parking lots, and less on less important roads. (But what do I really know, because I commute from place to place on icebergs?)
There are eight words in the article which I find quite interesting: “….and let the land REVERT to CREEK BED.” (emphasis added) Hmmm.
Another point to ponder: IF taxpayers are to “bail out” (no pun intended) property owners whose values decline due to rising waters(?!), should the taxpayers also take any profit if the waters don’t rise, and the property values increase? Yes. If the taxpayers are to guarantee no financial loss, then property owners should be required to sign an agreement that any increase in value belongs to the taxpayers. Doesn’t make any sense to say “I lost money due to rising water, you must pay me”, and then under another scenario say “I sold my property for a profit, and it’s all mine”.
People involved in solving NFIP’s problems have some solutions which are also applicable to problems associated with SLOWLY rising sea levels… due to NATURAL forces, NOT HUMAN actions. But most people in charge over the last two decades were of the mindset to ‘tax’ more to fix the problem, however they wanted to impose or define ‘taxes’.
Insurance underwriters should be able to analyze the mitigation tactics that worked in their specific lines and apply some, albeit adapted to the specifics of flooding and receding land on bodies of water.
So, I’m calling on creative underwriters to put on their ‘thinking hats’, to counter those who are pushing Global Man-made Warming hoaxes, to suggest ways to mitigate, transfer, or eliminate risks of approaching waters… Ready, steady, … GO!
Also, to your question on property value increases if waters do not rise….
Why would the public sell the property it bought to prevent loss of property to rising waters? It has domicile property and no need to use the flood plain property. The market wouldn’t increase the value if domicile or commercial property were available elsewhere. The original proeprty owners no longer hold any claim to the sold flood plain properties…. and have no right to gains or losses in value.
What’s climate change?
Something stupid people deny.
Because you didn’t have “significant, man-made” on the front of that term, I’d agree.
Except I’ve seen you deny it, even without the qualifiers, which are unnecessary in this context, just as they are for other scientifically proven and accepted ideas.
WRONG, again! The lack of qualifiers preceding the term are what allow GLOBAL WARMING HOAXERS to continue to LIE.
Also; “scientifically proven” is a lie. Accepted is true only to the extent it applies to the naive believers who were brainwashed into thinking man has control over GLOBAL CLIMATE CHNAGES that occurred many times over many hundreds of millions of years BEFORE man appeared on Earth.
I forgot to add… based on ‘fake, censored, and otherwise falsified data’.
” Accepted is true only to the extent it applies to the naive believers who were brainwashed into thinking man has control over GLOBAL CLIMATE CHNAGES”
Which is almost 100% of climate scientists. Just stick to cartoons. You have nothing but the same, tired, pathetic BS. You and other degenerate losers like Agent can stick together, and ignore reality.
I don’t have to do anything on this issue. TrumPresident is doing all that is necessary to stop the foolish Climate Hoaxers with a revamped EPA, soon to be down-sized and brought in line with the truth, not censored, false data.
Elections have consequences. Climate hoaxers are on their way out the door, never to control taxpayers money again.
Polar,
Just because the Liberal biased MSM lies that does not mean everything you don’t agree with is untrue. Just because your enemy lies doesn’t mean everything you say is automatically the truth. Trump lies. MSM lies. Accept it already.
(although I don’t vote on this site) +1 for basically saying everyone lies, but it doesn’t mean that source lies 100% of the time.
Generally speaking (not specific to Trump or MSM), even a compulsive liar tells the truth now and again.
You should have great skepticism about the veracity of a compulsive liar’s statements, but you can’t just dismiss everything that’s said as false because the source is a compulsive liar.
It sort of comes down to the “a broken clock Is right twice a day thing”.
Trump has proven himself grossly incompetent and a complete egomaniac, narcissistic liar – however – that does not mean EVERYTHING he says is a lie, just most. hahaha. He is no worse than MSM, though. I don’t agree with Polar much but he isn’t wrong when he says MSM has an agenda and has a way of…”augmenting” the truth.
I hear you, CTT. I certainly don’t believe the MSM is unbiased and, like Ron, I’ve posted when I have supported Trump’s actions.
I feel like understanding nuance is a lost art. Nearly every argument here is black or white; no gray. Either you’re a progressive libbiteral socialist millenial or a blind sheep republicon who will be dead of old age soon.
How dare anyone be a liberal on social matters (legalize weed & give women the ability to safely abort unwanted pregnancies) AND a conservative on fiscal matters (reign in the budget and reduce the deficit).
Anyway, back to the topic: can we (not you and me, the general we) stop arguing about WHY the climate is changing and start talking about HOW we can keep this planet churning safely for the next few generations of humans?
Confused,
Even in my days of blind support for the Republican party I still believed there was something going on with our climate. I simply do not understand how Agent, Polar and whoever can not only deny climate change but also mock people who do. I don’t think they realize how they come across. Maybe they do but just don’t care. Anyway, to your point. A few states are taking big steps in reducing emissions as well as supporting industries that clearly are our future (clean energy). Here is a fun fact – did you know Arby’s (yes the fast food chain) now employs more people than the coal industry? So long as we have people in charge who are worried about trivial matters – weed, bathrooms, walls, etc – nothing will be done about our environment. Hell, look at our new EPA head. Dude is insane.
