Arkansas Has a Growing Population of "Climate Change Refugees" 276
HughPickens.com writes: Located between Hawaii and Australia, the Marshall Islands are made up of 29 atolls and five islands with a population of about 70,000, all of whom live about six feet above sea level. Now Story Hinkley writes in the Christian Science Monitor that another 10,000 Marshallese have moved to Springdale, Arkansas because of climate change. Because this Pacific island nation is so small, the Marshallese population in Arkansas attribute their Springdale settlement to one man, John Moody, who moved to the US in 1979 after the first wave of flooding. Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas, eventually causing a steady flow of extended friends and family migrating to Springdale. "Probably in 10 to 20 years from now, we're all going to move," says Roselinta Keimbar adding that she likes Arkansas because it is far away from the ocean, meaning it is safe.
For more than three decades, Marshallese have moved in the thousands to the landlocked Ozark Mountains for better education, jobs and health care, thanks to an agreement that lets them live and work in the US.. This historical connection makes it an obvious destination for those facing a new threat: global warming. Marshallese Foreign Minister Tony de Brum says even a small rise in global temperatures would spell the demise of his country. While many world leaders in Paris want to curb emissions enough to cap Earth's warming at 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), de Brum is pushing for a target that's 25 percent lower. "The thought of evacuation is repulsive to us," says de Brum. "We think that the more reasonable thing to do is to seek to end this madness, this climate madness, where people think that smaller, vulnerable countries are expendable and therefore they can continue to do business as usual." Meanwhile residents jokingly call their new home "Springdale Atoll," and there's even a Marshallese consulate in Springdale, the only one on the mainland US. "Its not our fault that the tide is getting higher," says Carlon Zedkaia,. "Just somebody else in this world that wants to get rich."
For more than three decades, Marshallese have moved in the thousands to the landlocked Ozark Mountains for better education, jobs and health care, thanks to an agreement that lets them live and work in the US.. This historical connection makes it an obvious destination for those facing a new threat: global warming. Marshallese Foreign Minister Tony de Brum says even a small rise in global temperatures would spell the demise of his country. While many world leaders in Paris want to curb emissions enough to cap Earth's warming at 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius), de Brum is pushing for a target that's 25 percent lower. "The thought of evacuation is repulsive to us," says de Brum. "We think that the more reasonable thing to do is to seek to end this madness, this climate madness, where people think that smaller, vulnerable countries are expendable and therefore they can continue to do business as usual." Meanwhile residents jokingly call their new home "Springdale Atoll," and there's even a Marshallese consulate in Springdale, the only one on the mainland US. "Its not our fault that the tide is getting higher," says Carlon Zedkaia,. "Just somebody else in this world that wants to get rich."
Education... (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, I've traveled pretty extensively - and have enjoyed my time in Arkansas quite a bunch. But... And you knew there must be a but... I can't really imagine the hardship if you're moving to the Ozarks for a "better education." This might seem like a slam against the Ozarks and, indeed, it might be but the reality is that they're not stupid - it's that I just don't think of the Ozarks when I think of where to send people for a "better education."
Better than what? I was under the impression that we'd put schools and infrastructure in place post WWII. The climate part I get... But, of all the places to seek in the US for "better education" that seems a bit of a stretch. I'm thinking it was cheap living, ready jobs at Tyson, family, and a pre-existing culture base that was similar due to their historical roots. Hmm... I suspect "education" makes a better sound bite but damned if I'm gonna read the article - I'm no heretic.
Re: (Score:2)
To me the "wow" moment was rather the "better healthcare" bit.
Re: (Score:2)
That too... I think the entire article is probably a stretch for reasons other than they had a desire to not live on an isolated island without the benefits of modernity (which probably includes safety) and moved to where they had familiar people and jobs. It is tempting to read the article but I have my pride. If it's got pictures then I'd see fit to view those infographics but I'm guessing it probably doesn't so I'll skip giving them the traffic. Ah well...
Re: (Score:2)
"Probably" based on what?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, dying of easily-vaccinated diseases, small cuts that get infected, and bad colds sounds great! Let's ditch this western civilization stuff and move back into huts made out of mud, feces, and straw right now!
