science Is Mother Nature getting out of control?

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

Since hurricanes Harvey and Irma had hit the US and the Leeward Islands, including Puerto Rico, now Maria is forming to hit the Leeward Islands, including Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic again. It seems that no matter how nice we are to Mother Nature, seems all she cares about is senseless destruction to many normal lives, even giving them nothing but pain and misery, not to mention the endless suffering. You can try and contribute to nature, but nature itself will never return the favor and resort to causing as much destruction as possible so that many people will suffer from food shortages and electricity being knocked down, as are their infrastructures as well. It seems that this year, mother nature's bringing hell on the weaker islands, no matter how well-prepared they are just so many people (myself included) will be suffering a lot. Not to mention having nowhere to evacuate due to inadequate funds.

Anyone else realizing that Mother Nature is just not nice in general, no matter how much we try and improve?

[碇 シンジン 27,427]

I dont know if its just me but i've been always wondering why people settled to live in areas where these hurricanes or other natural disasters are a problem in the first place. I mean like some places are more prone to these things than others and yet still people choose to live there with the constant risk? I dont really understand it.

[Fluttershy Friend 25,445]

Hm. Read about theory or conception that Mother Natura isn't friendly for life Gaja but Medea.

[Jeric 46,835]

Planetary climate and weather are only the effect of an extreme number of variables both external (the host star) and internal (chemical composition and core). Out of control would be the wrong way of looking at it. There is nothing out of control with Venus or Neptune for example. It's basically complex cause and effect. 

The Earth's current climate and weather patterns are simply a result of internal and external influences. 

9 minutes ago, ooReiko said:

I dont know if its just me but i've been always wondering why people settled to live in areas where these hurricanes or other natural disasters are a problem in the first place. I mean like some places are more prone to these things than others and yet still people choose to live there with the constant risk? I dont really understand it.

So everyone should move from just about every US State then? That's a reasonable solution. 

[碇 シンジン 27,427]

12 minutes ago, Jeric said:

So everyone should move from just about every US State then? That's a reasonable solution. 

I wouldnt say every state

[Meeps 297]

2 hours ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Since hurricanes Harvey and Irma had hit the US and the Leeward Islands, including Puerto Rico, now Maria is forming to hit the Leeward Islands, including Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic again. It seems that no matter how nice we are to Mother Nature, seems all she cares about is senseless destruction to many normal lives, even giving them nothing but pain and misery, not to mention the endless suffering. You can try and contribute to nature, but nature itself will never return the favor and resort to causing as much destruction as possible so that many people will suffer from food shortages and electricity being knocked down, as are their infrastructures as well. It seems that this year, mother nature's bringing hell on the weaker islands, no matter how well-prepared they are just so many people (myself included) will be suffering a lot. Not to mention having nowhere to evacuate due to inadequate funds.

Anyone else realizing that Mother Nature is just not nice in general, no matter how much we try and improve?

Well, nature doesn't have thoughts and feelings toward those who live on this Earth, or any other planet for that matter. As @Jeric mentioned, we consider many planets in our system to be "violent" by our standards, but they are totally normal in the sense of what they are. Nature gives neither smile nor tear for the baby coyote that starves because its parents are killed, or the trees that thrive after a good rainfall. Wildfires destroy everything in their path and contaminate our air, but many parts of the world actually require them to thrive. The fact we live where we do should in no way convince nature to not continue on with what it's been doing for thousands and thousands of years! 

Mother nature is simply a host, and we live through both the good and the bad of it with every other creature and plant here. Don't take what happens in nature personally!

 

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

2 hours ago, ooReiko said:

I dont know if its just me but i've been always wondering why people settled to live in areas where these hurricanes or other natural disasters are a problem in the first place. I mean like some places are more prone to these things than others and yet still people choose to live there with the constant risk? I dont really understand it.

Most people are pretty poor and are struggling through inadequate funds because their jobs do not give them the proper wages in order to move to better places where it isn't impacted by hurricanes or other natural disasters. Even their local governments cannot guarantee them safer havens elsewhere, or even better wages, especially when it comes to housing and costs of living.

[Jeric 46,835]

1 hour ago, ooReiko said:

I wouldnt say every state

Oh how clever. You used the disaster underwriting data. I have a real issue with that map in a way that Nazis have with Antifa (and visa versa). 

What is the single biggest natural disaster in an ecosystem? Now ... look at that map and tell me how horribly it fucked up. What is it not taking into account? That map is a Michael Bay/Dean Devlin map. It is bad and it should feel bad. 

