26 March, 2015
07 March, 2015
For starters, I have seen some rather interesting photos of people floating on the surface of the Dead Sea without any flotation devices due to how dense that water is, and with explanations that the density is in turn due to the salinity. Also, I am fully aware that a combination of temperature and salinity, with salinity being by far on top, is what drives the thermohaline circulation, since warm water with dry air on top of it (which can be either hot/dry or cold/dry and still have the same effect) tends to evaporate faster, and since evaporation leaves all the salt behind, the water that is left behind becomes saltier, denser, and thus, more prone to downwelling.
Therefore, I thought of a rather ingenious hypothesis the night before (worship/post-worship fun night): What would happen to the sea surface temperatures off SoCal if the salinity of the local waters were to suddenly increase during a critical time when hot, dry air is blowing over those waters in the form of Santa Ana winds?
Early the following morning, the day those dry Santa Ana winds were forecast, I decided that it was the perfect opportunity to test that hypothesis. I biked to the beach (specifically Salt Creek Beach in Dana Point) to beat the heat, of course, but I also made a little pit stop on the way there. In Laguna Niguel, practically right on my route there, is a Walmart. I stopped there to see how expensive those one-liter cans of salt were. Sure enough, they cost only 78¢ per can. So, I got four of them, totaling 1 full gallon of pure salt, enough to double the salinity of 33.3 gallons of seawater. Then, I slipped that salt in my backpack, headed down to the beach, spotted a rip current, and dumped all that salt in the water at about 9AM, which is by far the perfect time on a day like that since it gives that increased salt time to force some of the local waters to downwell (and evaporate) prior to those hellish Santa Ana conditions.
From there, I rode back up to Laguna Niguel to have lunch, then went back to the beach, this time to Aliso Beach. When I got there, I got in the water, and noticed that its temperature had indeed risen. And when those (weak) Santa Ana winds then began blowing, the water didn't cool as it normally would have. No, because of the increased local salinity, it actually warmed due to the resulting feedback effect. Remember, when air is dry, water evaporates VERY rapidly. And when salt water evaporates, the vapor becomes fresh water, leaving the salt behind, making the water saltier and denser still. Since water that is dense becomes heavy and wants to downwell, that downwelling pulls heat down with it, making the water even warmer.
I then checked the sea surface temperature map this morning. When I had last checked it prior to that intervention ― sure enough, just before heading down to the beach ― it was indeed anomalously warm, but only in about the low 60's. This morning, however, this tongue of warm water in the upper 60's to low 70's (!) that didn't exist before suddenly stretched from Baja up the coast almost to Los Angeles. Then, as I zoomed out even further, I noticed an almost dead Kuroshio Current with exceptionally cold water choking it out, and also noticed more anomalous equatorial downwelling east of the Date Line, not to mention eastward movement of Asian water against the will of the Trade Winds (the calling card of El Niño).
I was stunned. How could I have known that busting this devastating drought would be that easy? Remember, water that comes in to replace that resulting anomalous downwelling naturally wants to curve to the right due to the Coriolis effect. That means from Mexico, around the tip of Baja, and ultimately northward. Consequently, warm water must also then flow eastward along the equator (which already has a level that is rather imbalanced) to replace THAT water, and so on and so forth. The results I spotted on that map matched perfectly with my hypothesis.
SST anomalies of that scale right off California may result in dry winters, to be fair, but when it comes to summer (read: hurricane season), they couldn't be more beneficial, to say the least. They not only enhance the hurricane season in the eastern Pacific but also the monsoon, which tends to cause a normally dry season to become a season of pop-up convective thunderstorms and dew points in the 70's. What's more, if the resulting SSTs reach a certain threshold (like they did in 2006, when a buoy stationed near Newport Beach reported 80-degree waters and another one further offshore in San Diego County reported SSTs near 83°F) ― 82.8°F ― they end up becoming fuel for tropical cyclones.
Last summer, Hurricane Marie was a storm for the record books, to say the least. It was the first tropical cyclone to reach Category 5 status in the Pacific east of the International Date Line (the dividing line between typhoons and hurricanes) since 2010's Hurricane Celia. Despite not even coming close to California shores and weakening to a tropical storm at the same latitude as Ensenada due to the exceptionally cold waters that normally serve to shield us Californians from hurricanes (that's exactly why you don't usually hear of hurricanes hitting California: cold water), Marie's 160mph sustained winds with 195mph gusts extending a whopping 400 miles out from the eye were enough to send 25-foot waves careening into the California coast from more than 1000 miles away. Surfers, of course, were absolutely loving it, but they were the only ones who were. Those who lived near the coast, especially low-lying regions such as Seal Beach, woke up to find several feet of salt water in their homes, and a lifeguard station up in Malibu was completely washed away into the ocean.
Should a storm like Marie actually take advantage of anomalous sea surface temperatures and make landfall in California at the perfect time, however, it would definitely be the ultimate drought-buster, to be sure. Then again, it's kind of a two-edged sword due to the amount of wind and (especially) flood damage that hurricanes cause, but it would definitely be a sure way to get those reservoirs full and our groundwater up to par. Then again, that's a topic for another post that won't be published until it actually occurs...
05 March, 2015
01 March, 2015
One of the first effects was actually quite bizarre: summer heat. Surprisingly, the weather got unspeakably hot across most of Europe from June to August during the first phase of the eruption. This may, of course, be attributed to the fact that not only SO2 and HF but also CO2 are released during such eruptions, but the true culprit remains a mystery. Of course, that heat wave also resulted in the formation of severe thunderstorms large enough to produce hail. In Europe specifically, this hail, which would have been similar to the hail that we modern people would see as being the size of baseballs, resulted in widespread crop damage during what should be the growing season. Then, of course, it skipped fall (which the summer was in the US) and went straight into winter.