Why spend our days in comfortable, air conditioned homes discussing intellectual matters over a world-spanning network of computers with such broad-spanning implications on everyone's lives that only fifty years ago would be only the talk of crazy people? Right now, we could instead live with
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, as always, the "issues" are escalated with FUD and the crowd is whipped into a frenzy, given a gun and pointed toward a straw man.
While everyone is focused on the "talking points" the real problems slip through the cracks and another election cycle goes down the drain.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I would rather send my kid to school in the poorest Ozark school than almost any inner-city shithole school in America.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, in northern AR, there are some VERY wealthy communities up there, due mostly in part to the Walmart Walton family. There are multi-million dollar homes, and an airport, I believe, was put in just for all the business that is done up there....with industry folks coming in up there to try to get Walmart to carry their goods, etc.
So, with that kinda money, the school system up the
fallout - the gift that keeps giving (Score:2)
They better damn well love America!
[*] still better than they probably could've expected at the hands of the Japanese...
Re:Education... (Score:5, Informative)
Per capita GDP in the Marshall Islands is $2900, compared to Arkansas's $31000. Arkansas, while near the bottom among US states, is better off even compared to EU members like the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Estonia, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, and Croatia.
No matter how much "schools and infrastructure" we put in place, a pacific atoll simply doesn't have much to support a thriving economy: it is poorly located for physical or data traffic, has few natural resources, and has always been at high risk of natural disasters. The reason much of Micronesia and Polynesia were settled so late in human migration (many places just a few thousand years ago) is because these islands really are not good places to live and people only move there if they don't have a choice.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd have expected them to go to Australia or maybe somewhere in Southern Europe or even parts of Eurasia. The Ozarks? It just strikes me as an odd choice - I've been to the Ozarks but I've never been to the Marshall Islands. I've read a bit about them and seen a few documentaries but I've never felt the urge to go.
Re:Education... (Score:5, Informative)
John Moody and his family moved from the islands to Springdale creating an existing community of Marshalese in the US
There's a Marshalese consulate in Springdale
There's an existing agreement that lets the Marshalese people live and work in the US
Re: (Score:2)
Per capita GDP in the Marshall Islands is $2900, compared to Arkansas's $31000.
One other factor is that the urban conglomerate of Springdale/Fayetteville/Rogers/Bentonville has a substantially higher per-capita income than the rest of the state. The schools are quite good and well-funded, since this is the headquarters for Wal-Mart (with all the correspondingly highly paid execs). First-year teachers in Springdale make $46K/year, while first year teachers elsewhere in the state start at $30K.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Since I grew up in one of those European countries with free education, I can tell you from first hand experience that you are wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
The claim about a correlation between per capita GDP and education system quality was not made by me, but by the GP. Take that issue up with him/her.
Re: (Score:2)
The claim about a correlation between per capita GDP and education system quality was not made by me, but by the GP. Take that issue up with him/her.
You better reread the GP post again. There is NOTHING saying that per capita GDP relates to education system. What GP said was Marshall Island has much less per capita compared to AK. And AK has higher per capita than those mentioned countries even though AK per capita is in the low compared to other states in the US...
Per capita GDP in the Marshall Islands is $2900, compared to Arkansas's $31000. Arkansas, while near the bottom among US states, is better off even compared to EU members like the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Estonia, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, and Croatia.
Re: (Score:2)
Since I grew up in one of those European countries with free education, I can tell you from first hand experience that you are wrong.
Having free higher education is by default a huge advantage compared to the US. You have not provided any argument against my claim. Just "you are wrong".
Re: (Score:2)
You're absolutely right. You can choose to spend more on education as a part of your GDP and have a better educational bang for the buck.
On the other hand, lower GDP sometimes does come back to roost elsewhere. You might have a free education, but does that translate into opportunity within those countries when you finish your education?
An educated person can do many things, but that doesn't always means they have the chance to do so in their own country, and many times the chance to do so comes in some o
Re: (Score:2)
because all of them have free, or essentially free higher education!
My fancy US education taught me that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
The education is not free unless the teachers are all volunteers.
Re: (Score:2)
Your fancy education is wrong. I know several ways to get a free lunch, including - picking it from a tree, shooting and cooking it, going through the bins (trash), eating roadkill, visiting my gran's house, shoplifting, etc, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
You must have missed the lesson where if there is someone paying for it, it isn't free.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on who owns the land, and if you used sunscreen. You could be paying for the doctor to treat your melanoma, you paid for the calories you are burning, the wear and tear on your clothing and shoes, the gas to get there (if you drive...not always the case).