Anyway, every state has expensive natural conditions, from erosion, to drought, to geological activity, to river flooding, to invasive species, to fires, to blizzards, to tornadoes, to hurricane, to yoga pants. All bad and all dangerous to their population. However ... cause smart ass comment was smart ass ... congratulations you just killed millions due to starvation and the collapse of the world economy if you are legitimately suggesting people move from those incorrectly identified red areas to the green areas. Check out the population of those red States on the map. Look at exports and then import based consumer power of items that would not be purchased in the green areas. Move all those people to the green areas (including agriculture) ... now Google the dust bowl. Complexity is the issue. You stated that you don't understand ... reading about sociology, macro economics, human geography, and anthropology is a good way to fix that. 

The way that map defines disaster is the way a kindergarten student would definitely what it feels to be happy. Using that map to disprove the point I implied is similarly simplistic. 

9 minutes ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Most people are pretty poor and are struggling through inadequate funds because their jobs do not give them the proper wages in order to move to better places where it isn't impacted by hurricanes or other natural disasters. Even their local governments cannot guarantee them safer havens elsewhere, or even better wages, especially when it comes to housing and costs of living.

More to that, moving people would be an extraordinary disruptive event in the entire economy as some economic systems are localized and set so that each individual produces exponentially more value that their individual economic worth in production of good or labor. Compressing a population in smaller distances can have severe consequences on agriculture and land usage. 

Basically the benefits outweigh the risks for people who live in areas that experience disasters. FYI, the last hurricane to hit my area that had the impact of Irma was 13 years ago. There were no deaths in my area, and again my area recovered wonderfully. 

For island populations it is actually similar. Disasters happen infrequently enough that it is still a net positive for them to continue to live there. 

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

Unfortunately @Jeric, this isn't the case when you're living in an area that's hit through a huge debt and crippling infrastructure that is Puerto Rico, which is where I live in. Especially since their main electrical grid is outdated and neglected of maintenance as a result of an overwhelming debt that results in frequent power outages, be it from bad weather or lack of maintenance as a result of an unpayable debt. And as much as I love to move elsewhere, unemployment and lack of good funding is preventing me and my family from moving elsewhere. While you are managing very well for you, mine is the complete opposite, to be honest. Especially since the previous government borrowed far too much money for unnecessary needs instead of trying to improve the economy and even give the electrical grids an upgrade.

[Jeric 46,835]

5 minutes ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Unfortunately @Jeric, this isn't the case when you're living in an area that's hit through a huge debt and crippling infrastructure that is Puerto Rico, which is where I live in. Especially since their main electrical grid is outdated and neglected of maintenance as a result of an overwhelming debt that results in frequent power outages, be it from bad weather or lack of maintenance as a result of an unpayable debt. And as much as I love to move elsewhere, unemployment and lack of good funding is preventing me and my family from moving elsewhere. While you are managing very well for you, mine is the complete opposite, to be honest.

Aye. I didn't mean to suggest that all people can easily deal with disasters, rather I used my example as a suggestion that the idea that people should just not live there ... well ... it's an absurd one. It works both ways. For some people, you just deal with it and complain when it happens and move on. For others it is not so simple. The remark that drives me crazy is the, "Well it's your fault ... just move."

It's like blaming people for being born poor. :/

And yes PR needs more infrastructure investment from DC. 

 

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

Exactly! And if I was working, that'd be fine. But it seems most jobs, especially if I were to move to the mainland US, do not hire people who are unemployed, including those who are in need of money, and are forced to take the brunt of bad weather from hurricanes.

[Jeric 46,835]

12 minutes ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Exactly! And if I was working, that'd be fine. But it seems most jobs, especially if I were to move to the mainland US, do not hire people who are unemployed, including those who are in need of money, and are forced to take the brunt of bad weather from hurricanes.

You aren't kidding. I checked San Juan and Bayamon for how many tech jobs were available (something I can use as a comparison to other population centers since I routinely check this) and was shocked at the dearth of available jobs (and also what the few available ones paid). 

I don't think I've seen as depressed a job market in that sector (at least not in the US or European countries). I'm almost afraid to look at your unemployment rate. 

[GrimGrimoire 4,970]

I know right? I visited her on mothers day. Gave her that amazing elliptical machine... I keep my mouth shut when she chooses to watch the Kardashians over good television and I was nothing but polite when we spent six hours at the grocery store extreme couponing. It is like she does not appreciate me at all.

