Some amazing preliminary observations of the flood records

[creek wader]

Fishinwrech, I really don't know the answer about the melting, either. I assume it's the ocean temperature that's warming. And it's melting the outer edges of the icecap. Just a guess. 

On the "on the edge post". Trying to keep this an environmental issue. Not a religious issue. We don't really know what God's plan is.

One way at looking at it is: God created man, so anything man does is in his plan. Good and bad. Including the holocost, genocide, clearing the rainforest, acid rain, fracking causing thousands of earthquakes, testing nuclear weapons, pollution in all forms, etc. That man is a tool or means of carrying out God's plan.

Or, the other way of looking at it is; God gave man a brain with the power to reason/think. God made a planet that is suitable to sustain life for man. Fresh air, clean water, food, temperature, etc. When you look at the atmosphere and extreme temperatures on other planets, this is the only planet that man can survive on, that we know of. We have such a small window of temperature extremes and air mix that we can survive in. That God trusts man to take care of the planet and to make it a livable environment at the very minimum. Since we live here and have more impact on the planet than any other living organisms. Then we are basically the stewards of this planet and for generations to come. So, man needs to take it very seriously. Something that hits close to home are the quality of the Ozark streams. Some may take it for granite. Where I live, the rivers are muddy, farmers have taken out many of the riparian corridors and stream bank erosion is quite bad. Loss of habitat do to farming every square inch, has decimated the quail and pheasant habitat to mention just a few. Growing up in Nebraska, pheasant was king. You would see hundreds if not thousands of birds in a year. Now, seeing a pheasant is a very rare thing. Man altered that.

I believe that humans have the power to make this planet what we want it to be. If man can create earthquakes, many earthquakes, I think we can do other major environmental disasters. Key to everything is moderation and learn from our mistakes and don't repeat them. 

Just my 2 cents, again 

 

[Flysmallie]

16 minutes ago, creek wader said:

Growing up in Nebraska, pheasant was king. You would see hundreds if not thousands of birds in a year. Now, seeing a pheasant is a very rare thing. Man altered that.

Or maybe God altered that to see how man would handle it. Like you said, nobody knows. 

[snagged in outlet 3]

They weren't a native species anyway right?

[creek wader]

18 minutes ago, Flysmallie said:

Or maybe God altered that to see how man would handle it. Like you said, nobody knows. 

You could be right. God may have willed it on man to wipe out the pheasant. Might as well sell our National parks to mining and drilling companies. Oh, I forgot, they're trying to do that. 

[creek wader]

3 hours ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

They weren't a native species anyway right?

Your correct. Guess they don't belong here anyway, kind of like the buffalo. Oops sorry, they may have been native.

[KCRIVERRAT]

35 minutes ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

They weren't a native species anyway right?

Brought here from China.

[MOPanfisher]

I am not a very good "God's plan" person , we have free will, we can rape, murder and be bad as we wish and as we are willing to face man's justice for those actions. As for temps on the poles, well I don't know the exact trends, but a lot of the polar ice and glacial ice is well removed from the actual poles so a few degrees change can make a big difference.  My personal outlook is that I don't believe man is the sole source for climate change, but no question we have had an effect through our actions.  And more short term, changes in farming, concrete and asphalt jungles etc. have certainly changed things, more people and more available water on the surface of the planet allows more water vapor to be picked up by the armosphere, more water plus warmth equals more energy available to come together in severe storms.  Whether we accept climate change or not we are still stewards of our environment and planet, surely the least we can do it to try to make it better, now we just have to figure out and agree what better is.

[creek wader]

2 hours ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

They weren't a native species anyway right?

Trout aren't native to Missouri or Arkansas. So, I guess if bad farming and manufacturing practices create poor water quality and the elimination of trout in Missouri. By your logic, that's ok because there not native, anyway. 

[Al Agnew]

A few points...first, about climate change.  I don't see how anybody can argue that the planet has been warming for the last century or so and is still warming, at rates that are much higher than what we've come to accept as normal.  It isn't just global average temperatures or ocean temperature data that is telling us this, it's a lot of other stuff that is the result of warming, like disappearing glaciers, melting sea ice, thawing permafrost, changing plant growth zones, more frost-free days, etc.  All point to a warming climate.  The debate should be how much of it is human-caused and how much we can or should try to do about alleviating it.  But at the very least, we should be planning how to deal with the effects of it, and one effect COULD be larger and more frequent floods.  

As for the cause that seems to make the most sense to everybody, rampant development, we need to step back a bit and think about it when it comes to streams like those in the Ozarks.  With few exceptions, much of the upper watersheds of these streams is in relatively UN-developed country, nothing but forests, small farms, and small towns.  The percentage of asphalt and rooftops in the total land area of regions like this is still very small, though it has certainly increased in the last 100 years.  We look at a shopping center in Sullivan and see all those parking lots and think that they have to be producing a huge amount of runoff, but a lot of the flood water that went past Meramec State Park came from the upper watershed where there just aren't many parking lots.  And there have been times in the past, especially in the period from 1900 to 1950, when the Ozark watersheds were probably in worse shape than they are now, with a lot more row crops and plowed fields, and denuded forests.  Yep, fewer rooftops and asphalt, but probably a larger percentage of land area was capable of producing faster runoff than healthy forests and fields do.

There have been massive rain events here in the past.  The question is, are they more frequent now than then?  The answer appears to be yes.  Of course, we could go into a drought starting tomorrow that would be like the Dust Bowl years, but we can only look at present trends and the best climate science we have, and make assumptions.  If we assume that this is the new normal, we can begin to plan for it.

[MickinMO]

You can't trust the data because "scientists" have been cooking the books for decades to fit their narrative. Weather feels more extreme because we can see it now. Even 15 years ago West Plains' flooding would not have made the national news. Same goes for tornados and hurricanes. There is more attention and emotion because of the instant effect of social media. I do think the midwest is getting more moisture. Record PWAT values that are more tropical. Mankind is not near as powerful as we want to believe. The sun is what dictates our planet's well being.