What does that have to do with a free lunch not being free?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Three or four years ago and probably again within the next couple of months as I'm on the road and down in DC already. Anyhow, no - I'd expect to see them in Australia or somewhere in Europe or maybe Eurasia or similar. The Ozarks seems a very odd space for them to settle. You may be seeing slight where none is intended. I'd have felt it just as odd had it been somewhere in the NE, MW, or NW. Hell, I'd have felt it odd anywhere in the US except maybe Hawaii.
Re: (Score:2)
The Ozarks are beautiful. I have a luthier friend who lives there and I visit him every Spring. At least his little patch is how I expect heaven to be, except without the insects.
Re: (Score:2)
They weren't given citizenship in Australia, Europe or Eurasia.
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed. Small disclosure: I'm from this particular bit of the planet. I can say that even 20 years ago, it was growing and doing very well - both academically and otherwise (especially compared with the rest of the state.) Incidentally, Fayetteville (the largest city in the area, just south of Springdale) is the home of the University of Arkansas, which is well regarded in its own right.
As for Healthcare, it is actually top-notch when compared to most of the South, and even most of the US.
The cost of livin
Re: (Score:2)
Better then Marshall islands. That appears to be enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was in the Marshall Islands for 4 months back in 1996. The education available there is extremely limited and not of high quality. There is no post-secondary education available there. Standards for STEM subjects are extremely low, and the dropout rate is extremely high. At the time I was there, it was normal to have a first child in your mid-teens (for both men and women). The Seventh Day Adventist church had a semi-decent elementary school on Majuro (the main island) with youth serving as the teach
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Key question (Score:5, Funny)
Are they Muslims? If so this is the end to our America. And look they criticize our way of live. We will not change our ways just for a flipping atoll who have for no apparent reason access to the US. It is our right to drive where other people would walk. And it is our right to have this great market economy. Yes we can become rich. Every decent person can become rich. And we will not allow to destroy this by some island folks or the pope who is not a true Christian. Look he just visited a Mosque in Africa. And there is no such thing as human made global warming, because if there were we would have to give up our birth rights. We will never do that.
-- signed, Republican Simbot v0.5a
Re:Key question (Score:5, Funny)
Are they Muslims? Well in that case they're oppressed and we must defend them and their religion no matter what they do. anyway, we know Muslims can do no wrong, because all evil in the world is caused by white heterosexual Christian males. Everyone else is an oppressed child who must be coddled, indulged, and taken care of by the evil oppressive white Christian patriarchy. And if you dare say any differently, you're a racist, sexist, bigot who should be banned from speaking in public, banned from the internet, kicked out of university, and arrested.
-- signed, Democrat Simbot v0.5a
Re: (Score:2)
I am going to vote for one of the two above. If you don't like either, vote for me as I am the third option. Please?
-- signed, Independent Simbot v0.1
Re: (Score:2)
Are they Muslims?
Probably not. But if global warming continues we might have adherents of cargo cults from Vanuatu move to the US. They even worship Americans. Literally: they have "gods" named John Frum and Tom Navy who are depicted as US servicemen during WWII.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlike muslims, these people are going to the US through legal channels, so I wouldn't worry too much.
Are you saying that all Muslims going to the US are doing so illegally? Think you need to spend more time in preview before you post
Must be all in their heads (Score:2)
since we all know there is no such thing as AGW. I understand the Tuamotus are being abandoned as well.
Moving to Marshall, Arkansas? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
First, AGW came for the Marshall Islands... (Score:3)
Whether you believe in God or climate change, and I'm not certain why the two are typically mutually exclusive, it has to occur to you that change is inevitable. Tangible evidence exists that the World's weather is different now, and it doesn't take a wild leap of imagination to infer that eight billion humans probably have something to do with it.
The sacrifice required now to right the ship is minimal compared to what it will become in a decade... and past a certain tipping point, there will be no remedy. Buy some land where it's presently very cold.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether you believe in God or climate change, and I'm not certain why the two are typically mutually exclusive, it has to occur to you that change is inevitable. Tangible evidence exists that the World's weather is different now, and it doesn't take a wild leap of imagination to infer that eight billion humans probably have something to do with it.
The sacrifice required now to right the ship is minimal compared to what it will become in a decade... and past a certain tipping point, there will be no remedy. Buy some land where it's presently very cold.
