OK, let's do that. Oil belonging to those who live along the Mississippi should not be allowed to be siphoned off and given to the Communist states of California, Washington and Oregon. States have gone to war over less.
Only fools believe reasonable doubt is invincible on the intellectual level. Instincts navigate from the center of being timed apart while biologically here. As for the topic of this thread, last time I heard, it wasn't cost effective, then there is all that salt to dispose of or is that dumped back into the pacific at one location upsetting the macro environment dumped at?
Foolish is as Foolish does. However, unless you haven't noticed there is no "does" in internet forums. Therefore, applying inductive reasoning, there are no fools in internet forums either. So, you must be referring to something not here, but out there in the multiverse.omh » 02 Jun 2022, 1:26 pm » wrote: ↑ Only fools believe reasonable doubt is invincible on the intellectual level. Instincts navigate from the center of being timed apart while biologically here.
you are the foolish kind of mind that allows other people's consensus regulate your brain believing you pulled the fast one over everyone else mutually evolving here..Skans » 02 Jun 2022, 1:30 pm » wrote: ↑ Foolish is as Foolish does. However, unless you haven't noticed there is no "does" in internet forums. Therefore, applying inductive reasoning, there are no fools in internet forums either. So, you must be referring to something not here, but out there in the multiverse.
The nuisance flood waters sold to Nevada ranchers and California farmers would not be "stolen." I don't think you are very well versed on the topic from a factual perspective. Clearly, your knee is well conditioned to jerk, and you are properly conditioned to shriek "communism" when the topic of diverting government teat from the military industrial complex to actual civic uses for the good of the public is broached. But not all government projects of scale = "communism."Skans » 02 Jun 2022, 1:08 pm » wrote: ↑ OK, let's do that. Oil belonging to those who live along the Mississippi should not be allowed to be siphoned off and given to the Communist states of California, Washington and Oregon. States have gone to war over less.
Why are you so angry?omh » 02 Jun 2022, 1:34 pm » wrote: ↑ you are the foolish kind of mind that allows other people's consensus regulate your brain believing you pulled the fast one over everyone else mutually evolving here..
Every post you validate being ruthless, relentless, corrupt, and dishonest. Everyone claims I lost my mind using my brain to navigate space limited to mutually evolving here as I compromise with denial to get along with reality of social engineering outcomes forward now.
I know how to balance total sum of my behavior.
honesty doesn't get angry, it just explains how things became absolutely corrupted by chain of command social order. universe is ever changing by perpetual balancing result never same details added from here.
Don't go there, I was raised on the continental divide of north east ohio and the cuyahoga river when in the 70's the feds wanted to create another erie canal to run great lake water to the southern states rapid expansion of population running out of water.Skans » 02 Jun 2022, 1:08 pm » wrote: ↑ OK, let's do that. Oil belonging to those who live along the Mississippi should not be allowed to be siphoned off and given to the Communist states of California, Washington and Oregon. States have gone to war over less.
Its not a desert state, only parts of it are. We have the tallest and biggest trees in the world that require heavy rainfall to grow.Skans » 02 Jun 2022, 10:58 am » wrote: ↑ All tap water tastes different to me, especially from one state to another. As long as its drinkable, it can be filtered using even a fridge filter for better taste. Personally, I think they should have desalination plants running 24/7 pumping fresh water into lakes/reservoirs in California's interior. Maybe they can actually greenify that desert state.
Cannonpointer » 02 Jun 2022, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑ Too difficult is NEVER a reason to back off an idea. "Too difficult" should mean tackle it, rather than kick the can to our grandkids, down the road. Those flood waters should have been addressed in the 60s. We should put a stop to that - lives are lost every year to flooding in the midwest, and hundreds of millions in property daage occur.
Pretend the pipeline is for oil. See that?
The only thing the states would be "pissed off" over is being bypassed. They would FIGHT to be part of the project. Daylighted pipeline water plus **** land = prime real estate = increased economic growth, increased population, new jobs and an increased tax base.
It's not an either/or. This nation needs two hundred desalination plants yesterday. This project is paid for four ways: selling irrigation water to the southwest, eliminating our trade deficit, saving billions in flood damage and turning **** lands into prime real estate. New state and national parks and recreation areas, new commercial opportunities - the options from dylighting the pipeline are endless. Another way the project pays for itself is through decreased flood risks, which equates to decreased insurance premiums - we're talking hundreds of millions annually.
