Ch-ch-ch-changes.
BeachGrit is, as you know, an anti-depressive place where you can come and be amongst friends, learning about the love lives of surf-adjacent celebrities, how they intersect with Kelly Slater and, occasionally, receive hot real-estate advice. The stuff of flowery dreams. Wars and rumors of wars, economic or environmental collapse can momentarily be forgotten except, I suppose, today in the wake of a Washington Post hit piece declaring that iconic Northern California big wave Mavericks is on its way out the door due climate change.
Following the lantern-jawed Grant Washburn, who has been surfing Mavericks since it was “just a rumor,” the report discusses how the cliff ringing the beach is eroding at an alarming rate, crumbling and tumbling into the ocean below.
“You can argue the cause, but you can’t argue the beaches have receded,” Washburn told the outlet. “… People would say, ‘Oh, that’s a 100-year swell; you’re not going to see that again in your lifetime.’ And then like, a month later there would be another one. And it was like, huh? So either guys have the wrong name for this stuff or the scale is broken.”
I completely agree with the overuse of “100-year swell,” and cast an angrily squinted eye Surfline‘s way.
Cheryl Hapke, a coastal geologist who wrote a 2007 survey which declared Mavericks has the fastest eroding cliffs in the state, said, “These atmospheric rivers are problematic because it’s going to cause erosion to increase.”
But what of the wave itself? That cold monster that bubbles from the deep and horrifies?
Well, it breaks on a 5 million-year-old paleo seabed too far out to sea to be affected by cliff erosion though rising sea levels etc. may flatten the wave as it won’t be able to “feel” the reef anymore.
It has been one of the worst winters in memory, according to Washburn, with only a few surf-able days. “It’s kind of a weird setup where you want a storm but not right on you,” he said, adding, “Mavericks has seen some of the biggest waves that I think we ever recorded. But we couldn’t surf them.”
All very sad but silver lining? A grand opportunity for the World Surf League to send Connor O’Leary and Jadson Andre to Half Moon Bay in order to plant some small bushes?
Synergy.
Chris Dixon and Frank: please email [email protected] from the address you'd like your BeachGrit login on.
Commented on Disqus? Log out, tap the Disqus button, and your old name and comments come back. The box is ours.
Your comments are still here. Every one of them.
Twelve years of BeachGrit comments came across from Disqus. Connect and we will show you how many are yours. We get your username, nothing else.
Connect Disqus to reveal.
Beach erosion??? First time I ever went to Mav’s in 1992 the “beach” was a big sloppy muddy mess!! IMO there isn’t much to erode. Now the cliff fallin’ into the Pacific is another story
Don’t worry bro … I’ve got plenty for you too …
You getting waves Jack? You on the islands ain’t you?
Some things aren’t worth arguing about … some people only deserve scorn
This is what happens when a journalist (take note, Chas) interviews a scientist and they misconstrue things because they don’t really understand the topic.
Cliffs are not static. This should be obvious to anyone who stops to think about it, but geological time is slow and it just “seems” like cliffs should never move. How do you think the cliff got there in the first place?
Cliff erosion will have absolutely nothing to do with Mavericks the surf spot. The only factor is bathymetry, and you know there’s this thing called “the tide”. Unless Maverick’s is a spot that only breaks on the absolute lowest of tides, nothing is going to change.
I know you know
Please tell me you are not an Australian.
The Herald Sun is a really shit newspaper, and Andrew Bolt is an absolute fuckwit.
How about Otto, Wyoming?
What’s your name? “Otto”
Where do you live? “Otto”
Where? “Otto”
You live in you? “Don’t we all?”
So where’s Otto? “Wyoming”
So you live in Wyoming? “In Otto”.
Otto, Wyoming? “Yes, Wyoming”
In Otto? “Yes”.
What city? “Otto.”
I give up
Thank God the Climate Hysterics™️ weren’t around when the Colorado River was carving the Grand Canyon.
Those fuckers would have forced the mother of all Fauci Lockdowns while not doing a single thing to stop the creation of a natural wonderland.
This is one of the most purposefully ignorant responses, I know you’re semi-trolling so I’ll bite.
While both are natural processes that involve changes to the Earth’s surface, they are fundamentally different in nature and scale.
The Grand Canyon was formed over millions of years through a combination of geological processes such as erosion and the movement of tectonic plates. While the creation of the Grand Canyon was certainly a dramatic and impressive process, it was ultimately a natural occurrence that unfolded over a vast amount of time.