The only simple solution is to kill a bunch of people. Nothing else "solves" overpopulation in a simple way. And if the chicken littles are correct, then it'll be much easier to solve that problem in ten years.
Re: (Score:2)
The humans have proven to be particularly resilient and resourceful, but the rather near future requires more environment in which to expand, or a whittling of the population to achieve some balance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"If you know what's good for you, if you know that they're leftists, you won't believe anything they say any time, anywhere, about anything ... So we have no the Four Corners of Deceit, and the two universes in which we live. The Universe of Lies, the Universe of Reality, and the Four Corners of Deceit: Government, academia, science, and media. Those institutions are now corrupt and exist by virtue of deceit." - Rush Limbaugh
The program must be pretty simple:
If the Republican Party agreed with the scientific community from the outset... or if most climate scien
Re: (Score:2)
Of course I don't expect you to believe me. That might require you to suffer an existential crisis by this point. I've read your comment history, it's all you talk about.
As for evidence, it's extensive enough that we have the military, food and drug production companies, insurance companies, and oil companies (who were among the first to realize it) all making plans for a warmer, more hostile world and broken ecosystem. Suggesting that all of this is just part of a conspiracy by climate snake oil salesmen
putting this into perspective (Score:5, Insightful)
The per-capita GDP of the Marshall Islands is $2900, very low by world standards, and it has never been a lot better. Arkansas's per capita GDP, by comparison, is $31000. That alone is ample incentive for moving. That is, even a backwater, poor state like Arkansas is still a lot better that the Marshall Islands. While Westerners have some idyllic notions of island paradise, atolls have always been risky and marginal places to live; people moved there because they didn't have any other options, and these nations have always experienced large net emigration as soon as people actually had opportunities to emigrate. In addition, many of these atolls simply are not permanent, but they are temporary features that appear and disappear over thousands of years, quite naturally, regardless of human activity.
Also, to put this issue into perspective, all island nations of Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia together make up less than 3 million people, who have always lived under impoverished conditions and always been at high risk from natural disasters. Even if global warming were to displace all of them, that would be comparable to the number displaced by a single major hydroelectric plant, like China's Three River Gorges dam.
At this point, the discussion is also academic because sea levels are going to continue to rise, no matter what policies we adopt, so we better find places to accommodate these people. Given that places like Europe have big demographic problems, Europeans should welcome these populations with open arms. Of course, America would also benefit from their presence and I'm glad they are settling here.
Re: (Score:2)
Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia together make up less than 3 million people, who have always lived under impoverished conditions and always been at high risk from natural disasters. Even if global warming were to displace all of them....
The problem with global warming is its not localized to atolls in the south pacific. 40% of all humans live within 100km of a coastline.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, since you are changing the subject, you apparently concur as far as the Marshall Islands go.
Now, what about those 40% that live within 100km of a coast line? They are in an entirely different situation than pacific islanders. Pacific island nations are susceptible to sea level rise because their entire nations are within a few meters of sea level and because their ent
India vs. the Marshall Islands (Score:2, Insightful)
Why should 1 Billion people in India give up on affordable energy and all the improvements it brings to their lives just so a few thousand people can live comfortably in the Marshall Islands?
Re: (Score:2)
China certainly thinks that it is worth displacing more than 1.5 million people for a single hydroelectric dam.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a big ass dam dude, it's 5 times the size of the Hoover dam and stretches for over 600 kilometers.
Oh, and the figure I read was 1.6 million displaced, but the article was a bit old.
Re: (Score:2)
The Three Gorges Dam generates about 10GW and displaced upwards of 1.5 million people. Total world energy generation from fossil fuels is about 10TW. So, if you accept the displacement of at least 1.5 million people for the Three Gorges Dam, you should be willing to accept the displacement of at least 1.5 billion people for fossil fuel consumption, right?
Re: (Score:2)
The Three Gorges Dam generates about 10GW and displaced upwards of 1.5 million people. Total world energy generation from fossil fuels is about 10TW. So, if you accept the displacement of at least 1.5 million people for the Three Gorges Dam, you should be willing to accept the displacement of at least 1.5 billion people for fossil fuel consumption, right?
Hence my statement of more than 1.5 million. In fact, it's probably several million, but Chinese propaganda likes to play it down.
