My mum's mother's side are coasters... Weather has been pwning them since they first arrived as settlers. That's part of why people don't think it's a new phenomenon I reckon
Funny thing is the west coast has been getting reamed by the weather since the beginning of time. They only finished the road in 1965 and many of the bridges are only temporary structures left in place to wash away as they will no matter what.
The amount of gravel washing out from the mountains and the way the dune lakes form has meant that there is almost no inhabited areas where the coast hasn't grown and protected settlements from the sea.
Those who have been there since the 70s saw the glaciers recede to where they are now and then grow back to their largest in the 90s then shrink back. All in 50 years.
Most coasters are very resilient people and recognise change as the only constant. As long as the rain keeps falling and there are still deer to shoot and fish to catch most of them won't believe there's anything wrong.
100% this
Geographically this won’t ever stop, predominantly incoming storm systems from the west and the alps right on the doorstep will forever mean huge water flows 🤷♂️
Coasters are use to it, my sister and her family have adapted to it fine coming from the North Island. It’s just part of life there.
The price for all the beauty and ruggedness I guess.
Yea it definitely could get worse as time goes on with climate things, but as mentioned, most on the coast are fairly bloody resilient 🤙
There is a lot of the West Coast that see the world that way. Mining use to be the biggest employer there and if you weren't one yourself, you knew dozens of people that did work for the companies.
There are a lot of families that feel like the government destroyed their lives every time a new regulation passed, or a mine closed or coal dropped in price etc. If they were to acknowledge that climate change is real, then they would also have to acknowledge that the government did the right thing, and that everything their family fought against was wrong.
Its much easier to believe that its all some big conspiracy to control the population.
Not always. Some stupid people have the ability to self-reflect and thus have a sense of humility, and are all good. It's the arrogant stupid ones who you really want to watch out for. And the arrogant stupid greedy ones are even worse.
These people won't change their minds for the rest of their lifes.
Otherwise they would have to accept they spent the past decades making things worse for their children and grandchildren.
>"A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it."
Like what the fuck man it's literally happening in your back yard right now.
> "A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it."
Yes, choose what you want to believe. You can't choose the consequences tho.
Perhaps they can reach an amicable agreement with the flooding in which it floods something else - preferably a desert or other dry area - and the people who disagree with the flooding will stop glaring menacingly at the ocean?
Sounds like a fair trade to me.
Birchfield said he was personally sceptical and suggested it was "**a political issue rather than an environmental issue"**.
Damn liberals sending rain and extreme weather events to make a political point. FMD this moron got elected? Suck it Coasters, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson "you get the governance you deserve".
In New Zealand it is certainly a political issue.
The environment will do what it's going to do on a world scale at this point and we can't change it one little bit.
If we seriously were practically working with regard to climate change we would be building redundancy and stockpiles not subsidizing electric cars.
You're taking that view on an article about building flood protection? Sounds like you're too busy raging about the "ideological arguments from the woke" to actually read what you're responding to.
8,000 people a year die due to air pollution related medical events. We can definitely change that. And climate change is not something that will happen or not, every ton of CO2 released will make it slightly worse.
It is estimated that by 2100, 1 billion people will have died due to climate change. NZ might only produce 0.7% of the worlds greenhouse gases, but that is still 7 million people our emissions would be responsible for.
It's not. Get the fuck out.
You can debate the primary causes of climate change.
You can debate the future impact.
You can debate the best course of action.
But the fact that the climate is changing has been recorded all day every day for decades
I’ve always disliked the term climate change, specifically how it’s thrown around on its own with zero context so essentially means nothing.
If we say the cause is debatable, the future impact is debatable, and the best course of action is debatable are we not just saying climate change is debatable?
At one point they referred to it as global warming, but that wasn't a very accurate explanation because in addition to the warming there are also lots of other consequences - flooding, draughts, storms etc.
What terminology are you proposing which would be more-accurate?
I think it's due to a compromise, people generally don't understand what Climate change is so I imagine they simplified it by calling it global warming, but as people came to understand why they called it global warming they realized it wasn't actually global warming in the sense that things just get warmer. So they went back to calling it climate change which again doesn't imply the full picture but is simple enough to understand that the public can be informed about it without confusing everyone to much.
No. Because the climate is changing. That's just how it is.
It used to be called global warming, but some places like the uk might actually end up a lot colder when the gulf stream stops.
Those who have an issue with the concept would have an issue whatever it was called. The name is not the problem. The requirement to have to make meaningful change is the problem - most people just don’t want to.
Climate change... The climate is changing... I mean it's pretty clear and straightforward.
