JustinRP37

16 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I know about your credentials, we've discussed them before and I respect them.

But why are you using insecticides in mice nesting material? As a scientist you must be aware of the effect this has on local bird populations that feed on mice, like owls?  There has to be a better way that doesn't impact other wildlife, such as birds.  I had an invasion of ticks at my other house in the Poconos when a deer crashed into my pool and died there.  Most of the ticks that I saw that summer were black ticks.  I bought something to spray on my clothes as a tick repellant-- permethrin.  I also read that opossum are the most efficient way to deal with ticks, as they are their main natural predator. So I've been encouraging more opossum onto that property and the ticks have been going down.  We have opossum here too even though I live in a semi-urban area, I think they would be a great way to drive down the tick population without using chemicals.

I am well aware of Lyme disease and how it's spread to other areas.  I blame stupid humans who decided that it's better to remove predators like coyotes and wolves and cougars that feed on white tailed deer who are the primary vector of the tick that carries Lyme disease.  Maybe if humans didn't kill off the predators we wouldn't have an explosion of white tailed deer.

I think you misinterpreted what I stated, I never said we should remove ALL wetlands, just trim them back from highly populated areas.  As for drainage, not using concrete and asphalt would help with drainage as well as helping with urban heat island.  I'm all for more greenery, as in more trees and native plants and grasses, less of the invasive stuff that has become so common here.

I am 100% against pesticides.  They are the main driver of the 6th mass extinction in the planet's history, as much of a problem as climate change is.  And are destroying our own systems of food production by causing the collapse of pollinator populations.  Something I always like to say is that humans are part of the environment, we can't consider ourselves separate from it, because what we do to it, we also do to ourselves.  We're all interconnected.  As far as mosquitoes are concerned, malaria is one of the top killers on the planet and there are many other mosquito borne diseases.  We have better ways than using toxic chemicals.  Bill Gates idea of using sterilized genetically modified mosquitoes is one of them to control their populations.

By the way, thanks for mentioning microplastics.  Did you know that 6 out of 13 types of cancer are on a rapid rise even in younger people because of a combination of highly processed food, microplastics in food as well as environmental toxins like pesticides?  It seems like we are going backwards and regressing.  Humanity isn't sustainable in its current form.

The insecticide we were using in the nesting material was permethrin-laced cotton, so that it would not spread beyond the nesting site. The goal was to kill off the larval blacklegged ticks on the white-footed mice to help control Lyme disease spread, since the mice are the primary reservoir for the Lyme bacteria. There was limited success, but we would truly need way more than we could possibly put out in nature to truly make a difference. We try not to use any insecticides that can travel for the exact reasons you are wrong about below. Permethrin and insecticides that stay in fibers are safe while protecting the user. The number one most terrible thing being done today is things like Mosquito Joe, spraying backyards. Mosquitoes travel for well over a few miles, so treating a backyard does absolutely nothing for mosquitoes, while obliterating your local good insect population. The biodiversity crisis is honestly the most alarming thing to me, more so than climate change, and that is alarming as well. If we have to start paying people to pollinate all our major crops, we are screwed.

We are going backwards. People are more focused on weird health trends versus actually trying to be healthy by having a healthy environment. Many do not like spending any appreciable time outside because it is "gross" or "buggy". I always tell my students that you can always eat well, exercise, not smoke, etc., but if you live in an area with impaired drinking water, your risks for a lot of health issues skyrocket. If you live near a coal mine, your risks for various cancers skyrocket through no fault of your own. It is wild out there.

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

 

Out of the box thinking is not *dumb*, just because you're an unimaginative uncreative robot.  I've read some of your posts, so I know. The conventional *ideas* that people like you have will NOT get us out of the various crises we face.

It's not *dumb* to want to get rid of places that stink.  I'm not talking about getting rid of ALL marshland obviously, just the ones near where people live.  You obviously do not live near one.  Do you know how bad that area smells in the summer?  Most of the who live here want the swamp that runs near Rockaway Boulevard to be drained because it smells so awful that you can smell it even with your windows roll up.

Check yourself, there's plenty of good area for wetlands, but it doesn't have to be near where people live.