For 10 TW of clean power I think that displacing 1.5 billion people is a damn bargain.
Re: (Score:3)
It won't be just for a few thousand people in the Marshall Islands, it will be for themselves too. Their country and their lives are at severe risk from climate change. They are basically betting that they can develop fast enough to mitigate a lot of the problems, by industrializing and building defences before millions of them die.
Anyway, it's not really on most of them to fix it. It's on us in the west, and those in the far east to develop clean energy so that it is cheaper than coal anyway, at which poin
Re:India vs. the Marshall Islands (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyway, it's not really on most of them to fix it. It's on us in the west, and those in the far east to develop clean energy so that it is cheaper than coal anyway, at which point they will switch to it. We are already well on the way, we just need to speed the process up.
I apologize for being indelicate, but that line of thinking is complete bullshit. The people of India and the Far East are not some sort of subhuman animals who can't be held accountable for their actions and it's not on the West to take responsibility for fixing everybody else's problems. I absolutely abhor PC finger-wagging, but that is some of the most bigoted tripe I've read today, even if it was couched in platitudes for our Western saviors.
Re: (Score:2)
it's not on the West to take responsibility for fixing everybody else's problems.
Too bad the west has never followed that mantra. If we hadn't been stirring the pot in the middle east for 70 years maybe we'd have an extra few $Trillion to develop renewable and nuclear energy making this whole issue a moot point. (yeah yeah, we had to fight the red menace and all but making oil worthless also might have bankrupted the soviets)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, it's not really on most of them to fix it. It's on us in the west, and those in the far east to develop clean energy so that it is cheaper than coal anyway, at which point they will switch to it. We are already well on the way, we just need to speed the process up.
I apologize for being indelicate, but that line of thinking is complete bullshit. The people of India and the Far East are not some sort of subhuman animals who can't be held accountable for their actions and it's not on the West to take responsibility for fixing everybody else's problems. I absolutely abhor PC finger-wagging, but that is some of the most bigoted tripe I've read today, even if it was couched in platitudes for our Western saviors.
Except it's mostly our actions that created the problem of global warming, it's us who have most benefited from all the industrialization that caused global warming, and as a result of that industrialization it's us who have the most wealth and technological skill to mitigate global warming.
Yes India and the Far East will bear the brunt of the problem, but it's really our mess and we should take responsibility for fixing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Die from what?
Flooding, crop failure, land being made unusable, extreme weather, changing economics that they are unable to adapt to quickly enough. Wars over resources, extreme poverty as tens or hundreds of millions of people migrate within the country.
Re: (Score:3)
Flooding, crop failure, land being made unusable, extreme weather, changing economics that they are unable to adapt to quickly enough.
People who live in the western world don't die by the millions (or even the thousands) from flooding or crop failure or extreme weather. If cheap energy allows India to begin to prosper like it has allowed the west to prosper, then India can expect to begin to achieve the resiliency that westerners have in the face of bad weather.
If India is deprived of their opportunity for progress, they can expect to remain as much at risk from bad weather as they've always been.
Wars over resources
Why would there be wars over resources wh
Re: (Score:2)
People who live in the western world don't die by the millions (or even the thousands) from flooding or crop failure or extreme weather. If cheap energy allows India to begin to prosper like it has allowed the west to prosper, then India can expect to begin to achieve the resiliency that westerners have in the face of bad weather.
Right, that's exactly what I just said. Their hope is that they can reach that level before climate change becomes too severe, but if they can't they are screwed.
If India is deprived of their opportunity for progress, they can expect to remain as much at risk from bad weather as they've always been.
Who is suggesting denying them progress? Not I, I'm saying we need to make progress cleaner, not stop it.
Why would there be wars over resources when fossil fuels are cheap? What resources? The water that's "flooding" them?
Because you can't eat coal. You can't drink sea water or untreated river water full of fossil derived pollutants. A diesel tractor isn't going to help if your farm is under 1m of salt water.
Because they've never had a poverty problem? Because people never migrated in the past? But cheap energy and an improved lifestyle will cause extreme poverty.
Because when parts of the country become uninhabitable
Re: (Score:2)
Because you can't eat coal. You can't drink sea water or untreated river water full of fossil derived pollutants. A diesel tractor isn't going to help if your farm is under 1m of salt water.