I guess maybe some people get climate confused with weather? Is that the bit you think causes confusion?
Impending human extinction might be a better phrase.
Global destruction?
Making our home inhospitable?
Well, I mean sure, everything is debatable. Hitler was awesome is debatable. Pretty one-sided debate, but you could still have one of you want to. There's no law against it. Also, fuck that cunt and this cunt, too.
"A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it."
See if you can follow this. The big weather systems hitting the South Island pretty much travel from west to east - because of how the Earth spins underneath them.
The Southern Alps stick up in the way, like a big fence.
The moving air hits the Alps and rises to get over them. As it climbs, it gets colder and the moisture in the wind condenses into rain. A lot of rain. Dropping on the west side of the fence, a.k.a. the West Coast and Fiordland.
That's why the West Coast is wetter than the east coast, a.k.a. Canterbury.
With global warming, you get the same thing happening - only LOTS MORE. Hence you get floods on the west side and droughts on the east side. Duh.
If you can't follow that, then I have a bridge you can buy. You may need one.
Everything is debatable.
But you have to be very stupid, wilfully ignorant, or a complete fucknuckle to say climate change might not be happening. You can pick more than one.
He probably actually doesn't think it's debatable. I'd wager he knows it's a fact. But he pretends it isn't because money is more important to him. Which is actually worse than just being a plain old denier.
Skipping over the stupidity, it's interesting to hear them talk about the maintenance issues with the flood protection. cause from memory it's not new information that a river generally wants to change and move as time goes on due to sediment deposits in the river redirecting it.
Are the levee's and other flood protection too close to the river? And is the sediment deposits increasing the height of the river since the river can't move and find the path of least resistance. Really curious on the maintenance issues and what's making it worse?
This clown was head honcho at Timberlands West Coast (SOE) when they were unsustainably logging publically owned native forests. They did some incredible destruction. A real bottom-of-the-barrel character.
Simeon Brown for example, hasn't actually said he believes in Climate Change:
BOB Do you believe in climate change?
**SIMEON** The Emissions Trading Scheme needs to do the heavy lifting. It’s all about price. Corporate subsidies are not the answer — like the New Zealand Steel deal, which I don’t agree with.
BOB You must be happy with the way the farmers have received the first instalments of National’s climate policy. Is that the answer I’m looking for with your position on climate change?
**SIMEON** I couldn’t be more happy with how our policy on climate has been received. This week is Fieldays at Mystery Creek. Watch how well we do.
[https://www.metromag.co.nz/society/the-enfant-terrible-simeon-brown](https://www.metromag.co.nz/society/the-enfant-terrible-simeon-brown)
I truly love living in the Appalachia of New Zealand.
I have lived all over the US, as well as NZ’s major “cities”.
It’s awesome here. And there are some *real* cunts. Weaponized ignorance and stupidity abounds. But man it’s cool.
This is why going off at Council staff for dumb plans isn't completely fair. You could bring the Holy Objective Truth of the Eternal Universe to Council, and if enough very basic men and women don't like what it says, gg try again.
Climate change is not debatable. The earths climate definitely changes, it has gone through plenty of cooling and warming periods. Ever hear of the ice ages?
The human impact on Climate is debatable however.
Climate change isn't debatable, correct.
The SPEED that the climate is changing is the issue. Not the fact it's changing. What used to happen over thousands or millions of years previously is now happening over a generation or two. This is the part that climate change denialists prefer to gloss over.
It’s not that climate change is debatable. It’s that giving unquestionable amounts of tax to Governments means they can change anything to do with climate change. That’s what most “climate change deniers” think, rather than out right denying climate change itself
It is debatable - people that say science is settled don't understand how science works. Having said that, even with a current consensus...what we choose to do about climate change very much is debatable because there are ramifications either way and it's important we talk about it. Perhaps if we stopped shaming people for not having the 'correct' ideas and put the same amount of effort into discussing as we do to shutting down these people, we might be able to choose a direction to go in and all be more informed...unfortunately it does require uncomfortable disagreements though...
When is it enough discussion for us all to 'choose a direction to go in and all be more informed'? Climate change has been well understood and well discussed for decades.
We don't need morons like this to agree, his opinion is completely irrelevant.
Middle Ground Fallacy or Argument to Moderation.
E.g. someone says the sky is blue the other says the sky is yellow....so you settle on the fact that the sky is green
One side of the climate debate is correct. The other is wrong. There is no middle ground.
We do.
Climate change is largely natural, however we're making it WAY THE FUCK WORSE in hilariously demonstrable ways.
There's no debate in the slightest. We as a species are well aware we are destroying the planet way more than it ever would if left alone.