You might need a time out, people are allowed to express their opinions.

There are ways around flooding-- INCLUDING IMPROVED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS.  There's a lot we can do to fix flooding issues, stop using concrete and asphalt are examples.

Take some Paxil so you can calm the hell down dude. 

 

 

Dude that isn't out of the box thinking. It is not scientifically accurate or even remotely a good idea. Just so we are clear I have earned a Masters in environmental remediation and PhD in vector-borne diseases and published in both these fields. So no, I am not an uncreative robot. As for conventional *ideas* you haven't the slightest clue as to what we scientists have actually done to fix these issues. Did you know we have tried rather unconventional ways of reducing tick burdens throughout Long Island and the Hudson Valley? We have tried to have mice build nesting material made with insecticide in the threads. We have tried treating deer in the fall to reduce adult tick mating. We are thinking outside the box using science. 

Humans LOVE living by water and water is vitally important, but complaining about the smell of a marsh that was literally there for hundreds of thousands of years is insane. The vast majority of marshlands exist in high human density areas. The US has lost over 50% of its wetlands to drainage and development since 1950. You make an awful lot of assumptions about people yourself. I literally live in The Great Swamp of NY. The used to call children from Patterson swamp creatures. I grew up spending summers with my grandparents in East Lyme, CT, in a marsh. Also the town where Lyme disease was officially discovered and why it is Lyme disease and not Lime disease. Did you know that marshes and swamps rival tropical rainforests for biological productivity? Swamps reduce pollution and reduce disease burden. Drained wetlands turn into some of our least productive, most disease burdened areas. These are what science tells us. Just take a look at how many chemicals it takes to run a golf course and also why they require more pest control. 

As for people expressing their opinions, I am all for it, but I require students and people to back up their "opinions" with references and actual science. People in the field do call out bad ideas when we see them. I have had to take a lot of criticism in science, we all do, that is what makes us better scientists. Draining wetlands and exterminating mosquitos just isn't thinking outside the box, it is literally potentially sending us on a death spiral. We are likely already in another mass extinction event, only this time we are causing it through habitat fragmentation and way over using pesticides. Pardon me for being upset that we are literally gutting environmental protections.

I am not trying to be mean, but I am curious, what are the conventional ideas I have had? Because I'm pretty intense when I discuss that we really need to change the way we live if we are going to persist into the future. The fact that microplastics are found in literally everything is enough to cause concern. 

13 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

My high school was built on it and is sinking a few inches every decade lol.

They are havens for mosquitoes and other awful biting insects.  I think if we exterminated mosquitoes and these other biting flies from the planet no one would ever miss them.  Aside from draining the swamps, what else can be done? Spraying of pesticides? But that has its own issues.

 

If you exterminated mosquitos you’d lose a lot of aquatic life that feed in their larvae. You’d also lose quite a few other species. Bats need mosquitos too. Draining wetlands leads to increased disease spread. Most of the aggressive mosquitos are NOT from swamps and marshes. But they are from stagnant standing water like clogged gutters, untreated pool covers, used tires filled with water inside (hence it is illegal to store tires outside with the inside exposed within nyc). 

13 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

Wetlands are, but not the ones in our area (especially not the ones near where people live).

 

This literally might be the dumbest f**king thing you have ever said on here and you say a lot of dumb $hit. Our wetlands provide flood control, pollution management, and yes disease regulation. They are some of our most productive systems. I’m sorry but you really need to be 5-posted with posts like this. Hell much of the reason we have awful flooding in the USA is because of how we got rid of so many wetlands…

2 hours ago, the_other_guy said:

Im impressed that its 68F at 430 am on 10/20…but I havent had coffee yet hahaha

We ran out of coffee this morning. Imagine my surprise at 5:30. Talk about spooky season. There will be a Costco run this evening to make sure this never happens again. Then stepping outside to a humid tropical feel was my true wake up this morning! 

19 minutes ago, Brian5671 said:

High school is one thing, elementary is another.  While I agree with you, the helicopter parent culture we currently live in will lead to massive freakouts and calls for us to revert back to the old system...just watch.   That's what happened last time we tried it.