Oh well, I still love her no matter what, since she is the only one I have. Sure she can be overly dramatic, and really difficult when she wants something, and if she decides a course of action, woe be it for any folks who get in her way and tell her no. And don't get me started on the days when she is just plain angry... *shudders*

That being said, sure she can be a lot of trouble... but she also give us this

And a million other scenes, places, viewpoints just like it, all over the place... all for free... and we very often ignore and throw them away.

Moral of the story is.. I would be hard to put up with to sometimes.

 

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

14 minutes ago, Jeric said:

You aren't kidding. I checked San Juan and Bayamon for how many tech jobs were available (something I can use as a comparison to other population centers since I routinely check this) and was shocked at the dearth of available jobs (and also what the few available ones paid). 

I don't think I've seen as depressed a job market in that sector (at least not in the US or European countries). I'm almost afraid to look at your unemployment rate. 

Yeah. And even if I move to the mainland US where job offers are wide open, they're practically very choosy on the people and prefer the "right people" eligible to work. Even witht the skills and the degree, most, if not many, US jobs available do not always guarantee them work because they'd rather pick people who are perfect for them and not those struggling to may for food and bills.

[Mirage 24,137]

30 minutes ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Yeah. And even if I move to the mainland US where job offers are wide open, they're practically very choosy on the people and prefer the "right people" eligible to work. Even witht the skills and the degree, most, if not many, US jobs available do not always guarantee them work because they'd rather pick people who are perfect for them and not those struggling to may for food and bills.

Wow - so you think the reason for nature, and businesses, is to help the poor?

I'm doing my best to be positive here, because this kind of viewpoint is probably not your fault...but, that all smells of Marxist propaganda to me. So just because you're poor, nature should not be nature, and everyone should stop what they are doing to appease 'the poor'?

Well, I don't consider 'the poor' to simply be victims of circumstance. 'The poor' is so relativistic in meaning, and so over-used to grab hand-outs from politicians it's almost meaningless. However, in a very large number of cases, being 'poor' is more so an attitude...and I think you're helping to re-enforce the latter...

Please don't fall into that horrible trap. Wringing your hands over natural disasters and 'the greener grass' in other countries and just the whole 'I'm a victim of everything' is the most dangerous state a human mind can be in. Believing the whole of nature and all people of the world and their systems are all against you is a big fat lie, and I'me afraid its an intentional lie you've been taught to believe.

You are a human fucking being man, and you can do anything you believe in. You can accomplish all of the greatness you see in others with your own power.

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

11 minutes ago, Mirage77 said:

Wow - so you think the reason for nature, and businesses, is to help the poor?

I'm doing my best to be positive here, because this kind of viewpoint is probably not your fault...but, that all smells of Marxist propaganda to me. So just because you're poor, nature should not be nature, and everyone should stop what they are doing to appease 'the poor'?

Well, I don't consider 'the poor' to simply be victims of circumstance. 'The poor' is so relativistic in meaning, and so over-used to grab hand-outs from politicians it's almost meaningless. However, in a very large number of cases, being 'poor' is more so an attitude...and I think you're helping to re-enforce the latter...

Well, not exactly poor, but not exactly rich either. Its a mixed bag,a s are other people. And I seriously apologize if I was under pressure. It wasn't my intention though the news popped up and hit me pretty hard.

However, owing to the debt Puerto Rico has faced through, most people are forced to be laid off of their jobs due to the rise in unemployment rates as a result of said debt. So I wouldn't call myself or the others poor, but rather, economically crippled, hence why power outages frequently happen from bad weather and lack of adequate maintenance.

Again, I'm sorry if I was under pressure, especially after Irma had /barely/ passed through.

[Mirage 24,137]

1 minute ago, Jon the Bronynerd said:

Well, not exactly poor, but not exactly rich either. Its a mixed bag,a s are other people. And I seriously apologize if I was under pressure. It wasn't my intention though the news popped up and hit me pretty hard.

However, owing to the debt Puerto Rico has faced through, most people are forced to be laid off of their jobs due to the rise in unemployment rates as a result of said debt. So I wouldn't call myself or the others poor, but rather, economically crippled, hence why power outages frequently happen from bad weather and lack of adequate maintenance.

Again, I'm sorry if I was under pressure, especially after Irma had /barely/ passed through.

I see - so you are ranting...thank the deity...

Well, I'm very sorry to hear about your plight - all governments overspend and cause all kinds of problems. In fact, no other institution has caused more trouble throughout human history than governmental/ruling entities.