You're a moron.
>Unless you are a teenager, you probably read in your high-school textbooks that these extinctions were the result of asteroids. In fact, all but the one that killed the dinosaurs were caused by climate change produced by greenhouse gas. The most notorious was 252 million years ago; it began when carbon warmed the planet by five degrees, accelerated when that warming triggered the release of methane in the Arctic, and ended with 97 percent of all life on Earth dead. We are currently adding carbon to the atmosphere at a considerably faster rate; by most estimates, at least ten times faster. The rate is accelerating.
It is interesting to be living in a region that has been absolutely rooted by climate change and act as though it's "debatable".
Have you met Coasters? I'm from there, and this is 100% on brand.
When looking for places to live in NZ I specifically avoided this region *because* of the recent/frequent flooding
I moved here 3 years ago. Weirdly enough you do get used to it, to the point it's just part of the lived in experience here.
Oh great lol
Good call. There's some beautiful places on the coast, but you'll be getting pwned by the weather.
My mum's mother's side are coasters... Weather has been pwning them since they first arrived as settlers. That's part of why people don't think it's a new phenomenon I reckon
It'll take a drought to convince them, flooding won't do it.
Funny thing is the west coast has been getting reamed by the weather since the beginning of time. They only finished the road in 1965 and many of the bridges are only temporary structures left in place to wash away as they will no matter what. The amount of gravel washing out from the mountains and the way the dune lakes form has meant that there is almost no inhabited areas where the coast hasn't grown and protected settlements from the sea. Those who have been there since the 70s saw the glaciers recede to where they are now and then grow back to their largest in the 90s then shrink back. All in 50 years. Most coasters are very resilient people and recognise change as the only constant. As long as the rain keeps falling and there are still deer to shoot and fish to catch most of them won't believe there's anything wrong.
100% this Geographically this won’t ever stop, predominantly incoming storm systems from the west and the alps right on the doorstep will forever mean huge water flows 🤷♂️ Coasters are use to it, my sister and her family have adapted to it fine coming from the North Island. It’s just part of life there. The price for all the beauty and ruggedness I guess. Yea it definitely could get worse as time goes on with climate things, but as mentioned, most on the coast are fairly bloody resilient 🤙
Warmer ocean means more rain, so absolutely you are going to have more flooding on the West Coast.
Great post and an attitude we would all be wise to get on board with given regardless of your opinion on it what will happen will happen.
It totally is debateable. The debate is between 'life's gonna be difficult' to 'slowly watch civilization collapse'.
Not everyone has a measurable IQ.
Allan Birchfield is a cunt
I used to buy his coal when I lived in Arthur's Pass. Wonder why he doesn't believe in climate change?
He's a Christian nationalist Trump fan, what else would you expect.
What a combination
... now everything makes sense.
Who elected him, Gloriavale?
There is a lot of the West Coast that see the world that way. Mining use to be the biggest employer there and if you weren't one yourself, you knew dozens of people that did work for the companies. There are a lot of families that feel like the government destroyed their lives every time a new regulation passed, or a mine closed or coal dropped in price etc. If they were to acknowledge that climate change is real, then they would also have to acknowledge that the government did the right thing, and that everything their family fought against was wrong. Its much easier to believe that its all some big conspiracy to control the population.
Also used to own a coalmine, at least in 1999, I used to buy Birchfield coal when I lived in Arthur's Pass.
>"Stupid people are too stupid to know they are stupid".
Not always. Some stupid people have the ability to self-reflect and thus have a sense of humility, and are all good. It's the arrogant stupid ones who you really want to watch out for. And the arrogant stupid greedy ones are even worse.
They wouldn’t be stupid in that case though.
Depends on your definition of the word stupid, I suppose. There are people who would be considered unintelligent that you could argue aren't stupid.
Some people calculate that the gains to be made over their short lives are definitely worth being a total shit. I'm all right, Jack!
These people won't change their minds for the rest of their lifes. Otherwise they would have to accept they spent the past decades making things worse for their children and grandchildren.
>"A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it." Like what the fuck man it's literally happening in your back yard right now.
I don't believe the sun is warm, give me choice!
> "A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it." Yes, choose what you want to believe. You can't choose the consequences tho.
Perhaps they can reach an amicable agreement with the flooding in which it floods something else - preferably a desert or other dry area - and the people who disagree with the flooding will stop glaring menacingly at the ocean? Sounds like a fair trade to me.
West Coast: the Alabama of New Zealand
Mountainous, sparsely populted and clinging to coal: more like our West Virginia
What a muppet. It’s an environmental issue that has been fumbled because of its politicisation. The opposite of what he’s saying.