I recall the first time I ever visited California in my late teens I was horrifically disappointed. Having never been there, I had envisioned this lush, green paradise with huge redwood trees everywhere, mountains, streams, never-ending forests and warm, tropical, white-sandy beeches.impartialobserver » 02 Jun 2022, 4:01 pm » wrote: ↑ "https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/ami ... e%20change."
This article somewhat lays out why there are not more desalinization plants. The simpler solution is simply to have folks move to other states. Unbeknownst to most (not Skans), the state is largely desert. Even where there are trees.. it is pretty dry and arid. NE California has some forests but only because it is sparsely populated and there never was a sustained native population.
Who else could be doing that ?
Only in Californica ?SJConspirator » 02 Jun 2022, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑ apparently the concern is how desalination intake valves destroy marine life.
Haven't you noticed that huge amounts of water would have to be pumped over the high plains to get it to the Colorado or some other Western river? And wherever you choose to store the water, that is land that belongs to someone who would be deprived of it forever.Cannonpointer » 02 Jun 2022, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑ An even more elegant solution would be the construction of a few large retention ponds in the midwest, capturing the annual nuisance flood waters of the yallerstone, missouri, mississippii et al, and pumping it over the rockies into lake powell in utah - headwater of the colorado.
That's what God's servant, Adam, would do: say to the Mississippi, "You were fashioned to feed the Gulf of Mexico, but to serve the interests of human kind, some of your waters will feed the Pacific, by the power of my word and by the stewardship granted me by our Heavenly Father."
The waters shipped west could be daylighted at various stops along the route, creating residential, industrial, agricultural and commercial opportunities. The monies earned by such daylighting, the monies saved from preventing annual nuisance floods and septennial catastrophic floods, and the monies derived from the sale of the rerouted waters in the arid southwest would all combine to easily justify the expense of the project. The resulting agricultural bounty would erase America's trade deficit.
This would require long term planners. Wall Street is obsessed with next quarter, and wall street governs this country, unelected.
The Colorado sure could use the water !Xavier_Onassis » 03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ Haven't you noticed that huge amounts of water would have to be pumped over the high plains to get it to the Colorado or some other Western river? And wherever you choose to store the water, that is land that belongs to someone who would be deprived of it forever.
Well, we can't have people dry up and die by dehidration !Xavier_Onassis » 03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ And wherever you choose to store the water, that is land that belongs to someone who would be deprived of it forever.
Gosh, no. I thought you could run a pipeline over the Rocky Mountains without a pump - just let gravity get it up there. Now that you mention it, that makes my idea lot less simple. Gotta add an energy source. I could donate one of my portable generators, if that would help. Might be an even bigger job than that. Might need a whole-house Generac.Xavier_Onassis » 03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ Haven't you noticed that huge amounts of water would have to be pumped over the high plains to get it to the Colorado or some other Western river?
I wonder if there are any sizeable tracts of land in the midwest that using for retention ponds wouldn't bother anyone too much? I know that almost 4% of the land is already being used by humankind, but maybe we could find a few low-lying, flood-prone spots that aren't, and build the ponds there?Xavier_Onassis » 03 Jun 2022, 10:44 am » wrote: ↑ And wherever you choose to store the water, that is land that belongs to someone who would be deprived of it forever.
These guys have the answers...Cannonpointer » 02 Jun 2022, 11:14 am » wrote: ↑ An even more elegant solution would be the construction of a few large retention ponds in the midwest, capturing the annual nuisance flood waters of the yallerstone, missouri, mississippii et al, and pumping it over the rockies into lake powell in utah - headwater of the colorado.
That's what God's servant, Adam, would do: say to the Mississippi, "You were fashioned to feed the Gulf of Mexico, but to serve the interests of human kind, some of your waters will feed the Pacific, by the power of my word and by the stewardship granted me by our Heavenly Father."
The waters shipped west could be daylighted at various stops along the route, creating residential, industrial, agricultural and commercial opportunities. The monies earned by such daylighting, the monies saved from preventing annual nuisance floods and septennial catastrophic floods, and the monies derived from the sale of the rerouted waters in the arid southwest would all combine to easily justify the expense of the project. The resulting agricultural bounty would erase America's trade deficit.
This would require long term planners. Wall Street is obsessed with next quarter, and wall street governs this country, unelected.