I thought this guy couldn’t a bigger a-hole, but now he’s topped himself…..
http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/25/al-gores-new-group-demands-15-trillion-to-fight-global-warming/
Psstt; Libitterals! The topic of this article is Climate Change. Try to focus on that. Thanks.
Judge Smails to Al Gore: You’ll get nothing and like it.
Here we go, again!
Cue the Climate Hoaxers with false reports using censored or falsified data…. Ready, steady, …. GO!
So dumb. So shortsighted. So blinded by partisan loyalty. You parrot everything your orange overload pushes, true or alternatively true. Doesn’t matter. Just that the liberterrals and libtards and hoaxers are wrong and you’re right, because you know what you know. Exhausting.
Old ideas coming from an old man. Nothing new. Move along.
I denied the MAN-MADE SIGNIFICANT impacts long before TrumPresident became a candidate. Search for my posting history…
And, I’ll continue to deny Al Gore and all his robotic followers… who parrot his empty claims…. based on a handful of scientists who FALSIFIED DATA to support their ‘scientific method research’ (quotes used to convey my sarcasm).
I hope to buy Al Gore’s beach front villa at a hyuuuuuge discount because he thinks it will soon be submerged. But he hasn’t budged off his marked-up price that would yield a hyuuuge profit, almost as much as he makes in a week by selling carbon credits.
Climate change is real…just like Bill Nye is a real scientist…
Bill Nye has a mechanical engineering degree from Cornell, a top school, and took extensive chemistry, astronomy, and physics courses; you lie about having a statistics degree and the jobs you hold.
I know many people with such degrees. No big deal. Fluid dynamics and Thermal dynamics degrees are more pertinent to the issue.
Ask Nye for specific correlation stats and watch him change the subject.
You lie about me lying because you don’t have a clue as to who I am, what I know, what I did, where I worked, and what I’ve studied and written.
Your posts are devoid of substance. You merely object and try to discredit others instead of providing a refutation or rebuttal. Your contributions to these comment boards are nil, even negative.
You said you had a degree in statistics. You couldn’t answer basic questions about statistics. You don’t have a degree in statistics. You lied. I have never lied about you. You are a person with no real education who feels, and is inferior, and thinks briefly reading a few blog posts is the same as a real education because you don’t believe in college. You are a liar and a joke.
Anybody that is a Birther and a climate change science denier is a POS, not a serious person.
You also repeatedly cite studies “debunking” climate change from people with fewer, less relevant qualifications than Nye, but now change your tune. Go away, you are a useless, sad, Dittohead.
I could answer questions about statistics anytime for someone who is paying me, but you aren’t. I don’t ‘manage stats’, I manage higher level matters.
Find someone else to type trivial answers to trivial stats questions; e.g. a recent college grad or a current college student.
Who is a ‘birther’? You’re as confused as Confused. Go set up an anti-TrumPresident protest; I need some amusement this week.
For the record, one posted a citation proving Yogi to be a Birther 3-4 times abs it has been deleted each time. The site is an absolute joke now, I can’t imagine a person doing business with Wells Media. We canceled our ads long ago.
This excerpt from Wiki is not a good endorsement of Bill Nye’s deceitful character:
Nye announced his engagement during an appearance on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson and was married to his fiancée of five months, musician Blair Tindall, on February 3, 2006. The ceremony was performed by Rick Warren at The Entertainment Gathering at the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles. Yo-Yo Ma provided the music.[66] Nye left the relationship seven weeks later when the marriage license was declared invalid.[67] In 2007, Nye received a protective order against Tindall after an incident in which she came onto his property and used herbicide to damage his garden. Tindall admitted this but denied being a threat to him.[68] In 2012, Nye sued Tindall for unpaid attorney’s fees he incurred while he went to court in 2009 to enforce the protective order against Tindall after she allegedly violated it. According to Nye’s court filings, she was ordered to pay these fees; to date, she has not paid any of it.[69]
Perhaps he should be called Bill ‘Nuptia-lie’, the Invalid Licenses and Degrees Guy?
Nothing in your post supports that he has been deceitful. Also, a person not following through on a marriage due to an invalid wedding license and an unstable mental state of the parter has nothing to do with anything on this topic.
Care to discuss how coastal residents of Florida and/or any other coastal state has to deal with increasing sea level rise (putting aside any percentage, if any % at all, of that sea level rise is attributed to humans)?
Do you think the NIFP should reduce subsidies?
Should the NIFP be defunded and made obsolete?
Can we keep this thread on-topic since it did not mention Bill Nye or anthropomorphic climate change even once?
Move inland. Problem solved.
I should have been clearer. Care to discuss *actually useful and non-snarky* ways coastal residents can deal with increasing sea levels as well as your stance towards the NIFP?
