Global catastrophe / SHTF "survivable locations"

[Mexican Hat]

For anyone who doubts the sanity of the discussion I recommend some light reading: The 2019 Pentagon report on Climate change.... It's only 50-odd pages.

https://climateandsecurity.files.wor...ate_to_dod.pdf

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Mexican Hat

For anyone who doubts the sanity of the discussion I recommend some light reading: The 2019 Pentagon report on Climate change.... It's only 50-odd pages.

https://climateandsecurity.files.wor...ate_to_dod.pdf

the problem is that the data in the report is based on now known flawed information .

[Mexican Hat]

Originally Posted by newhaul

the problem is that the data in the report is based on now known flawed information .

Don't want to get too far off topic but having read the report perhaps you can substantiate your claim? What data used in the study is now known to be flawed?
Please share.

The only reputable contradictory data I have heard is that the NASA satellite study (citing the numbers of people that live in areas that will be flooded in event of a 1m sea level rise) has been increased from 60 to 300 million after they took the height readings of vegetation into account.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by Mexican Hat

Don't want to get too far off topic but having read the report perhaps you can substantiate your claim? What data used in the study is now known to be flawed?
Please share.

The only reputable contradictory data I have heard is that the NASA satellite study (citing the numbers of people that live in areas that will be flooded in event of a 1m sea level rise) has been increased from 60 to 300 million after they took the height readings of vegetation into account.

Climate change is not a SHTF scenario. This is something that takes place over time and have been going on for eons. There is time to adapt as man has always done. The issue in this thread is if one has to bug out, where does one go?

The issues that would make one need to leave are those that are usually unexpected and always sudden and severe. These are things like epidemic/pandemic, volcano/volcanoes or supervolcano. regional or larger power outage, etc.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Mexican Hat

Don't want to get too far off topic but having read the report perhaps you can substantiate your claim? What data used in the study is now known to be flawed?
Please share.

The only reputable contradictory data I have heard is that the NASA satellite study (citing the numbers of people that live in areas that will be flooded in event of a 1m sea level rise) has been increased from 60 to 300 million after they took the height readings of vegetation into account.

here is one piece that actually caused the ipcc to officially issue a correction to their latest report originally issued this last September .

https://phys.org/news/2019-09-journa...n-warming.html

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by ArmyDaveNY

Climate change is not a SHTF scenario. This is something that takes place over time and have been going on for eons. There is time to adapt as man has always done. The issue in this thread is if one has to bug out, where does one go?

The issues that would make one need to leave are those that are usually unexpected and always sudden and severe. These are things like epidemic/pandemic, volcano/volcanoes or supervolcano. regional or larger power outage, etc.

personally I am looking forward to the" catastrophic" sea level rise to give us new anchorages to explore but so far in the last 40 years I haven't seen anything aside from the same rate of rise per decade that we have seen for the last couple hundred years.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by newhaul

personally I am looking forward to the" catastrophic" sea level rise to give us new anchorages to explore but so far in the last 40 years I haven't seen anything aside from the same rate of rise per decade that we have seen for the last couple hundred years.

I agree. According to the so-called experts, much of my city should have been under water by now. Oops. In addition to the new gunkholes to look at and the new anchorages, the rise would flush out a lot of the filth! Perhaps equally telling, the wealthy, including those saying we need to stop climate change, have continued to buy properties right on the edge of the rising waters.


Back to the thread. Here in NYC, one of the most troubling scenarios is an extended and regional loss of power. We are nine meals ( or less!) from anarchy. Other scenarios are problematic, but not quite as immediate. For example, an epidemic would take a number of days before people really start to react.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by HansChristian33

South Western Tasmania that’s all I’ll say but there are places down there that can really only be reached by sea, are incredibly wild with access to ample land, fresh water and seafood.

Very bad place to go to; the water is crook, the land is poor quality and the seafood is poisonous. The locals are unfriendly.

All the really good places to bolt to are in the northern hemisphere and most near the equator

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Wotname

Very bad place to go to; the water is crook, the land is poor quality and the seafood is poisonous. The locals are unfriendly.

All the really good places to bolt to are in the northern hemisphere and most near the equator

on my coast its best between about 38°N and 55°N for the best salmon and tuna.
And shellfish well the colder the water the better.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by newhaul

on my coast its best between about 38°N and 55°N for the best salmon and tuna.
And shellfish well the colder the water the better.

All of which confirms my view that we should encourage those who need to bolt somewhere when the SHTF, then that somewhere should be away from places such you describe.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Wotname

All of which confirms my view that we should encourage those who need to bolt somewhere when the SHTF, then that somewhere should be away from places such you describe.

most wouldn't like living aboard in my area in the winter
And yes that's water off the pier in my marina .

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

here is one piece that actually caused the ipcc to officially issue a correction to their latest report originally issued this last September .
https://phys.org/news/2019-09-journa...n-warming.html

Once again, Newhaul misrepresents the facts, and gets it wrong.

The Journal “Nature” requested a retraction of THIS article, which the authors (of the questioned article) accepted.
“... The (retracted) report used a new approach to measure the ocean's temperature based on measuring the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxide rising off the oceans' plants. Much of the data on ocean temperatures currently relies on the Argo array, robotic devices that float at different depths.
The retraction of the article came on the same day that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released its latest report on the impacts warming on oceans and ice-covered regions ...”
“... In a paper published Oct. 31 in the journal Nature, researchers found that ocean temperatures had warmed 60 percent more than outlined by the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
However, the conclusion came under scrutiny after mathematician Nic Lewis, a critic of the scientific consensus around human-induced warming, posted a critique of the paper on the blog of Judith Curry, another well-known critic ...”
“... Keeling said they have since redone the calculations, finding the ocean is still likely warmer than the estimate used by the IPCC ...”
“... According to the most recent IPCC report, climate emissions need to be cut by 20 percent by 2030 and then zeroed out by 2075 to keep warming from exceeding 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels.
Authors of the recent study had previously claimed that emissions levels in coming decades would need to be 25 percent lower to keep warming under that 2-degree cap ...”

“Climate contrarian uncovers scientific error, upends major ocean warming study” ~ by Joshua Emerson Smith, November 16, 2018
➥ https://phys.org/news/2018-11-climat...fic-error.html

Retraction Note ➥ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1585-5

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by newhaul

personally I am looking forward to the" catastrophic" sea level rise to give us new anchorages to explore but so far in the last 40 years I haven't seen anything aside from the same rate of rise per decade that we have seen for the last couple hundred years.

We're a couple of feet up from a creek 200 m away. I keep telling my wife we should build a dock now.

[rstevens4816]

I searched for the "Historic Vessel Vega", but did not find a link on this forum to this short film I was reminded of by this discussion. Just made me think about how only really badass men can deal with real SHTF...

https://www.facebook.com/12506843422...Tg2NTQ0NzQ5MA/

[Ghostrider421]

Someone previously mentioned 3rd world countries?


First step in the collapse of any system is the end of the rule of law. The US no longer has it. WWIII will not be opposing countries, but the collapse of social programs and blood in the streets. It won 't be Russia vs US, but civil wars like the 1848 communist revolutions that swept Europe and international Marxism vs what remains of individual freedoms. There will also be an international component of Shiite vs Sunni breaking out by 23'. America and Canada breaks apart socially and economically after 24.



WWIII is Marxism pushing back against the collapsing welfare state and socialism. The neocons might foolishly get us into a war, but the real war is what is happening across the world, just like 1848 with multiple Marxist revolutions underway. There will be blood in the streets as the state runs out of money. HK, Barcelona, Santiago, Paris, etc aren't backwaters, but first world cities.