Search Results
7/10/2025, 5:29:31 AM
>>509968569
That's rather easy to explain: we got them by declaring them to be "1,000-year floods". Or in other words: these particular floods, just by by taking place, proved that they are in fact no "1,000-year floods". Nature does not work uniformly like the human intellect prefers to assume it does. There is no law that floods have to appear in any pattern or after an equally long amount of time passed. And by the way, we are still witnessing the warming phase within a glacial period that - usually, as far as we can reconstruct for the recent millions of years - extends over ~100,000 years. Warming has more water evaporate over the oceans and consequently more water coming down over landmass. But even this cycle of periodical great ice ages does not logically justify the expectation of it remaining in effect forever, it may change due to whatever causes we don't know and don't take into account yet.
That's rather easy to explain: we got them by declaring them to be "1,000-year floods". Or in other words: these particular floods, just by by taking place, proved that they are in fact no "1,000-year floods". Nature does not work uniformly like the human intellect prefers to assume it does. There is no law that floods have to appear in any pattern or after an equally long amount of time passed. And by the way, we are still witnessing the warming phase within a glacial period that - usually, as far as we can reconstruct for the recent millions of years - extends over ~100,000 years. Warming has more water evaporate over the oceans and consequently more water coming down over landmass. But even this cycle of periodical great ice ages does not logically justify the expectation of it remaining in effect forever, it may change due to whatever causes we don't know and don't take into account yet.
Page 1