So if science tells us that Washington DC will be under water someday, then does that mean they should move?
Put another way, those that continue to build up the area and sell real estate at prices that are among the highest in the world, are they science deniers?
I had not only envisioned flooding DC, but the entire left coast and northeast coast with New York leading the charge feeding the fishies. All the left will be left with is Illinios and Detroit.
Granted, the whole lot of them would simply move to conservative states and destroy them as well. 😞
Originally posted by whodey http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090205142132.htm
It looks as if Washington DC is on borrowed time as global warming threatens to submerge it under water forever.
So should global warming be viewed as a threat or something that will eventually save us?
Interesting article. Global warming is a genuine threat, and flooding millions of square miles of costal land will NOT save us... Who dreamed that idea up?? Sadly, despite the warnings of leading scientists, there are millions who can't connect the thousands of tons of pollution our cars and smokestacks spew into our air every year with the greenhouse effect we have now that causes global warming. Global warming will continue, the glaicers will continue to melt, the ocean levels will continue to rise. and we have only ourselves to blame for it.
Originally posted by bill718 Interesting article. Global warming is a genuine threat, and flooding millions of square miles of costal land will NOT save us... Who dreamed that idea up?? Sadly, despite the warnings of leading scientists, there are millions who can't connect the thousands of tons of pollution our cars and smokestacks spew into our air every year with the greenhouse effect ...[text shortened]... ue to melt, the ocean levels will continue to rise. and we have only ourselves to blame for it.
What is the temperature now? And what should it be?