USVI-On-Line

It looks like a fantastic place to visit - and I certainly hope it remains that way for thousands of years to come.

If anyone wants to chime in about sea levels or right wing publications, please keep it civil and do it in this thread. I'll have a little more to say later, but I didn't want to mess up her incredible trip report.

Thanks.

I thought about posting links to some scientific papers and whatnot, but that's not really what this board is all about. We're mostly adults here - all capable of using google and finding info if we're so inclined.

I'm adding the Maldives to my list, but I'm not in any particular hurry, if you get my drift.

i agree it's not in th ebest way to use this post as a political one- but on this post i would be intrigued to hear you views-

I'm rather with you GDave. I tend to lean more toward proven science than scare tactics in forming my opinions.

Thanks for starting a new thread. I was thinking, oh no - not again

Anyway, I have no idea about what is true or not in this case. I've read that there are evacuation plans for the Maldives, Bangladesh and some islands in the pacific, like Tuvalu. But if it's not going to happen, so much better for everyone.

New york city is starting to think of putting in flood gates----to the tune of billions--seriously.
i think anyone who doesn't take this seriously is kidding themselves.

toes in the sand wrote:jmq - If you did not want to comment on the content of the link why do you find in necessary to make a political comment on the source of the link? I am just curious the rationale behind that.

I’ll answer here so as not to further sully the Maldives TR (apologies to Maggy for saying anything in her defense in the first place).
As to the “rationale”… the comment after the link ("It's all a publicity stunt designed to get paid") made me go “huh?” and click on the link because other non-editorial news sources, while indeed calling the underwater cabinet meeting a “stunt” also indicated that “officials said the event itself was light-hearted” and the idea was to raise awareness about how the Maldives would have a problem if sea levels were to rise.
I suppose I could’ve just said that, but thought it easier to just point out the bias of the source (betcha they arent publishing any letters from researchers with an opposing POV), especially since Maggy didn’t intend anything about her “disappearing” comment, beyond the likelihood that she might’ve been exposed to the concerns of the real people that actually live there.
Other than that, I do not have the inclination to engage in any no-win googling contest about whose experts say what about the possible cause and effect of climate change.

jmq wrote: Other than that, I do not have the inclination to engage in any no-win googling contest about whose experts say what about the possible cause and effect of climate change.

Bingo. Same here.

jmq wrote:I’ll answer here so as not to further sully the Maldives TR (apologies to Maggy for saying anything in her defense in the first place).
As to the “rationale”… the comment after the link ("It's all a publicity stunt designed to get paid") made me go “huh?” and click on the link because other non-editorial news sources, while indeed calling the underwater cabinet meeting a “stunt” also indicated that “officials said the event itself was light-hearted” and the idea was to raise awareness about how the Maldives would have a problem if sea levels were to rise.
I suppose I could’ve just said that, but thought it easier to just point out the bias of the source (betcha they arent publishing any letters from researchers with an opposing POV), especially since Maggy didn’t intend anything about her “disappearing” comment, beyond the likelihood that she might’ve been exposed to the concerns of the real people that actually live there.
Other than that, I do not have the inclination to engage in any no-win googling contest about whose experts say what about the possible cause and effect of climate change.

Thank you for your reply. I am still not sure the reason you felt the need to explain your views of the Spectators views but I thank you for your explanation of what you posted. I think that any reasonable person could read the letter posted there and formed their own opinion about the leanings of the author. I do not end my posts with an explanation of my political beliefs or my views of any previous poster leanings. I think that we can figure all that out for ourselves. (although many times we will be way off the mark)

I am just having trouble understanding postings on forums that start out by saying something like "I don't want to make this thread political but....." Usually it is those people who complain about a thread going political and have no idea that they were a contribution.

I apologize for my continuance of a distraction in both this and Maggy's thread.