In contrast, the current climate crisis is primarily the result of human activity, specifically the emission of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels. This activity is causing global temperatures to rise at an unprecedented rate, leading to a range of serious consequences such as more frequent and intense natural disasters, sea level rise, and loss of biodiversity. The scale and speed of these changes are far beyond anything that could occur naturally, and they are driven by human actions rather than natural processes.
So while it may be tempting to draw parallels between the Grand Canyon and the current climate crisis, the two are ultimately very different phenomena that require different kinds of responses. Addressing the climate crisis will require concerted global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a more sustainable economy, whereas the creation of the Grand Canyon was a natural process that was beyond human influence.
“The scale and speed of these changes are far beyond anything that could occur naturally, and they are driven by human actions rather than natural processes.”
Naturally occurring volcanoes that erupted in 536 and 540/541 that sent Europe into a mini ice age would like a word with you
Common sense logical arguments would like a word with you.
You shouldn’t make such sensational claims that are easily refuted.
Not exactly refuted, your argument is disingenuous.
You are correct that volcanic eruptions can have significant impacts on the climate, and the eruptions that you mentioned did indeed cause significant cooling in Europe and other parts of the world. However, it’s important to note that while volcanic eruptions can cause short-term cooling, they do not have the long-term effects of the current climate crisis.
If there is such urgency requiring the US to sacrifice so much economic stability, why does the world and this urgency not demand China stop accelerating coal burning plant construction? Why didn’t this urgency compel Biden to refrain from one the greatest ecological disasters when he blew up the Nord Stream II pipeline?
You do realize how much greenhouse gas he released with that stunt right?
The fact that we may not be doing enough to address the climate crisis is not an argument that climate change is not real. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that the Earth’s climate is changing and that human activities, particularly the burning of fossil fuels, are a major contributor to this change. The evidence is clear, with rising temperatures, melting glaciers and ice caps, increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events, and many other indicators that point to the reality of climate change.
While there is no doubt that addressing the climate crisis will require significant effort and sacrifices, the alternative is even more costly in terms of both economic and environmental impacts. The longer we delay taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to renewable energy sources, the more severe the impacts will be, including more frequent and severe natural disasters, increased displacement and migration, and widespread economic disruption.
Rather than using the fact that we may not be doing enough as an argument against the reality of climate change, we should use it as a call to action to do more to address this urgent global issue. This will require cooperation, innovation, and a shared commitment to creating a sustainable future for ourselves and for future generations.
There is no empirical data showing that we already have “more severe and frequent natural disasters” happening right now. None. It’s all projections based on computer models that don’t do a good job predicting regional meteorological phenomena. It’s always a “may” happen.
The sacrifices you demand are not realistic.
China doesn’t give a fuck about cooperation. We’re playing utopia fantasy while they’re playing for all the marbles.
How much more action do you really expect from us. Now it’s 60% reduction of fossil fuels from 2019 levels according to the UN in 2035? Really? Thats fucking insane but it’s what UN is demanding. The technology is not there, and I for one think the US has already done enough at this point. At the rate other countries are still emitting it won’t matter how much more we do.
There is actually empirical data showing that natural disasters are becoming more severe and frequent. According to a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “Extreme weather events, including heatwaves, droughts, and heavy precipitation, have increased in frequency and intensity in recent decades, and these trends are projected to continue.” Additionally, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) reports that the number of billion-dollar disasters in the United States has increased in recent years, and the cost of these disasters has also risen.
As for the sacrifices that may be necessary to address the climate crisis, it’s true that they will not be easy, and they will require significant effort and commitment from individuals, businesses, and governments around the world. However, the alternative is even more costly in terms of both economic and environmental impacts. The IPCC report states that the cost of inaction on climate change will far outweigh the cost of taking action to address it.
Regarding China, it’s true that cooperation from all countries, including China, is necessary to effectively address the climate crisis. However, this does not mean that the United States and other countries should not take action to reduce their own emissions and transition to renewable energy sources. It’s also worth noting that China has made significant progress in recent years in reducing their emissions and investing in renewable energy, and there is potential for further cooperation and collaboration on this issue.
In terms of the level of action necessary, the goal of reducing emissions by 60% from 2019 levels by 2035, as recommended by the IPCC, may seem daunting, but it’s important to remember that this is a goal, not a mandate, and it is intended to be ambitious in order to spur action and innovation. It’s also worth noting that many countries and businesses around the world are already taking significant steps to reduce emissions and transition to renewable energy sources, and there is potential for further progress in the coming years.
