Oh no, we can't refortify the levees and build them higher, that would further have negative impacts on the natural ecosystems. The ecosystems are so important, we cannot take a risk, even if it means the levees won't be that great.

Seriously...you can't have it both ways

9/15/2005 10:34:14 AM

the environmentalists wanted the levees, it was w who cut the funding to fortify them, and spent it on his vacation.

9/15/2005 10:35:08 AM

yeah the cash flowed right into his hip pocket

9/15/2005 10:36:40 AM

Lets not build Empires below the waves

9/15/2005 10:36:45 AM

i want NO to be the new capital of Atlantis personally.

9/15/2005 10:40:24 AM

If the wetlands hadn't been paved over in the first place they would have been able to do their job in flood prevention.

9/15/2005 10:44:46 AM

if you add levees you will just make things worse

spend the cash and fix the wetlands

its not a hippie ecosystem thing its a the wetlands protect the city and are vital for a place to deposit silt from the mississipi river that prevents the city from continuing to sink thing

[Edited on September 15, 2005 at 10:56 AM. Reason : ss]

9/15/2005 10:55:30 AM

But if we don't pave those worthless swamps we can't build the Wal-Mart there and it will hurt the economy!!!!1

9/15/2005 11:02:12 AM

are you fucking kidding?

9/15/2005 11:57:54 AM

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050606/ai_n14657367

June 6th 2005

9/15/2005 11:59:38 AM

Quote :

"if you add levees you will just make things worse"

its an endless cycle and nobody can win

you act like all the continents have and always will be in their current positions and that by keeping wetlands there, the city will be saved...its not like theres a such thing as continental drift and plate tectonics and the fact that storms naturally shape our country's coastlines, unless you antrhopomorphically preserve them, ie levees, riprap walls, jetis, etc

in the 70s The Sierra Club and some other environmental groups filed lawsuits against the Corps of Engineers because they were preaching the wetlands preservation thing instead of the protect our city from a catastrophic flood thing

9/15/2005 12:31:17 PM

First off, the continents move at about the same rate as the human fingernail grows. It will be a million years before that shit makes a difference in todays ecosystem.

Second, GTFO and come back with some sources

9/15/2005 12:41:03 PM

do you have a degree in natural resources - marine and coastal concentration? yeah i didnt think so

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=19418

naive or retarded? you are both

Gerald Gallinghouse pwns you

9/15/2005 12:48:43 PM

You know, that same argument has been made for why we should put up oceanfront seawalls. Lets put up multimillion dollar homes a hundred feet from the sea, and when the beach erodes, we put a huge wall to protect the houses. The rest of the beach erodes away and we no longer have a sandy beach because we valued the private home than the public beach. Just a wall that comes up to someones back yard and gets undercut by scouring by the waves.

The fact is, that putting up manmade erosion control structures is terrible for the regional economy because there is no beach for people to go to. NC has realized this, and NJ has not.

9/15/2005 12:50:57 PM

you cant have a natural-state ecosystem of wetlands AND have adequate protection from a hurricane when your city is below sea level...you cant have it both ways

9/15/2005 12:54:15 PM

Quote :

"The fact is, that putting up manmade erosion control structures is terrible for the regional economy because there is no beach for people to go to. NC has realized this, and NJ has not."

Depends on how severe of an impact you are trying to make. NC has been succeful at rebuilding areas through collection walls at the OB. Just down the hall from me here at the DOT they have a time lapse sequence of some island tip on the Coast where erosion had gotten pretty bad. They build a hook wall and allowed for the sand bar to build back up over top of it. Worked really well and the land has returned to its original shape/size.

The system that Venice adopted seems capable of both fighting storm/ocean surges and maintaining normal water levels.

[Edited on September 15, 2005 at 12:57 PM. Reason : .]

9/15/2005 12:55:54 PM

plus the coastline of north carolina is amero-trailing edge...ie its on the receeding side of continental shift...it has a very gentle slope...beach renourishment is pretty effective for a lot of areas that arent high energy...high energy areas are much more susceptible to erosion and sediment transport...many times certain manmade structures are made to keep inlets open that have plenty of commercial traffic...seawalls at shipping ports...commercial type things

9/15/2005 12:59:37 PM

No I dont have a useless hippy degree.

Thank you for doing what you should have done in your FIRST POST, although judging by the content of "frontpagemag" maybe it was best you didnt.

9/15/2005 12:59:44 PM

my degree is pretty useless...but you know what else?

my first post should be obviously true to anybody with a lick of sense...not your average people who blame Bush for every problem in the history of the world

you dont know shit about it so dont act like you do...you're wrong...accept it and

GTFO

I also have an engineering degree...WHAT WHAT WHAT WHAT

9/15/2005 1:00:48 PM

^I'm with ya.