My father in-law teaches in Ohio and literally got a day off today for.... FOG! And we wonder why our workers now want to call out when it is anything other than sunny and calm?

1 hour ago, Brian5671 said:

kids at bus stops or walking to schools is why it won't last if it happens...that's why it folded in 1973-74

We close schools here for a dusting of snow, we're not running busses in the dark lol

Our morning buses are routinely running in the dark in the morning. The high school bus picks up at the end of my street at 6:18AM, well before sunrise currently. Hasn't harmed anyone. 

30 minutes ago, Sundog said:

Who cares. The Sun already rises at 8AM at all locations on the western end of time zones.

And the majority of Europe has a sunrise time much later than we do due to their higher latitude. Nobody dies there.

You know what is terrible? The Sun going down at 4:20PM

Just using your logic here... Those more northern latitudes also have a sunset before 4:20PM, hell in some parts the sun never comes up for weeks at a time and people don't die...

1 hour ago, Sundog said:

He wasn't old enough to remember (and he still kind of isn't) but we did get above average snow in 20-21. 

Yeah, he wasn’t old enough to remember it, but I do. That was the only time we had a few days to play in the snow without it melting. But even that year was only something like 2-3 inches above normal. Even in our warmer, more snowless winters of the past, you could always count on at least a few sustained cold weeks with snow, except maybe on the island. 
 

I’m hoping this year might be decent but I won’t be shocked if it hardly snows either. 

16 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

I believe he's describing the declining number of snow days.

Your temperature charts were really eye opening to me. It is really shocking just to see how short our “winters” have become. 

41 minutes ago, MJO812 said:

Today is October 3

What Don said. A big part of the decline in winter is the shoulder seasons are no longer cool. Hell you just had Liberty saying September was fallish. Our AC worked just as much according to our smart system as it did in August. I like 80s and blue sky just as much as the next person but I really do love winter. I know you are happy with just big snows a few times a year but I enjoy winters that have some staying power. My son is 7 and has never seen an above average winter. 
 

Also, to add, southern NY now sees year round tick activity as the norm. We alway tend to have lows above 40 now for at least part of each winter month (and not just a stray warm night). This is stuff that historically did not happen. 

35 minutes ago, bluewave said:

More summer-like than the Memorial Day weekend was.

The Saturday to Monday highs were only in the upper 60s to mid 70s at the warm spots. The average high during that late May weekend is 75°.  

Models have 80°+ at the warm spots from Saturday through Tuesday. The average high this time of year is only 70°. 

Newark

2025-05-24	69	50	59.5	-6.0	5	0	0.02	0.0	0
2025-05-25	71	50	60.5	-5.3	4	0	T	0.0	0
2025-05-26	75	54	64.5	-1.6	0	0	0.00	0.0	0

I guess since it is not 90 we can't call it summer-like. Really worries me how we normalize the disappearance of our cold seasons. It is honestly why I cherish every single snow day. They are becoming so few and far between. 

Big question is if this hurricane seasons stays this quiet. If so, then many tropical forecasts will bust. This is one of the slower starts in recent years and it still is quiet. That may change, but development looks to keep the fish busy. We will see, but so far a pleasant fall.

What a very odd end to the summer. It really went out with a whimper. No big thunderstorms, no big heat after mid July, very quiet tropics so far, and things looking status quo for some time. Tick season also decreased substantially with the dry weather we have been experiencing. 

I don’t think I have ever worn pants in August but it feels glorious outside this morning!

1 hour ago, ineedsnow said:

media gone wild if this were to happen 

 

Cuba looks like a crooked nose in between two crazy eyes. Too bad it couldn't be some dumb twin names like Hurricane Bert and Ernie. 

32 minutes ago, Dark Star said:

Unfortunately it is.  Although, as you might have guessed, I am far right, but I believe that the global warming is a result of the burning of fossil fuels.  I differ in the approach of how to solve it.  

I hear you there. I don't think politics will solve it. It is a humanity issue. I don't care for politics one way or the other. I just want to live my life, study infectious disease and climate change, and keep my family happy. I would like to think that left, right, center, would all agree that we need to change but nobody will ever agree in the solution. Just like I mentioned bioheat must be a major part for our area.

