Re: Geology is a dangerous business


"jonathan" <maatschj@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:kSshf.20971$s92.14175@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "George" <george@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:Pcrhf.570721$x96.141828@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "Jo Schaper" <joschapern4ospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:11obud74aa60j3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
> http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/sciencemedicine/story/04CCC9EC44BB2EA6862570C2001C613A?OpenDocument
>>
>> I suspect that when waves are breaking on the steps of citry hall, they
>> will accuse us of not warning them soon enough.
>
>
> Incredible, just because the city is subsiding does not
> mean a conclusion of abandoning it is sound. It's
> completely irresponsible of this pseudo-scientist
> to say so. Unless he's done all the other work required
> to make such a dramatic decision.

Johnny, it isn't going to magically rebound. There isn't a magic hand out
there that is going to stop it from subsiding. It is subsiding, and will
continue to subside. The equilibrium of the Mississippi delta has been
destabilized for over 100 years. New Orleans has been very low ground
since it was first settled. Just to get it back to it's former elevation
of 100 years ago would cost more than the entire city is worth and likely
involve moving substantial portions of it anyway. If they don't try that
approach, the only alternative other than moving the city entirely would be
to continue to built higher and higher flod walls. And that is simply
dumb. The best, most cost effective solution is to move the city. Will
that happen? I seriously doubt that it will. Politics makes strange
bedfellows, especially when the natural world is concerned.

George


.