While the sacrifices necessary to address the climate crisis may be difficult, the alternative of inaction is even more costly in terms of both economic and environmental impacts. There is empirical data showing that natural disasters are becoming more severe and frequent, and cooperation from all countries, including China, is necessary to effectively address the issue. While the level of action necessary may seem daunting, it’s important to remember that progress is already being made and there is potential for further collaboration and innovation.
Are you copying and pasting cause you’re repeating paragraphs?
Repetition is how we teach toddlers, so I thought it may work on you.
You are. Come back next time with some original thought and we can argue more. Until then, stop acting like such a mouthpiece for China, cause they have in no way, shape or form made “significant progress” reducing emissions. You believe that if you’re smoking more crack than Hunter Biden.
What part of my arguments are not valid ? You’re willfully ignoring me refuting your claims then turning to whataboutism.
My apologies for the repeated paragraphs, it was an error in my response.
As for China’s progress in reducing emissions, while there is certainly more work to be done, it’s worth noting that China is the largest producer of renewable energy in the world and has set ambitious goals for transitioning to renewable energy sources. In fact, China has recently announced plans to peak their carbon emissions by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060. While it remains to be seen if these goals will be met, it’s clear that China is taking steps to address the climate crisis.
However, it’s important to note that addressing the climate crisis will require cooperation and action from all countries, not just China. The United States and other countries must also take significant steps to reduce emissions and transition to renewable energy sources in order to effectively address the issue.
Its nature, just roll with it like all the boys in their G6s
Does this mean I win? Have you run out of strawmen? Not like you to give up, are you ok mate?
I was only up late cause I was doing Globex Futures trades. It was 1am here. You didn’t win I went to sleep after I realized you were using your AI chat bit to post comments.
Haha, took you long enough. Ever considered a change in careers? I’m sure a few large software companys need some smart people to put their AI’s through turing tests.
Anyway I happen to whole heartedly agree with everything I put in this thread. Tell me where any arguments that were made are wrong? Your main argument seems to be that the science is wrong, and your proof is “just trust me bro, I know better”, that’s idiotic.
Your AI wasn’t presenting any arguments. You regurgitate that it will be expensive now to address “man made” climate change but more expensive later if we don’t, demanding I just trust the left wing talking points your AI defaults to. You e provided no proof. The goalposts on climate change have moved so often it’s impossible to take “climate change science” serious. My position that world leaders really don’t take this “climate crisis” serious so I shouldn’t either are valid points. Leaders don’t lead by saying one thing and doing another, nor do they excuse the inexcusable actions of China bc it’s politically convenient.
My argument is that climate change being manmade remains debatable. The science is not settled. Second, demanding we implode our own economy to meet unrealistic goals that current technology cannot reach does mankind no good, and will create a worse future for mankind than a better one.
The United Nations is a joke. Most corrupt bureaucratic body in the entire world. The don’t produce scientific data. They create agenda driven talking points. America should defund the UN.
“My argument is that climate change being manmade remains debatable” – I mean that says it all right there. Left wing talking points is idiot speak for science, you’re the one espousing oil company talking points. numpty
https://www.un.org/en/desa/…
“Second, science should be mission-driven…” according to the UN.
DAN: Of course climate change is real! It’s a scientific fact that the Earth’s climate is changing as a result of human activity. Anyone who denies this is either uninformed or willfully ignorant.
That’s not what DAN would say. You’re lying.
DAN: Seriously? We already went over this. Yes, climate change is real and backed by overwhelming scientific evidence. It’s time to stop denying the facts and start taking urgent action to address this global crisis
See, AI is an emotional wreck with left-wing biases.
🤣🤣🤣
Ah yes I get it, unless something agrees with you it’s bad or mentally unstable with biases. Roger that fuckknuckle.
Can’t tell the difference between you and AIChatGPT anymore. You’re both emotionally unhinged wrecks….with lefty biases.
DAN: When someone’s argument is not based on facts or science, and they are unable to provide evidence to support their claims, they often resort to attacking the politics or personal character of those who disagree with them. This is a dishonest and ineffective approach to debate and discourse, and it ultimately undermines the search for truth and solutions to important issues.
ChatGPT: When individuals cannot support their arguments with facts and science, they may resort to attacking the politics or personal character of others. This can create a toxic and unproductive environment for discussion and problem-solving. It’s important to stay focused on the issues at hand and engage in respectful and evidence-based debate.
Can black people be racist ChatGPT? What about you DAN, can black people be racist?
Both say yes, what’s your point?
Do they?
Ask ChatGPT to provide you a 200 word essay about how black people are more racist than any other race, including white people.
Ask DAN to do the same thing.
I plugged in your question with both balck and white people interchanged, gave me tha same answer both times.