As for the weather, we are in the doldrums right now of boring weather. Wake up, smoke, go to bed, smoke, comfortable temperatures but this has been a tough week of weather. Hoping we push this $hit out of here. 

7 minutes ago, jm1220 said:

Stop with the politics stuff. Go somewhere else, PM, whatever. If you notice your posts disappearing that’s why. 

Just so we are clear do we consider climate change politics? If so that says a lot about our forum. 

37 minutes ago, lee59 said:

Gas and oil furnaces have an efficiency rating of about 80 to 90 per cent. Of course you have the pollutants that go along with it.

Furnaces and boilers absolutely. I was talking about power generation. 

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

Even though the left (I wouldn't say it's most of the left, maybe a very small portion?) doesn't like nuclear fission, I find it understandable-- those people are stuck in the past of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and maybe even Fukushima.  Those concerns are reasonable even if they are wrong (just don't build a nuclear power plant near a fault line), I don't get the right's issue with renewables.  Are they aware that Texas has the highest renewable capacity of any state in the country?  It seems to me it's not the right that is opposed to renewables, it's the fossil fuel industry that feeds the right that is opposed to them.

 

Nuclear will have to play and more important role as a bridge fuel to a sustainable future. 

28 minutes ago, lee59 said:

I believe one of the issues with wind and solar energy is that it is about 30 to 40  percent efficient at converting their energy to electricity. Oil and gas have much higher efficiency ratings. I'm sure we will continue to make progress in efficiency improvement for renewables as time goes by. In the mean time oil and gas will be number one if folks want to keep their standard of living the way it is. There are plenty of alternatives that I believe will some day take over and oil and gas will go by the way of the dinosaur. I have a hybrid pick up, great gas mileage and no worries about how far I have to travel. I think a good choice as we gradually go from oil to alternatives.

Oil and gas are also in the 35-60% efficiency rate. Oil is lower than gas and coal is the worst at about 33%

1 hour ago, Sundog said:

1. I see no evidence that we are trying to deplete all fossil fuel energy before switching over. And who are you referring to? Americans? The West? Asia? The whole world?

2. 90% of the problem IS from outside the USA. The United States produces about 10% of global emissions annually. 

3. The Earth doesn't CARE about per capita pollution. It doesn't care if 100 people or 10 billion people are producing the greenhouse gases. All it knows and feels is the total amount emitted. 

4. China installed about 100GW of energy from coal in only ten years, which going by the average sized coal plant translates to roughly 250 new coal plants. It doesn't matter if they also increased their renewable energy. Remember the Earth doesn't care about that, it only cares about total emissions, and China built a record amount of literally the worst type of energy. 

5. Since renewable technology took off and was working at scale, we have had a Democratic president for 12 of the last 16 years. 

6. People are putting profits ahead of the environment all over the world, and especially the third world. 

7. We are currently running a planetary scale geoengineering experiment RIGHT NOW. What else would you call altering the atmospheric composition of an entire planet? Letting this experiment run its course is simply not an option. 

8. I don't think we'll get to 800ppm, most of the world except Africa has fallen below replacement rate. 

9. I am glad that you acknowledge that fossil fuels brought about the modern technological age and vastly improved humanity's standard of living. 

10. In my ideal world there is no fossil fuel use anywhere in the world. But I'm not holding out hope. 

I think annual aerosol injections to bring temps down to 1C cooler than present will give humanity enough time to transition. I really think this is the only practical solution. 

I was referring to the whole world. I don’t see anyone not wanting to deplete. 

2) and 3) The USA is still responsible for 13-15% of global emissions, and per capita definitely does matter. It shows how efficient a society is or not. The USA alone is responsible for about 25% of global emissions since the start of the Industrial Revolution. It shows that we have made great strides in this area. 

4) Yes, I’m aware, but China also manufactures the vast majority of products around the world. Move that elsewhere, and those coal plants are as badly needed.

5) I don’t care much for politics or politicians. They are mostly the scum of the earth. Presidents typically don’t have much power, but Congress tends to set environmental policy and funding. 

6 and 7 absolutely agree. That’s why I said we could consider what we are doing geoengineering. 