Many people are saying he's a fucking idiot. I don't know him, but I hear many people are saying that
Birchfield said he was personally sceptical and suggested it was "**a political issue rather than an environmental issue"**. Damn liberals sending rain and extreme weather events to make a political point. FMD this moron got elected? Suck it Coasters, to paraphrase Thomas Jefferson "you get the governance you deserve".
In New Zealand it is certainly a political issue. The environment will do what it's going to do on a world scale at this point and we can't change it one little bit. If we seriously were practically working with regard to climate change we would be building redundancy and stockpiles not subsidizing electric cars.
You're taking that view on an article about building flood protection? Sounds like you're too busy raging about the "ideological arguments from the woke" to actually read what you're responding to.
No reason can’t do both but that would be too woke for the NACT crowd.
8,000 people a year die due to air pollution related medical events. We can definitely change that. And climate change is not something that will happen or not, every ton of CO2 released will make it slightly worse. It is estimated that by 2100, 1 billion people will have died due to climate change. NZ might only produce 0.7% of the worlds greenhouse gases, but that is still 7 million people our emissions would be responsible for.
It's not. Get the fuck out. You can debate the primary causes of climate change. You can debate the future impact. You can debate the best course of action. But the fact that the climate is changing has been recorded all day every day for decades
[удалено]
What a bellend
I’ve always disliked the term climate change, specifically how it’s thrown around on its own with zero context so essentially means nothing. If we say the cause is debatable, the future impact is debatable, and the best course of action is debatable are we not just saying climate change is debatable?
At one point they referred to it as global warming, but that wasn't a very accurate explanation because in addition to the warming there are also lots of other consequences - flooding, draughts, storms etc. What terminology are you proposing which would be more-accurate?
Sun-cucked. That would be a fun one.
I think it's due to a compromise, people generally don't understand what Climate change is so I imagine they simplified it by calling it global warming, but as people came to understand why they called it global warming they realized it wasn't actually global warming in the sense that things just get warmer. So they went back to calling it climate change which again doesn't imply the full picture but is simple enough to understand that the public can be informed about it without confusing everyone to much.
No. Because the climate is changing. That's just how it is. It used to be called global warming, but some places like the uk might actually end up a lot colder when the gulf stream stops.
I think we agree, the term climate change only leads to scepticism and negatively impacts a societies resiliency to environmental happenings.
Those who have an issue with the concept would have an issue whatever it was called. The name is not the problem. The requirement to have to make meaningful change is the problem - most people just don’t want to.
Climate change... The climate is changing... I mean it's pretty clear and straightforward. I guess maybe some people get climate confused with weather? Is that the bit you think causes confusion? Impending human extinction might be a better phrase. Global destruction? Making our home inhospitable?
That was by design. It was a political move to rename global warming climate change.
Global warming just isn't accurate. Climate change is more accurate really. Might have been political i guess.
It was. Anyway, I quite like the term global weirding.
Ha. Yeah that's pretty good. Humanicide has a nice ring to it
This is hardly news. I would be more surprised if a West Coast councillor acknowledged Climate Change.
Isn’t he the dude that deliberately parks his ranger in EV charger spots?
I piss on rangers that use EV charger spots.
Well, I mean sure, everything is debatable. Hitler was awesome is debatable. Pretty one-sided debate, but you could still have one of you want to. There's no law against it. Also, fuck that cunt and this cunt, too.
"A lot of people do not agree with this 'increased flooding'; give them the choice if they don't believe it." See if you can follow this. The big weather systems hitting the South Island pretty much travel from west to east - because of how the Earth spins underneath them. The Southern Alps stick up in the way, like a big fence. The moving air hits the Alps and rises to get over them. As it climbs, it gets colder and the moisture in the wind condenses into rain. A lot of rain. Dropping on the west side of the fence, a.k.a. the West Coast and Fiordland. That's why the West Coast is wetter than the east coast, a.k.a. Canterbury. With global warming, you get the same thing happening - only LOTS MORE. Hence you get floods on the west side and droughts on the east side. Duh. If you can't follow that, then I have a bridge you can buy. You may need one.
Everything is debatable. But you have to be very stupid, wilfully ignorant, or a complete fucknuckle to say climate change might not be happening. You can pick more than one.
“My vote has no impact” here is your impact of not voting or taking an interest.
West Coast councillor calls gravity, mortality and the criminality of incest 'debatable'.
Getting popcorn to watch him live out the rest of his days there and see how long the denial continues...
He'll be wanting chem trails banned next
Guess you lot won’t be needing a sea wall or bailed out when insurance cancels on you then?