That is a useful avoidance approach to the flood peril.
‘Move out of the flood plain’ is similar to ‘don’t play in traffic’. Didn’t your parents teach you that? Go upstairs right now and ask them.
My other opinions on NFIP issues are ‘off limits’ to you.
“That is a useful avoidance approach to the flood peril.”
There are already people living in the areas you’re suggesting where coastal folks should move – that is not a useful suggestion.
I didn’t suggest anything but “move OUT OF FLOOD PLAINS”.
Straw Man argument.
He has already presented a plan. He thinks government should buy all coastal land. He isn’t in reality.
Why buy the land when they could just take it for free as eminent domain? And who cares that 53% of the US population lives in coastal flood areas – let’s just move ’em all, right Yogi?
No, you see, they will buy it over time, so it’s not a moronic plan only supported by full-blown imbeciles. Moving 53% of the population, and abandoning most of the most expensive real estate and infrastructure in the US is a great plan, and the fiscally responsible thing to do..or it’s so stupid people pushing it shouldn’t be, and are not, taken seriously on anything.
Pssst; if the govt doesn’t BUY coastal properties, the current owners wouldn’t move out of the area.
But since ‘the Govt’ [ state or Fed ] isn’t moving toward any such plan, THEY ARE IMPLICITLY DENYING ANY DANGER OF RISING WATERS EXISTS. Alternately, they are implying the public can fend for themselves while contradicting that by selling NFIP policies.
Key question: will any govt continue to sell NFIP covers in coastal areas if GLOBALLY rising waters are a CERTAINTY? ANSWER THAT QUESTION or expect no further response.
The Earth will eventually be destroyed when the sun dies. The FACT that government isn’t relocating us to another solar system despite it being too expensive to happen is PROOF they are implicitly denying the scientific fact that the sun will one day die. Stupid beyond belief.
yes
@UW; you fail, again! The migration away from Earth has MUCH MORE time to do than migration from rising seas.
The government isn’t doing the latter, but NASA has always been studying migration to other planets and solar systems.
YOU FAILED.
Government hasn’t stopped murder, so it’s not a problem. Duuuuur
UW,
You are arguing with someone (Polar) who doesn’t use logic to form thoughts thus logic will not change his mind. The sun is dying. The earth is dying. At what speed…I don’t think we are quite sure of that yet but this absurd belief that humanity will persist forever is simply wrong.
Enjoy your travel down your new rabbit holes.
Govt can’t stop murder. Dur squared.
I took a lot of different college courses, BUT I ALSO PASSED THEM ALL.
Who ya gonna believe, a scientist or an ex real estate salesman?
Climate Hoaxers don’t want anyone to see this report on their scam that is being exposed….
http://www.whatfinger.com/single-post/2017/04/21/The-Science-of-Climate-Change-Dr-Patrick-Moore-and-Stefan-Molyneux—Climate-Change-Is-A-Scam-of-Epic-Proportions
I expect many down votes, perhaps enough to censor this post… temporarily, until I replace it.
LOL at the latest Nye show denouncing De-Nye-ers:
http://www.whatfinger.com/single-post/2017/04/25/Shocking-Science-Bill-Nye-The-Science-Guys-Show-on-Neflix-Bill-Nye-Saves-The-World-Will-Stun-and-Disgust-Most
CAPTION UNDER THE SCREEN OF THE ABOVE VIDEO: “The fake science guy, without a science degree calls this his new show…which is the most ridiculous thing you will ever see in science up until this point.”
Polar,
Just stop. No one cares. You are like the kid who breaks a lamp because his parents don’t give him enough positive attention. Negative attention is better than none at all, right? By the way, based on my analysis you should be in 10th grade now. Good luck buddy! Hope your parents increase your bedtime!
Paraphrasing of CTT:
Stop! You’re discrediting my hero, Bill NYE, the SILENCER GUY.
Polar,
I am not sure what is more entertaining – your complete delusion or the fact you don’t know how to respond appropriately to others’ comments. I didn’t mention Bill Nye. I don’t care about Bill Nye. Polar, I agree with you that the Liberal MSM and a lot of progressives are interested in silencing the opinions of others. I agree that if they don’t like something they normally claim its sexist, racist or any other ism or ist they can think of. That being said, honestly, you are no better. You aren’t dumb but you are severely misguided and so trapped by party affiliation that you refuse to believe anything other than that which you are told . When is the last time you disagreed with the GOP? Open your mind. This time, please, please try to respond with something of substance. Do you realize you come across as a troll a majority of the time? I am telling you this as a fellow human. You aren’t making a dent in anyone’s opinion here. You are simply giving them more ammunition. When is the last time you questioned something told to you by Fox, Breitbart, Infowars or whatever else you may listen to?
Nye is not a Science Guy. He has elected himself to be a SILENCER GUY, to silence those who know the truth about Climate Change NOT being significantly influenced by humans, and is thus a part of the topic of this article…. i.e. fair game to discuss.
YOU don’t set rules as regards what is fair game to discuss, within the umbrella of the topic.