Posted on 11/30/2012 3:04:06 PM PST by blam
Hope some of that rain makes it to the Midwest particularly the Mississippi River which is about to shut down.
Dang I’m getting old. I was five in 64. I remember a house full of people as we lived on a hill just out of Orick. I didn’t know that was a thousand year flood. Has it been a thousand years already? Time sure flies.
I live in Sonoma County. I seem to remember maybe 5 or 6 years ago it raining CONSTANTLY in January. What a pain in the butt that was. The flooding in Marin County and Petaluma was something awful.
Weather... what are ya gonna do.
Which renders the article another error-riddled piece of grant-mongering screaming "CLIMATE CHANGE" on the heels of Sandy. IOW the content is more appropriate for a carnival barker than the "Scientific" American.
Ca does tax rainfall that lands on some commercial property. A friend who retired to Nevada had a truck company and every time rain hit his lot he got a tax bill of sorts for the pollution of the trucks oil going into the sewers or ome such stuff. Insane!
Ca does tax rainfall that lands on some commercial property. A friend who retired to Nevada had a truck company and every time rain hit his lot he got a tax bill of sorts for the pollution of the trucks oil going into the sewers or ome such stuff. Insane!
The Sky is Falling!! The Sky is Falling!!
Turns out, I was right. Just a normal rain for No Cal.
Keep reading your magazines. They make you sound so smart.
Excuse me idiot, I never predicted a monstrous storm. You were indicating that such risks didn't exist and I proved otherwise.
Keep reading your magazines. They make you sound so smart.
Brewer's diary of the events in 1862 was no magazine, but an eyewitness account by a qualified expert. I was just as critical of Scientific American's grant mongering tale of doom as anyone else here, of course, if you had R-E-A-D the thread (four posts above) you would know that. Instead...
I suggest you take up reading. It might make you smart enough to have avoided making an a$$ of yourself.
Might.
So, you call me an ‘idiot’ and an ‘a$$’ and suggest that I don’t read. What color is the sky (that’s falling) in your world? Oh, that’s right, you’re too busy reading to see that the sky isn’t falling. Get back on your meds friend.
For the third time, idiot, I never said the sky was falling.
As I suggested in post 56 above, the chances of an event like that in 1862 are exceedingly UNlikely. "Rains like this at this time of the year are far less of a threat because the snowpack has not yet accumulated."
Here is another example from before the storm where I indicated that it was unlikely to be the cause of a flood: "We're supposedly due for about six inches of rain between midnight and noon, which would be hardly unusual."Clearly, I did not think or say that the sky is falling, quite the contrary.
Yet since you quite clearly cannot read, you persist in this stupidity.
Oh, that’s right, you’re too busy reading to see that the sky isn’t falling.
Contrary to your assertion, in post 64 I CASTIGATED the source article from The Scientific American: "Which renders the article another error-riddled piece of grant-mongering screaming "CLIMATE CHANGE" on the heels of Sandy. IOW the content is more appropriate for a carnival barker than the "Scientific" American."
Which renders your post completely false. Had you read the thread, you would know that.
So, no, I didn't believe the magazine. I never said there was an imminent deluge; I merely proved to you that a serious flood in Northern California is POSSIBLE. Yes, you quite clearly do not R-E-A-D and yes, you are an idiot.
GG, this is an example of why I'm tired of FR. Twelve years, and it just keeps getting worse.
You cited some thing from a hundred and fifty years ago that you thought was relevant to the (then) upcoming No Cal storm. But you didn’t think that it was possible? WTF? After twelve years, maybe its time you did take a break — but at a minimum, tone down the condescending attitude and knock off calling other Freepers names just because you disagree with them. Have a good one.
I hope it makes it all the way across to Texas, we need it!
It was a relevant event BECAUSE THE ARTICLE CITED IT. The phenomenon the article is talking about DOES have that potential, but not at this time of year. In the case of conditions similar to 1862, yes, that potential for a massive flood exists. Hence your 'rain in Northern California, so what' comment, was in need of correction with the historical record of what 'rain in Northern California' can do.
But you didn’t think that it was possible? WTF?
Not this time of year. Gad are you dense.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.