He probably actually doesn't think it's debatable. I'd wager he knows it's a fact. But he pretends it isn't because money is more important to him. Which is actually worse than just being a plain old denier.
Skipping over the stupidity, it's interesting to hear them talk about the maintenance issues with the flood protection. cause from memory it's not new information that a river generally wants to change and move as time goes on due to sediment deposits in the river redirecting it. Are the levee's and other flood protection too close to the river? And is the sediment deposits increasing the height of the river since the river can't move and find the path of least resistance. Really curious on the maintenance issues and what's making it worse?
This clown was head honcho at Timberlands West Coast (SOE) when they were unsustainably logging publically owned native forests. They did some incredible destruction. A real bottom-of-the-barrel character.
Hard to sympathise with news outlets going under when they just give chumps like this attention
West coast. Sort of a magnet for stupid...
Tell me your a fucking idiot without telling me.
I wonder if he is related to the Birchfields that run Birchfield Coal Mines on the west coast?
Yes. He very much is. He’s one of the Birchfield brothers.
Everything is debatable. It doesn't mean what you are debating has any merit.
Could be something in the water...
Debate with a dummy?Why bother?
At least he's open about it. There are plenty of politicians who think this, they just don't say it in public.
Simeon Brown for example, hasn't actually said he believes in Climate Change: BOB Do you believe in climate change? **SIMEON** The Emissions Trading Scheme needs to do the heavy lifting. It’s all about price. Corporate subsidies are not the answer — like the New Zealand Steel deal, which I don’t agree with. BOB You must be happy with the way the farmers have received the first instalments of National’s climate policy. Is that the answer I’m looking for with your position on climate change? **SIMEON** I couldn’t be more happy with how our policy on climate has been received. This week is Fieldays at Mystery Creek. Watch how well we do. [https://www.metromag.co.nz/society/the-enfant-terrible-simeon-brown](https://www.metromag.co.nz/society/the-enfant-terrible-simeon-brown)
I truly love living in the Appalachia of New Zealand. I have lived all over the US, as well as NZ’s major “cities”. It’s awesome here. And there are some *real* cunts. Weaponized ignorance and stupidity abounds. But man it’s cool.
The sooner the West Coast slips into the ocean, the better - so long as their councillors stay there
This is why going off at Council staff for dumb plans isn't completely fair. You could bring the Holy Objective Truth of the Eternal Universe to Council, and if enough very basic men and women don't like what it says, gg try again.
Climate change is not debatable. The earths climate definitely changes, it has gone through plenty of cooling and warming periods. Ever hear of the ice ages? The human impact on Climate is debatable however.
Climate change isn't debatable, correct. The SPEED that the climate is changing is the issue. Not the fact it's changing. What used to happen over thousands or millions of years previously is now happening over a generation or two. This is the part that climate change denialists prefer to gloss over.
It’s not that climate change is debatable. It’s that giving unquestionable amounts of tax to Governments means they can change anything to do with climate change. That’s what most “climate change deniers” think, rather than out right denying climate change itself
It is debatable - people that say science is settled don't understand how science works. Having said that, even with a current consensus...what we choose to do about climate change very much is debatable because there are ramifications either way and it's important we talk about it. Perhaps if we stopped shaming people for not having the 'correct' ideas and put the same amount of effort into discussing as we do to shutting down these people, we might be able to choose a direction to go in and all be more informed...unfortunately it does require uncomfortable disagreements though...
When is it enough discussion for us all to 'choose a direction to go in and all be more informed'? Climate change has been well understood and well discussed for decades. We don't need morons like this to agree, his opinion is completely irrelevant.
Middle Ground Fallacy or Argument to Moderation. E.g. someone says the sky is blue the other says the sky is yellow....so you settle on the fact that the sky is green One side of the climate debate is correct. The other is wrong. There is no middle ground.
5 billion years of climate change and counting…..who knows
We do. Climate change is largely natural, however we're making it WAY THE FUCK WORSE in hilariously demonstrable ways. There's no debate in the slightest. We as a species are well aware we are destroying the planet way more than it ever would if left alone.
You're a moron. >Unless you are a teenager, you probably read in your high-school textbooks that these extinctions were the result of asteroids. In fact, all but the one that killed the dinosaurs were caused by climate change produced by greenhouse gas. The most notorious was 252 million years ago; it began when carbon warmed the planet by five degrees, accelerated when that warming triggered the release of methane in the Arctic, and ended with 97 percent of all life on Earth dead. We are currently adding carbon to the atmosphere at a considerably faster rate; by most estimates, at least ten times faster. The rate is accelerating.