Quote :

"The fact is, that putting up manmade erosion control structures is terrible for the regional economy because there is no beach for people to go to. NC has realized this, and NJ has not."

Umm, maybe you know more about this than I, but I disagree. I frequent NC and NJ beaches fairly regularly and am curious how NJ hasn't realized this?

How are the jetties set up on the beaches not helping in NJ? The beaches at NJ are pretty damn wide right now too, although I realize that a lot of that has to do with the decade long (I think) dredging project to put sand back on the beaches.

9/15/2005 1:09:44 PM

you didn't say beach renourishment, you said

Quote :

"unless you antrhopomorphically preserve them, ie levees, riprap walls, jetis, etc."

which are hardened structures

beach renourishment is a temporary solution and is only economically feasible for large cities

The outer banks is trying to get rid of a stupid local sand tax that was enacted by the Dare Co. Commissioners (raised local sales tax to highest in NC) because Bush cut funding for it (only smart thing hes done so far)

Theres no reason to spend $50 million dollars on beach renourishment, when one hurricane can undo it all.


Besides jetties only work on oneside to accrete sand, which starves the downstream areas of sand. Thats why there is a pronounced buzz saw effect when you see a row of jetties. One side accretes, the other erodes. To keep erosion from occuring, you have to dredge, which costs more money.



[Edited on September 15, 2005 at 1:13 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on September 15, 2005 at 1:14 PM. Reason : .]

9/15/2005 1:10:27 PM

Quote :

"beach renourishment is pretty effective for a lot of areas that arent high energy"

they did a pretty good job with it at Topsoil...its all about having some wealthy residents who dont mind paying for it...dont have to have a big city

yeah its temporary but thats why its called REnourishment...you keep it up if you want to keep your beach

i know enough to not buy coastal properties, unless i intend to sell or rent them

9/15/2005 2:00:16 PM

Quote :

"you cant have a natural-state ecosystem of wetlands AND have adequate protection from a hurricane when your city is below sea level...you cant have it both ways "

you're probably right. here's an idea - DON'T BUILD CITIES BELOW SEA LEVEL

9/15/2005 2:13:40 PM

^i agree with that...too bad people want to live near the coast no matter what

9/15/2005 4:06:29 PM

^^^^so you're saying that the NJ beaches would be better without jetties?

Please explain what they should do up there to prevent beach erosion.

9/15/2005 4:18:16 PM

and with New Orleans...the economy and tourism wasnt because of any sandy beaches...they needed a dry city to make money

conversely some place like Miami was losing all types of tourist money in the 80s and turned to beach re-nourishment...now their beaches are long and wide and crowded from all the tourists

9/15/2005 4:20:14 PM

Quote :

"^^^^so you're saying that the NJ beaches would be better without jetties? Please explain what they should do up there to prevent beach erosion."

let nature take its course, make houses be relocated. we will spend millions of dollars trying to save a structure that will eventually be destroyed anyway. it doesnt make good economic or social policy. its quite assinine that private investor will make millions of dollars in investment money from a beach house, but that millions of public funds will be spent to pay for its protection and eventual loss to the sea.

9/15/2005 4:51:49 PM

TreeTwista10

Quote :

"you act like all the continents have and always will be in their current positions and that by keeping wetlands there, the city will be saved...its not like theres a such thing as continental drift and plate tectonics and the fact that storms naturally shape our country's coastlines, unless you antrhopomorphically preserve them, ie levees, riprap walls, jetis, etc"

HAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
ROFLBBQHOLYCRAP

Quote :

"do you have a degree in natural resources - marine and coastal concentration? yeah i didnt think so http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=19418 "

I wonder if your source on front page (an ex-cop and novelist) has any of those things.
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/authors.asp?ID=13

HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
ROFLOMGAFLCIO

9/15/2005 5:20:46 PM

^ why does that matter, if the claims are still correct? He attacked someone else who was disagreeing with those respective fields, presumably without a degree in said fields. I don't have a degree in the field of biology, but I accept that evolution is how life was speciated. Is my belief unfounded?

9/15/2005 5:25:34 PM

^^i just found an article...i would be glad to post a lot of scientific journal articles that explain coastal processes or perhaps some associated press articles of lawsuits filed against the CoE in the 1970s...i dont want to spend my time on that when most logical people can understand the FACTS i have presented already

bottom line is just like DirtyGreek said...dont build a city below sea level

But the city was already there...damn the Soap Box is a bunch of people who stick to their guns even when they're proven wrong

9/15/2005 5:33:31 PM

^ TreeTwista implied that since pyrowebmastr didn't have a degree in certain fields, then his opinion was worthless. Then, to support his claims, Treetwista posted a column written by someone who didn't have any of those degrees either.

Sounds like a fucking pwnt to me.

