Dave Lindorff’s article Global Warming Will Save America from the Right…Eventually is ridiculous on a number of counts (leaving out the whole debate of the existence and pace of global warming):

  • One of the first victims of sea rise would be South Florida, certainly a bastion of left-wing life and politics.  Perhaps it’s not an accident that the Sun-Sentinel is featuring an article on the stiffest antidote to global warming out there.
  • Texas’ populated areas include Dallas-Ft. Worth, Austin and San Antonio, certainly not in the target of sea rise.
  • Palm Springs’ characterisation as a "right-wing retirement (community)" is wide of the mark; it has one of the largest communities of homosexuals relative to its total population of any city in the U.S., something it is proud of.  And it doesn’t get its water from the Salton Sea either.
  • Building Dutch-style dikes to save Boston and other cities in the northeast goes against the left’s aversion to public works as environmentally offensive.  The environmental impact statements of such an enterprise around Boston wouldn’t be complete in time to beat Lindorff’s timetable for flooding.  Just think of how long it took to slog through the "Big Dig."
  • Closer to home, he doesn’t have a really cogent explanation as to why a city such as, say, Baltimore, would be spared whereas one such as Savannah would not.  This gives little comfort to the readers of the Baltimore Chronicle, where this article is published.

And they wonder why they have credibility problems with global warming…