That might depend on the police force (i.e., state) we’re talking about. My colleague told me that when he hit a deer and called the police with the deer still lying around, they just shot it.
"sure, the forest I played in as a kid is silent, the trees are dying, insects are sparse, we go back and forth between buried in 10ft of snow and heat wave drought inside a month, the river is low enough that it exposed carvings of 1,000 year old famine warnings, but we keep getting flooded every year with once in a lifetime storms, but there's NO EVIDENCE of climate change and I can prove it because [politician/company] said so"
Somewhat off topic but just some trivia from a geology weather class I took
100 year flood does not mean it happens every 100 years but there’s a 1/100 chance for it to happen annually
Putting climate change aside for a second for consistency sake, you could go for 150 or 200 years without a 100 year flood or on the other side only a 5 year gap for that 100 year flood if you’re unlucky
That's correct, it's about probability based on past known history. An area could get unlucky and have repeat conditions sooner than normal. When many areas appear to be having this same bad luck, it's time to reevaluate the probabilities. It's also why regular weather forecasts haven't seemed to get things as right as they used to...using the past percent chance probabilities in a changing environment doesn't hit as well as it used to.
At some point even the best plans aren't going to be enough, and the more we built the worse it gets. When an area gets water amounts in a day that it used to get in a year, that water simply isn't going anywhere fast. You know how evolution is about adaptation? I don't think we're adapting all that well or fast enough. (Yes, it's not quite the same thing, but the same point. Don't change, don't expect to survive)
If we ever do get the point of starting to actually fix climate change, those same Republicans will be whining that we should keep things the way they are (because by that point the rich will have figured out some way to profit from it).
When people talk about the cost of climate change, the updated/improved replacement engineering and construction are some of those costs. And the same exact people who initially denied climate change even existed and who are now downplaying its effects are the exact same people who will complain about the additional costs caused by the consequence of inaction.
42 replies
"I'm pepper spraying the water but it won't stop obstructing traffic!"
Must not be American police. That water would be half bullets here.
Nah, the acorn won't be very loud when it hits the water.
Maybe there's a hidden sheet of tin just below the water surface, you never know
This is Germany. Most bullets fired here end up in deer instead of people.
As it should be
Deer is delicious
Here in Germany the police tend to call the responsible hunter to avoid the paperwork, that comes with shooting their weapons.
That might depend on the police force (i.e., state) we’re talking about. My colleague told me that when he hit a deer and called the police with the deer still lying around, they just shot it.
I keep punching and choking it but it keeps coming back for more! Oh... Oh God..... IT LOOKS EVEN DARKER NOW!!! EVERY POLICE MAN FOR HIMSELF
OFFICER DOWN!!!
BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM
I'M HIT! I'M HIT!!
Porto Alegre underwater, not expected to recede any time soon
So what you're saying is, we need tougher laws against activists! /s
Arrest that water!
Beat it with a baton until it stops resisting
Theyre still not gonna make the connection
Give post10 15 minutes with a simple rake and traffic will be back normal
The climate knows that doing a protest that blocks highways are illiegal.
I'm so confused about the text. why would the climate paralyze climate activists? and what does that have to do with the image? so confused.
wE jusT neeD tO sPend a feW, MorE billioN raisinG thE road Aa littlE BiT hiGher...
ETDOPWNENGEAETG
Because the top text should read "when climate change instead of climate activists...". It confused me for half a minute too
oooohhhhhh, is that what they meant. that makes more sense
Are we doing the switcheroo thing on Lemmy? How does it work? Do we link to Reddit?
Looks like bad engineering to me.
A lot of engineering was done assuming that rainfall behaved the way it did in the past. That's not a valid assumption anymore.
Those "once in a lifetime" or "once in a decade" weather events seem to be quite common these days
"Another 100 year flood" seems like a ridiculous headline at this point. Denial is everywhere.
"sure, the forest I played in as a kid is silent, the trees are dying, insects are sparse, we go back and forth between buried in 10ft of snow and heat wave drought inside a month, the river is low enough that it exposed carvings of 1,000 year old famine warnings, but we keep getting flooded every year with once in a lifetime storms, but there's NO EVIDENCE of climate change and I can prove it because [politician/company] said so"
Somewhat off topic but just some trivia from a geology weather class I took
100 year flood does not mean it happens every 100 years but there’s a 1/100 chance for it to happen annually
Putting climate change aside for a second for consistency sake, you could go for 150 or 200 years without a 100 year flood or on the other side only a 5 year gap for that 100 year flood if you’re unlucky
That's correct, it's about probability based on past known history. An area could get unlucky and have repeat conditions sooner than normal. When many areas appear to be having this same bad luck, it's time to reevaluate the probabilities. It's also why regular weather forecasts haven't seemed to get things as right as they used to...using the past percent chance probabilities in a changing environment doesn't hit as well as it used to.
Thanks for the input it never crossed my mind that weather (the thing that we can only predict) changes when the past data is no longer relevant
And a big problem we're having is that due to climate change those 1/100 chance events are changing for the worst.
Oh 10000% it’s why I said ignoring climate change. Weather events are getting more frequent and more extreme
As well as "once in a lifetime" financial crisis in the US.
At some point even the best plans aren't going to be enough, and the more we built the worse it gets. When an area gets water amounts in a day that it used to get in a year, that water simply isn't going anywhere fast. You know how evolution is about adaptation? I don't think we're adapting all that well or fast enough. (Yes, it's not quite the same thing, but the same point. Don't change, don't expect to survive)
B-b-but climate change isn't happening? - Republicans then
B-b-but think of the eCoNoMy!? - Republicans now
Climate change is happening and we should do something about it! - Bernie Sanders, always
Where did all these weird weather events come from? - centrists
If we ever do get the point of starting to actually fix climate change, those same Republicans will be whining that we should keep things the way they are (because by that point the rich will have figured out some way to profit from it).
Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord, citing how Obama was being too radical about it all, so what you said literally has already happened!
Edit: but since you asked, they indeed do keep giving! https://programming.dev/post/14301895
When people talk about the cost of climate change, the updated/improved replacement engineering and construction are some of those costs. And the same exact people who initially denied climate change even existed and who are now downplaying its effects are the exact same people who will complain about the additional costs caused by the consequence of inaction.
Corporate spin: Climate change is creating more engineering jobs! We should keep at it!
It is time to hold mother nature accountable!