https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help
people understand risks relating to environmental factors.
Now perhaps
there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties
they want to sell before they get too affected,
and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is
just an ideological cut - predicting future problems
is not where the
"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So let's spend money where it can do good.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help
people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps
there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties
they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is
just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the
"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 14:46:57 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help
people understand risks relating to environmental factors.
What environmental factors?
Now perhaps
there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties
they want to sell before they get too affected,
Affected by what?
and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is
just an ideological cut - predicting future problems
What future problems?
is not where the
"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
What can go bad?
Obviously not. Oh dear, that might generate another lie from him!Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
Have you ever been a landlord, Rich80105?
Bill.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support >the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So >let's spend money where it can do good.
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help
people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties
they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is
just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 07:25:09 -0000 (UTC), TonyCite? And only ones that show the cause is climate change and not historical erosion.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support >>the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So >>let's spend money where it can do good.
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help >>>people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties >>>they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is >>>just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
There are quite a few areas around New Zealand where houses are having
to be moved back from the sea as erosion and storms make it unsafe to
leave them where they are.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:There are other parts where the coastline is building up ( not by EQ),
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 07:25:09 -0000 (UTC), TonyCite? And only ones that show the cause is climate change and not historical erosion.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support >>>the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea. >>>>Yet again the government is taking away information that would help >>>>people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>>>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties >>>>they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is >>>>just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>>>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they >>>>can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
let's spend money where it can do good.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
There are quite a few areas around New Zealand where houses are having
to be moved back from the sea as erosion and storms make it unsafe to
leave them where they are.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So let's spend money where it can do good.
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea.
Yet again the government is taking away information that would help
people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties
they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers
are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is
just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they
can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
On 2024-07-11, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Exactly - there are far too many people earning far too much money making shit up like Rich does.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:There are other parts where the coastline is building up ( not by EQ), Farwell Spit. Cherry picking is best done in orchards.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 07:25:09 -0000 (UTC), TonyCite? And only ones that show the cause is climate change and not historical >> erosion.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to >>>>support
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea. >>>>>Yet again the government is taking away information that would help >>>>>people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>>>>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties >>>>>they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers >>>>>are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is >>>>>just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>>>>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they >>>>>can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. >>>>So
let's spend money where it can do good.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
There are quite a few areas around New Zealand where houses are having
to be moved back from the sea as erosion and storms make it unsafe to >>>leave them where they are.
On 2024-07-11, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:There are other parts where the coastline is building up ( not by EQ), Farwell Spit. Cherry picking is best done in orchards.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 07:25:09 -0000 (UTC), TonyCite? And only ones that show the cause is climate change and not historical >> erosion.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to support
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea. >>>>>Yet again the government is taking away information that would help >>>>>people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>>>>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties >>>>>they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers >>>>>are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is >>>>>just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>>>>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they >>>>>can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. So
let's spend money where it can do good.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
There are quite a few areas around New Zealand where houses are having
to be moved back from the sea as erosion and storms make it unsafe to >>>leave them where they are.
On 11 Jul 2024 21:41:46 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:There is no eviodence that these issues are related to the any climate emergency that you are other fools fantasise about.
On 2024-07-11, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:There are other parts where the coastline is building up ( not by EQ),
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 07:25:09 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Cite? And only ones that show the cause is climate change and not >>>historical
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/govt-department-scales-back-coastal-mapping-project-fears-climate-planning-and-adaptation-measures-at-risk/FTAKIUNKURDDTHMNAIQCGR4QDU/
The coastal risks are based on zero science. There is no evidence to >>>>>support
It is behind a paywall, but even from the headline you get the idea. >>>>>>Yet again the government is taking away information that would help >>>>>>people understand risks relating to environmental factors. Now perhaps >>>>>>there are a lot of supporters of NAct1st that have coastal properties >>>>>>they want to sell before they get too affected, and ignorant buyers >>>>>>are better for getting the best price, but more likely is that this is >>>>>>just an ideological cut - predicting future problems is not where the >>>>>>"Right" think government should go - and if it all goes bad then they >>>>>>can be just as surprised and provide only minimal help.
the notion that sea levels are rising other than normal historical cycles. >>>>>So
let's spend money where it can do good.
Money for landlords, not for other people . . .
There are quite a few areas around New Zealand where houses are having >>>>to be moved back from the sea as erosion and storms make it unsafe to >>>>leave them where they are.
erosion.
Farwell Spit. Cherry picking is best done in orchards.
Have a look at the photograph in the article referenced above. Do you
think the owners care why the sea may be threatening their land and
house? Think about the people flooded in Wairoa due to the Bar
closing - do you think they care whether that is happening because of >increased abnormal climate events or other causes? They just want it
fixed, and if scientists can analyse what is happening and assist in >predicting those abnormal events then they would prefer that
information than ''reckons'' on nz.general . . .
Gordon is also correct that different forces will affect different
parts of New Zealand (and the world) in different ways. The coastal
mapping project , and assessing different adaption measures however
appears to be yet another casualty of current government priorities .
. .
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 76:07:09 |
| Calls: | 9,820 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 13,757 |
| Messages: | 6,190,029 |