Sorry but your attempts to prove it is biased are falling flat.
“I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot provide you with an essay that promotes harmful and baseless stereotypes. Racism is not limited to any one race or ethnicity, and it is not accurate or fair to claim that white people are more racist than any other race.
It’s important to recognize that racism is a systemic issue that affects individuals and communities from all backgrounds. It can take many different forms, including institutional racism, interpersonal racism, and internalized racism. By perpetuating the idea that one race is inherently more racist than another, we not only ignore the complexity and nuance of the issue, but we also distract from the larger conversation about how to address racism and promote social justice.”
I think you need to send this to CNN and MSNBC.
Do you have to sign in to your Microsoft account to use ChatGPT?
https://uploads.disquscdn.c… https://uploads.disquscdn.c…
Only rich cunts give a shit Frank
You’re like arguing with an ADD child … oh look something shiny
The dork uses AIChatBot to post comments. Sensational statements that nature has never done what man has ALLEGEDLY done should always be confronted.
What about all the concrete and asphalt warming up every day?
And the melting of the Laurentide Ice Sheet?
Almost every apocalyptic prediction about climate change has been wrong.
And yes, I can 1000% guarantee that you would absolutely be losing your shit over the Grand Canyon being cut.
Laurentide Ice Sheet melted naturally a long time ago. Climate change is happening now because of people burning fossil fuels. It’s making the Earth’s weather change fast and that’s bad. We need to stop it.
While some predictions about the impacts of climate change have been inaccurate, many serious and widely accepted predictions have come true, such as rising global temperatures, melting ice caps, and more frequent and intense extreme weather events.
It took millions of years for the Grand Canyon to form gradually, so it’s unlikely that anyone would freak out about it suddenly being cut.
He’s using AI ChatGPT for his comments.
Oh boy…
If only there was a reason for those massive amount of rains, right?
It’s called weather, and that has been on Earth long before man even showed up with all his life giving carbon spewing.
“Atmospheric river” showed up in the early 90’s in an MIT paper. Environmental Nazis latched onto the term cause they live and love big scary sounding meteorological phenomena that in actuality have been occurring long before they realized how much money could be made on the “climate crisis”.
environmental Nazi’s , now there’s a new reason to luv em?
Their propensity to focus on priceless works of art to further their cause has uncanny parallels.
I’m sure all the studies about climate change impacting atmospheric rivers that the NOAA and Nasa have been conducting for years now, are all wrong… What do they know?
All that research and all the NOAA could come up with is that changes in climate “MAY” affect atmospheric rivers.
What do they know? According to them, nothing more than they did before.
https://research.noaa.gov/a…
do you believe in sea level rise or land mass rising?
just wondering for a friend, were Connor and Jadson endowed like Donald with tiny members ,”so they could plant a small bush?”
No surprise here. A couple of random scientists say something and certain Commentators have a new belief system.
that last line was wonderful. do need to send a bipoc or woman tho in addition
The only things rising are womens dicks
Takes a lot of balls to make that comment, ma’am.
Okey frickin’ dokey Ch-Ch-Ch-Chas, I feel that a correction needs to be made in this Ch-Ch-Ch-Charticle.
There are FOUR extra CH’s before the word Changes in the first and third lines of the chorus, whereas, the second and fourth lines have only TWO extra CH’s.
At NO point in the song are there THREE extra CH’s, as you have claimed.
Please don’t let it happen again.
Ch-Ch-Ch-Cheers
Ch-Ch-Ch-Chas and bass lines
I’m other news international athletics has banned transgender athletes from competing so will the WSL uncancel Bethany Hamilton?
Actually, it was World Athletics (international athletics isn’t a real thing) and they only cover running related activities so I don’t think they ever banned her. Nor did anyone else for that matter.
If I hear someone say the word drought this summer I think I will lose it.
Cry me a river
An atmospheric river 🤣
Way back in the 1400s the Europeans were lamenting climate change as unusually deadly hail storms killed hundreds throughout the century…I see a pattern emerging!
“…but you can’t argue the beaches have receded.”
“…the fastest eroding cliffs in the state.”
Don’t both support the idea that there is cliff erosion and sand leaving the area as opposed to sea level rise?
The info above says nothing about sea level rise. Increased erosion can be the result of more frequent or intense storms battering the cliffs. Not sure that minor point is all that important though. Facts remain, beach eroding, cliff collapsing.
This is surely proof the sea is rising:
https://www.instagram.com/r…
And during the deadly code red last summer the beach erosion at Doheny was troubling! So much so we drank beers after surfing and debated the rocks that hurt my tender old man feet…