9/15/2005 5:33:40 PM

disregard the article then...you cats post articles like "Here is a link to an article that proves Bush knew about 9/11" http://blogs.com/mrconspiracy/fuckbush.html...so disregard the article I posted...all I know is pyrowebmaster hasnt posted shit since then cause he, unlike you, probably realizes that I am right...

in classes about coastal policies we would discuss for hours the disputes between fisherman and environmentalists about finding a medium between allowing fisherman to fish and make money, yet not depleting the supplies to appease the environmentalists

there were also similar debates about the balance between preserving natural habitats, or putting up manmade structures in order to try and preserve the current coastal areas of land without letting them erode away, etc...its 2nd nature to me...I dont care what kind of degree you do or dont have...but I know what I'm talking about on this issue

9/15/2005 5:39:23 PM

FEAR MY UNCORROBORATED FACTS!!!1111

9/15/2005 5:43:17 PM

Quote :

"TreeTwista implied that since pyrowebmastr didn't have a degree in certain fields, then his opinion was worthless. Then, to support his claims, Treetwista posted a column written by someone who didn't have any of those degrees either. "

actually, no. TT implied that pyro's claims WENT AGAINST the doctrines posited by certain fields. That, also is allowed to be done without holding a degree in said field. For instance, if you came in here and said "Man descended from rocks," I wouldn't have to have a degree in biology to say "ummm, biology disagrees with you." AND, any source that I post that upholds what the field of biology believes is perfectly valid, because I still am not going against the field of biology.

9/15/2005 5:47:21 PM

please quit pretending you can read, let alone that you're a lawyer.

9/15/2005 5:49:40 PM

i'll take that as an admittance of defeat on your part.

9/15/2005 5:51:41 PM

you can take that to mean that you're misreading Tree's quote. There is nothing in that sentence to imply that he was speaking of anything other than peedwiddles qualifications. Obviously, since Tree didn't even protest my interprutation.

you'refuckingretarded.

9/15/2005 5:54:23 PM

or, that TT was swayed by your bullshit ad hominem...

although, I would agree that in this case, the reference to the degree was kind of an ad hominem, but its not inconsistent with the rest of his post...

9/15/2005 6:03:36 PM

man. if you're going to start pretending like you know a logical fallacy from your asshole, then please read this...

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

and run your shit past me again.

9/15/2005 6:08:07 PM

sounds like a plan to me, we'll call it that, then, cause I knew it wasn't strictly ad-hominem, but didn't feel the need to go look it up. Obviously, if thats the only thing with which you can come back, then you must again be admitting defeat.

9/15/2005 6:11:56 PM

Quote :

"read this... http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html and run your shit past me again. "

the fallacy isn't peewee's, it's yours and Tree's.

[Edited on September 15, 2005 at 6:16 PM. Reason : what a fucking dumbass.]

9/15/2005 6:15:44 PM

you quoted yourself? wow.

9/15/2005 6:16:37 PM

Quote :

"you quoted yourself? wow."

9/15/2005 6:17:37 PM

I didn't see any purpose in it.

9/15/2005 6:18:29 PM

and that's why they call you chembob and why they call me Socks``.

9/15/2005 6:20:14 PM

actually, its not mine. It would be TTs and TTs alone.

If you'll notice, you intially called out TT for posting a source which didn't come from someone in the field of natural sciences or what not. You didn't call him out for the logical fallacy. And I called you out on the notion that he somehow had to post a source from within the field of natural sciences. Thus, if you were trying to call him out on a logical fallacy, you should have done so, instead of calling him out on not following through with his own logical fallacy.

Furthermore, you didn't even mention that it was a fallacy until after I mentioned it was likely a logical fallacy. Which goes to suggest even further that you have no argument...

9/15/2005 6:20:56 PM

dude. not only did you not read the link, you apparently have no clue about which post i'm referring to.

i'll tell you what. i am defeated.

9/15/2005 6:23:31 PM

please, continue to backpedal. I don't have to read your link to a logical fallacy description when your initial post on the matter had nothing to do with a logical fallacy. I believe what you are trying to do now is called "strawman"

Quote :

"you apparently have no clue about which post i'm referring to"

really? please, show me any other appeals to authority. The ironic thing is that from the context of the link you sent, TT did not technically appeal to authority. He, again, said "this field disagrees." And, unless you can show that said field does not disagree, then it is not a logical fallacy.

9/15/2005 6:32:15 PM

Quote :

"all I know is pyrowebmaster hasnt posted shit since then cause he, unlike you, probably realizes that I am right... "

Actually, its because I didnt feel the need to respond to "Im right because I have a degree".

Also I just got back from work

[Edited on September 16, 2005 at 12:40 AM. Reason : .]

9/16/2005 12:37:00 AM

why dont some of you morons have a 5 minute conversation with a MEA professor, one who has a PhD in some type of marine earth and atmospheric sciences, and ask them about it...maybe then you'll stfu about shit you know nothing about

9/16/2005 10:09:51 AM