Don't let phones and TV's fool you - we're still a bunch of hairless primates knocking each other around on a hierarchical pyramid of dominance.

My advice - and this might sound curt and insensitive but it's the truth - buck up and deal with it. Work hard and clean up the mess and move on. You cannot change nature, you cannot change governments - but you can always change your attitude.

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

+1

Even when things come to worse, at least most of us can still build and improve for the better, even if other people were to seriously lament as a result of nature's destruction from hurricanes (but also other natural disasters). And yeah. I've had worse really. I'd move elsewhere but at this point, its basically like running away from problems not even I would escape from.

Least I, including all of us, can change, even if governments cannot do the same. Yeah, it was basically a rant since PR and the other islands are still recovering from Irma, though Maria is ready for round two so just gonna brave the storm out there. Thanks for your advice, even if we all have to face the inevitable, but least we can still endure and survive and even move on to business as usual.

[Envy 6,000]

3 hours ago, ooReiko said:

I dont know if its just me but i've been always wondering why people settled to live in areas where these hurricanes or other natural disasters are a problem in the first place. I mean like some places are more prone to these things than others and yet still people choose to live there with the constant risk? I dont really understand it.

I hear you, but note that not everyone necessarily gets to choose which state they want to live in.

I'm just one type of case - if I had my choice I would live I would definitely live somewhere up in the North/East. But instead I live in Oklahoma. Even still, if I lived anywhere near Oklahoma City I would be telling my family that we need to get far away from there. The areas around Oklahoma City are magnets for bad tornadoes.

Still, there are in fact people that like these disaster-prone areas. Like Florida. People actually like living in Florida. I can't even begin to comprehend that.

[碇 シンジン 27,427]

2 hours ago, Jeric said:

Aye. I didn't mean to suggest that all people can easily deal with disasters, rather I used my example as a suggestion that the idea that people should just not live there ... well ... it's an absurd one. It works both ways. For some people, you just deal with it and complain when it happens and move on. For others it is not so simple. The remark that drives me crazy is the, "Well it's your fault ... just move."

It's like blaming people for being born poor. :/

And yes PR needs more infrastructure investment from DC. 

 

I understand the situations why people currently live in these areas and I'm not saying anyone should move anywhere. I'm saying that if one feels that the risks of living in such area overweight the benefits for them in that area moving to the area that could suit them better would be one option in my mind.

It is quite subjective how people view these things as maps and stats don't necessarily  prove anything as predicting these events is not easy. And people tend to value different things over another.

As for the US I'm not familiar with the economic system there but looking from my point of view i think it makes things like moving quite bit harder for some people that are "bound" to certain areas because of jobs and other infrastructure.

As for my original question i was mainly wondering why people in the past didnt move away from the stuff back then when the infrastructure didnt bound them as much. Though I guess some people moved and some didn't. And thing I didn't understand was mainly how the population points even formed in the distressed area though it was probably the most efficient back then  as sea was close and port cities usually prosper more in the trade. 

So I guess the points are justified to some extent

Edited September 17, 2017 by ooReiko

[Yakamaru 3,075]

Mother Nature is Mother Nature. Sometimes she's pissy as fuck as it's that day of the month, giving us hurricanes 'n shit. Other times she's in a generous mood, only drowning that annoying as fuck neighbor's dog in landslide.

Mother Nature acts like she's done for millions of years. And no, she is not out of control. She never is.

[Jeric 46,835]

1 hour ago, Mirage77 said:

Wow - so you think the reason for nature, and businesses, is to help the poor?

I know Bronynerd already  addressed this directly ... but  ... wow

How pray tell did you derive that he was suggesting otherwise from his post, especially after the exchange I had with him? That it was his primary motivation absent other variables. The guy gets slapped around by a storm and vents about it and all of a sudden it become seen as a treatise on business wealth distribution and liberalism? How does that even work man? I'm the one who suggested infrastructure spending there, not him. This is the problem with discourse these days, there and trees and there are forests ... and too many people need glasses. 

16 minutes ago, ooReiko said:

As for my original question i was mainly wondering why people in the past didnt move away from the stuff back then when the infrastructure didnt bound them as much.

It starts with doing a simple internet search for the locations affected. You didn't do that. You jumped straight into, 'why don't they move'. 

18 minutes ago, ooReiko said:

And thing I didn't understand was mainly how the population points even formed in the distressed area though it was probably the most efficient back then  as sea was close and port cities usually prosper more in the trade. 

