Re:California Is Sitting on the Solution to Its Drought Problem
by airza on Thursday June 18, 2015 @04:26PM
(#9741421)
He very much is, you can also see later in the article:
Yes, to solve the "drought" in a few short years, there are two basic tasks that California needs to undertake.
The argument made in the earlier part is clearly intended to be on-the-level as he assumes at this point that the reader is convinced by it enough to not call the current once-in-a-millenium drought a drought anymore.
Re:California Is Sitting on the Solution to Its Drought Problem
by Tloewald on Friday June 19, 2015 @12:45PM
(#9746025)
He's trying to engineer a solution to the drought. Engineering a solution to X does not imply X does not exist; that would be stupid.
But if we want to dwell on semantics -- a drought is defined as being an aberration from some norm. Given climate change, the drought in california isn't a "drought" but a change in norms -- this isn't a "once-in-a-millenium-drought" but, in fact, a new normal (didn't NOA just predict a multi-decade drought in California to be a virtual certainty in the next century?)
Re:California Is Sitting on the Solution to Its Drought Problem
by CONTRARlAN on Thursday June 18, 2015 @12:33PM
(#9739746)
As an aside, it's been my experience that titles are often written not by the person who wrote the article, but by someone who is tasked with writing titles that are intended to attract attention, and not necessarily perfectly reflect the views of the author.
The basic point is that if people collected rainwater instead of channeling it into the ocean they could have more than enough water. Don't argue at the margins and ignore the main point.