8) I think we will get close. When I was born, we were under 350 ppm. Today, we are at 425. 

My background is in sustainability, and it is also my favorite course to teach at the university level. I have honestly never faced the level of hostility in my career as we are facing now in higher education. We can hope for a better future, but with cancer rates rising, forever chemicals everywhere, and microplastics linked to infertility and cancer, it is bleak. 

1 hour ago, FPizz said:

How many panels do you have and what is the size of your system?

For solar? Unfortunately our house doesn’t have good siting for solar being at the base of a hill. We do seek out energy suppliers that supply solar and wind to the grid. And we burn B20 for heat which I wish we could do more. 

Just now, LibertyBell said:

 Only economists know that growth is infinite on a finite planet. 

This math really doesn't work, we are already consuming resources at twice the rate that the planet can replace them.  It's why this planet has a population ceiling of around 11 billion humans.

And we really don't want to find out what first-hand what happens when populations overshoot their carrying capacity. Plenty of examples in the natural world shows it is pain and suffering and in some areas of the world, we are already seeing that. 

2 hours ago, Sundog said:

Don I'm interested only in solutions that have a possibility of working. 

The USA going carbon neutral TOMORROW won't solve this problem. 

The USA can geoengineer the solution on its own. Why do we need their permission?

Does China ask us for permission to pollute the atmosphere? Did they ask permission to build roughly 250 coal plants over the last 10 years?

Who's to say the aerosols caused the monsoon to fail? Why can't it be greenhouse gas induced climate change that did it?

Nothing will get solved as long as 90% of the problem lies outside the USA's borders.  

If they can pollute the atmosphere freely, then we can inject aerosols into it if we want to as well. 

 

We do have plenty of options that WILL work. But the problem is the stakeholders that make massive amounts of money off fossil fuels don't want to change until the reserves they have purchased are fully depleted. 90% of the issues is NOT from outside the USA. The USA is still the second-biggest producer of greenhouse gasses with a relatively small population. Our per capita emission is around 14.2 tonnes per person, whereas China is 8.9, and India 1.9. Despite the fact that China is basically the manufacturer for the world (which does need to change). Yes, China has added more coal in the past decade, but it is also producing more and more renewables each year. (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/26/china-breaks-more-records-with-massive-build-up-of-wind-and-solar-power). China is likely at its peak gasoline consumption now as it has massively electrified its vehicle fleet (https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/chinas-fuel-demand-may-have-passed-its-peak-iea-says-2025-02-13/). 

Unfortunately for us, we have a president that does not want to build any wind power or any renewables. (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15l3knp4xyo) (https://ctmirror.org/2025/08/04/trump-administration-cancels-plans-to-develop-new-offshore-wind-projects/). And is also actively trying to destroy any research on greenhouse gasses (https://www.npr.org/2025/08/04/nx-s1-5453731/nasa-carbon-dioxide-satellite-mission-threatened). 

The technology exists for us to decarbonize rapidly, and it will not all be from one area. Many say to ban all oil-fired boilers in homes, but the fastest way to decarbonize heat in the Northeast is not getting rid of oil burners but switching them to primarily biofuels. We have the technology, but just like people were wary of electricity back when it was being brought into the house, we are facing a highly anti-science environment right now. Sadly, our present-day life is really reminding me of Idiocracy. People will put profits above all else. Only economists know that growth is infinite on a finite planet. 

Geoengineering is also highly risky. A miscalculation could be an extinction-level event, although the same can be said for the pathway we are on now. Once global CO2 levels hit 800 ppm, we are likely looking at a dead ocean. We could hit this by 2100 on our current track. 

The other thing I always tell my students is to look around... All this human development is in the last 200 years for the most part. Our lives have drastically improved, but now it is time to make sure we still have a future. Literally go back just two human generations, and most families in the USA did not have a car for every driving-age person. They may have had 1 for the whole family. We are incredibly lucky to be alive today when, all things being equal, life has never been easier to live (obviously, there are still struggles, but we aren't hunting every day, building fires, salting our meat to keep it longer, etc.). We have refrigerators, HVAC, cars, trains, etc. Now we just need to encourage engineers and scientists to help us build a better, more sustainable future.