You can use fossil fuel to mechanize and automate farming. You can use coal to generate electricity to pump water up hill to irrigate crops. You can use electricity to clean river water to make it safe to drink. You can use diesel equipment to create dams and walls for flood-control.
Because when parts of the country become uninhabitable people will be forced to migrate in large numbers. Isn't that obvious? Why do you think lots of people are leaving Syria right now, did they get a brochure in the mail advertising the glamorous European lifestyle or did they leave when making a long and dangerous journey away from their homes was the only option?
Has the Syrian migration caused millions to die? Has it caused "extreme poverty"? Is a gradual increase in sea level over the course of a century a bigger problem for the people affected than ISIS?
Indians will industrialize using whatever the cheapest technology is, like we did.
And they should. Regardle
Re: (Score:2)
You can use fossil fuel to mechanize and automate farming. You can use coal to generate electricity to pump water up hill to irrigate crops. You can use electricity to clean river water to make it safe to drink. You can use diesel equipment to create dams and walls for flood-control.
Yes, and that, as I already stated twice now, is the plan. Better hope they can do it fast enough. Better hope that their neighbours can do it fast enough as well so they don't start getting huge numbers of refugees. Better hope that it isn't too severe to cope with (because developed countries never flood, right?)
And they should. Regardless of whether it's bad of the Marshal Islands.
Then logically we should attack India to prevent the climate change they will cause harming us or costing us money.
Re: (Score:2)
Then logically we should attack India to prevent the climate change they will cause harming us or costing us money.
Or we could just not worry about it.
Re: (Score:2)
India has a seacoast, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Do we really want to turn India into a chinese copycat a.k.a.victorian era steam-punk apocalypse? I think the hindi have more sense than to desire or even accept such a future. Less material wealth, but more spiritual value and more tolerance is their way of life.
China has almost 5x the per capita GDP [wikipedia.org] as India ($8280 vs. $1688). Would the average person want his income to go up by 5x?
Maybe he'd settle for 3x for a while if there's no smog. But being poorer than China doesn't seem to be helping the air quality [hindustantimes.com].
SIX feet above Sea Level?? (Score:2)
Damn, wish my house was that high up...
Note that New Orleans is below Sea Level.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously you should move to Arkansas.
ancient #FloridaMan (Score:2)
he first humans moved to Florida about 12,000 years ago
And they're still clogging up I-95 driving 40 miles an hour with their left-turn blinker on.
Re: (Score:2)
You should abandon your Florida property and move. As a favor to you, I will buy your doomed house in Florida for $2000. Get out while you still can.
Bullshit. (Score:2)
I'm sure the Marshall Islands are no different. More people, which means more people (especially poor people) will be trying to live near the
HUH? (Score:2)
Re: Refugees? Not so much. (Score:2, Informative)
It's AGW week. "Climate change refugees" for something that hasn't happened yet is more PC than saying they moved to the USA because it's the "land of opportunity", providing jobs and education, with "chain immigration" policies making it easy to import thousands relatives once the first legal immigrant arrives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It has already happened. Parts of their islands flooded, and the sea level is rising and floods becoming more common, along with extreme weather events. FTA elaborates that change is now seen as inevitable, and eventually enough people will be forced to move that there won't be a viable economy or society left for the rest and they will all have to move.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Huh? It says right in the summary: "Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas". Is "working for Tyson" slang for "running from climate change" that I've never heard of?
Too bad I'm not a sculptor, I'd love to launch a climate change-related kickstarter which both sides could get behind. I'd offer to - if I could raise the expenses - make life-sized bronze statues of the world's most prominent climate-change deniers and in
Re: (Score:2)
At least it would be cheap to do.
The total height of the statues would be about a foot, if you're scaling them to actual projected sea level rise from the long-term trend since the start of AGW.
If you take the "extreme" current predictions, they'd have to be about three feet tall.
Re: (Score:2)
RCP8,5 is 0,53-0,98m by 2100... which is only about 84 years from now. With the rise at 2100 predicted at around 0,9-1,8cm/yr over the 2100-2116 period (minus the current 0,32-0,36mm/yr) the total would be something like 0,62m-1,21m (2' to 4') - basically, a typical person sitting, kneeling, or similar. The amount of rise however does vary to some degree based on location, and some isolated areas (like Baffin Bay) are even expected to get a drop (about 5% of the worlds' oceans). The northeastern US and nor
Re: (Score:2)
So... if you were to plant one on the Oregon Coast [noaa.gov], you'd end up with a 6' tall base and a 1' tall statue atop that.