Yep. Europe loved its new world trade. But as I said the history behind the evolution of all these islands are easily researched ... and you'll get a better picture through multiple sources other than a bunch of pony fans who think everyone but them has an agenda. I'm assuming that you already looked some of this up before drafting your reply as you were curious as to why people would settle and not move from dangerous areas. You did do that, right? 

I'm not asking anyone to do anything about the weather. I rarely push an environmental message because I would be hypocritical if I did. It seems the only thing that was suggested here was ... "damn this weather fucking sucks balls ... what the hell?"

And two people showcased the empathy I expect from a Dickens villain, not because they intended it, but because they simply weren't paying attention. I'm even guilty of this because my initial reply was really amounting stating it is simple cause and effect ... and depersonalized it. 

The moment I realized that ... "oh shit the OP just went through hell", I changed my tone real quick. That's how you people gentlemen. You flex to the situation and the person. Life isn't about textually one-upping each other as you wait for the next reply and your turn to speak. 

The weather sucks sometimes, and it's completely ok to bitch about it. Life sucks sometimes and it's completely ok to bitch about it. Yes perseverance is an admirable trait. Look at it this way, I sure as hell don't expect everyone to deal with hardship and tragedy with the same grace and dignity as if I'm better than them  .... because that would be a douchebag move ... and it would be wrong because I'm not better than anyone using that metric. 

2 hours ago, GrimGrimoire said:

I know right? I visited her on mothers day. Gave her that amazing elliptical machine... I keep my mouth shut when she chooses to watch the Kardashians over good television and I was nothing but polite when we spent six hours at the grocery store extreme couponing. It is like she does not appreciate me at all.

Oh well, I still love her no matter what, since she is the only one I have. Sure she can be overly dramatic, and really difficult when she wants something, and if she decides a course of action, woe be it for any folks who get in her way and tell her no. And don't get me started on the days when she is just plain angry... *shudders*

That being said, sure she can be a lot of trouble... but she also give us this

And a million other scenes, places, viewpoints just like it, all over the place... all for free... and we very often ignore and throw them away.

Moral of the story is.. I would be hard to put up with to sometimes.

 

This is why I hope to retire in Montana. Yes the winters will be cold ... but holy hell that is going to be one gorgeous view. 

1 hour ago, Envy said:

Still, there are in fact people that like these disaster-prone areas. Like Florida. People actually like living in Florida. I can't even begin to comprehend that.

I would wager everyone has a different threshold for weather, and other things. I actually came back to Florida because my younger sister was here, and over time I built a family here. That said, the moment my kids finish high school ... and start their college lives ... I'm bolting Florida with a quickness. Texas, Montana, Washington, and Pennsylvania are the top four contenders. 

[Goat-kun 2,498]

Still waiting for that H1N1 and TDR-TB form the East. And on that terrorist dude who will finally figure out that you can make a damn good Variola vera replica from the mouse version. One of these days. Makes you wanna touch all the cows and shit.

 

And all this weather stuff is just natural for lack of a better word. It sucked for invertebrates, it sucked for dinosaurs, it sucked for mammoths, and is sucks for us too. Ask all the sea creatures from Permian and they'll tell you how it looks like when Big Momma Earth is having a temper tantrum. Though I still wanna know if La Palma eruption is gonna be as spectacular as some say. Or if some of them calderas are gonna pop their corks any time soon.

 

As humans, we need to understand nature and adapt the best we can or be devoured. And the more you understand, the more you can bend her hands without undesired consequences. There is no "vaccine" for hurricanes, yet.

[Mirage 24,137]

2 hours ago, Jeric said:

I know Bronynerd already  addressed this directly ... but  ... wow

How pray tell did you derive that he was suggesting otherwise from his post, especially after the exchange I had with him? That it was his primary motivation absent other variables. The guy gets slapped around by a storm and vents about it and all of a sudden it become seen as a treatise on business wealth distribution and liberalism? How does that even work man? I'm the one who suggested infrastructure spending there, not him. This is the problem with discourse these days, there and trees and there are forests ... and too many people need glasses. 

My comment was a derivative of his 'suggestions'. I remember Katrina, and how that storm was blamed on so many political tropes. I must admit I'm sick of natural disasters being the subject of social exploitation. The talk of businesses and debt and etc opened sore wounds man.

But we're past all that - the OP is frustrated, I get it. No harm done.

[Olly 1,008]

On 9/17/2017 at 11:14 AM, Jon the Bronynerd said:

 seems all she cares about is senseless destruction to many normal lives

 

Aren't we forgetting something