This of course does not count what it would take to anchor the whole shebang to bedrock so that tidal erosion doesn't knock it over and bury it.
Re: (Score:2)
See this [slashdot.org]. Oregon's prediction is about average, so the RCP8,5 would be about 2-4 feet tall (a normal-sized person sitting, kneeling, or somesuch), with some other indicator for the RCP2,6 at about half that. And yes, the pedestal in that location would be larger than in a location like NYC.
Re: (Score:3)
Huh? It says right in the summary: "Moody's family eventually moved to Springdale to live with him and work for Tyson and other poultry companies based in Arkansas". Is "working for Tyson" slang for "running from climate change" that I've never heard of?
I fear I've read the article, so I'd better turn in my slashdot card. But here goes. And nothing in particular about your post - it was just a handy place for me to chime in.
As they note the first "relocator" was a Mr Moody - hey, wasn't on a lot of Lucille Ball TV shows? But I digress.
So why would a lot of Marshall Islanders want to leave their tropical paradise? Turns out there were a lot of problems where they lived - And here's why in 1979 it all started.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https:/ [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
So the constant and relatively new flooding the island is getting is caused by what?
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not. Nobody is fleeing from climate. They're just fleeing from the flood and their islands going under.
Fleeing from a climate, how silly a concept.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not. Nobody is fleeing from climate. They're just fleeing from the flood and their islands going under.
Fleeing from a climate, how silly a concept.
At the present rate, their island will go under in about 500 years, so they can probably take their time fleeing. But that is okay because they have been "fleeing AGW" for decades before anyone even knew that there was AGW going on. In fact, they started fleeing back when the coming ice age was the current scary disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess would rather be that they neither heard about the ice age scare nor the global warming craze, but they simply saw that water is coming, that floods are getting more numerous and that it's safer to pack up and GTFO.
Some people don't need no statistics to know when to flee some place. Wet feet are more convincing than any amount of statistics.
Re: (Score:2)
My guess would rather be that they neither heard about the ice age scare nor the global warming craze, but they simply saw that water is coming, that floods are getting more numerous and that it's safer to pack up and GTFO.
Some people don't need no statistics to know when to flee some place. Wet feet are more convincing than any amount of statistics.
At 6 feet above seal level, how can you even tell floods are more numerous? High tide is over 5 feet. At least once a month, you are going to get flood even if there is no significant weather.
They started fleeing the encroaching waters back in the 1970s when the sea level was still dropping.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I welcome Pacific Islanders. There is about 3 million people in Micronesia, Polynesia, and Melanesia, and maybe half of them are living on these kinds of marginal atolls. The US has one million legal immigrants per year; this is a drop in the bucket. We should welcome these people with open arms, for their benefit and for ours.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its the jumping, Every time someone on the atoll jumps, its sinks by a tiny amount. Unfortunately pogo sticks are the national pastime.
Re: (Score:2)
They didn't "begin fleeing" en masse in 1979. One guy moved there. That said, global warming wasn't unheard of in '79. It was predicted in the 19th century, and scientists were well aware of it in the seventies, even if the media wasn't.
Also, "Raygun decided to really crank-up the temperature of the Earth in order to hurt the poor and minorities."? That's a childish view. Environmental regulations were gutted to make donors wealthier. The poor are not part of the equation.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the tide gauge for Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshal Islands. [noaa.gov] It looks like it was put in in 1946 or 1947. Since then there's been over 6 inches of SLR in the Marshalls. 6 inches vertical rise means many feet of horizontal spread. When your maximum elevation is about 6 feet all it takes is a large king tide or major storm surge to wash over the islands.
In looking at the graph it has dropped quite a bit in the past year. I believe that is because of the El Nino which pushes more water toward the Eas
Re: (Score:2)
Please, O Right Wing Troll, your views are every bit as ideological and simplistic as his.
Re: (Score:3)
No one was wrong about cooling. There were a few speculative papers about the possibilities but there were 7 times as many about warming (from 1965 to 1979).
Re: (Score:2)
They live in a place that has NEVER flooded until the seventies.
Yea, right. They just never had a place they could leave to until the 70s.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh trust me. I've paid really close attention.