That winter was especially harsh. According to reports from both Europe and the newly independent United States, it was one that not even this record 2014-15 winter, which is clearly one for the record books thus far, could even come close to topping. Temperatures were, like they are now, below zero in the eastern US for a good chunk of the winter. In fact, temperatures got so unspeakably cold that even the Gulf of Mexico froze! Crops failed as late as May, and in Europe, famine was widespread. Across the globe, it's estimated that more than 6 million people perished from the climatic impact of this seemingly gentle eruption.
Meanwhile, in the tropics, the Laki SO2 had other, far different (albeit familiar) effects. Thanks to the unusually extreme European cold, dry air began sweeping over Africa, over the Sahara, cutting off the African Easterly Jet and weakening the trade winds. Over Asia, that cold, dirty air made the high pressure over Tibet persist, causing the Indian Monsoon to also fail. In the Pacific, however, the effect was the opposite. Because the Atlantic was cold and so was the East Indian Ocean, the Pacific warmed up like wildfire. A super-strong multi-year El Niño began a few years after the eruption (presumably because there were a whole lot of factors that had to change prior to the El Niño, unlike in the case of today where we've got an El Niño that's already three years overdue), in 1789, and didn't end until 1793, causing flooding in California (then a Spanish colony; I would love to see if I could find some Spanish records of the storms, especially given that I learned almost 3 years of Spanish as a second language in high school) and South America that would be for the record books, for sure.
See, sulfur dioxide and hydrogen fluoride are acid gases. The mechanism of their toxicity is far different from the mechanism of action of gases like carbon monoxide that just put you to sleep for good. No, these gases will simply burn your lungs into oblivion if you try to breathe them. That's because when they contact water (which our lungs are full of), they turn that water into, respectively, sulfuric acid and hydrofluoric acid. Those strong, highly corrosive acids, then, are what do most of the damage. They can cause everything from wheezing and coughing all the way to pulmonary edema, which makes it excruciatingly painful to breathe, leading to death. That same property ― turning water into acid ― however, is also what makes these gases hard on the climate, potentially even more so than the ash. Why? When that acid happens to be acid high up in the atmosphere ― that is, in the clouds ― it's going to take a whole lot more than just a little sunlight to remove it. The reason? Its high albedo. Compared to water droplets, acid droplets are far more reflective and can persist far longer at the upper levels. They can take on rather bizarre yellowish or greenish colors, acting like a smokescreen that can drift to very high, even stratospheric levels. This has the effect of reflecting sunlight that would otherwise reach the surface and warm us up right back out into space.
Of course, that albedo-increasing property bring us right back to Bardarbunga. Although the eruption at Holuhraun was only 6 months long compared to 8 months for Laki, it's still probably at least one of several reasons why this current winter simply doesn't want to end. That is due, of course, to the extreme quantities of sulfur dioxide that it managed to release into the atmosphere, which was estimated to have peaked at a whopping 35,000 metric tons per day for 184 days, totaling 6.44 million metric tons of SO2. People have smelled Bardarbunga sulfur as far away as Norway, and SO2 concentrations in Austria have been in some cases higher than they were in the 1980's as a result of this eruption, believed to be emitting twice the amount of sulfur dioxide of all of Europe's power plant and oil refinery smokestacks combined.
That's a tremendous amount of reflective SO2 aerosols, if you ask me. And, of course, with now sulfur-coated Europe being so close to North Africa, the African Easterly Jet is now also likely to be affected. Yeah, that in turn allows for strong wind shear in the Atlantic, and from there, well, I think we all know what that means. Less hurricanes in the Atlantic but more in the eastern Pacific, which is of course abnormally warm... and if the effect on the Indian Monsoon is also one inducing a failure, it's likely that the resulting SST imbalance between the Indian and Pacific Oceans should also be enough to cause westerly wind bursts to ramp up like wildfire, which of course they're already trying to, and there's also already a Kelvin wave in progress as icing on the cake. Then again, we'll never really know until we actually see the activity...
24 February, 2015
See, there's this global circuit called the thermohaline circulation. It acts like a global heater, transporting warm equatorial water northward. This, in turn, is exactly why some high-latitude places such as Europe and the Pacific Northwest are (usually) as warm as they are during the winter compared to other places, such as Canada and New York, at the same latitude: because of the warm water being transported northward by the thermohaline circulation, which warms the air above through the release of water vapor (a greenhouse gas that, molecule for molecule, is more than 2,000 times as potent as carbon dioxide, but has an atmospheric half-life of only a week compared to hundreds or thousands of years in the case of gases such as methane and CO2). This system, however, has a weakness: the delicate balance of warm, cold, salt, and fresh water that it depends on.
One needs to realize that in order to understand how fragile the thermohaline circulation is, one must first take into account how it works: When warm water moves north from the equator in response to constriction against continents by the normal (not anomalous) east-west flow of the trade winds, it moves into regions of colder, drier air. As a consequence, it evaporates more and more rapidly the further north it gets. That excess evaporation, in turn, results in an increase in salinity, density, and, thus, weight, so it sinks. Then, at the subsurface, the water moves back toward the equator from the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, heating up again. This self-perpetuating cycle normally makes places like the eastern US and Europe relatively temperate as far as climate is concerned. Normally.
Dumping large amounts of fresh water into the ocean from the north (or south) ― yes, even in the form of meltwater pulses ― however, puts this pattern in jeopardy. Remember that water gets denser the more saline it gets. Being less dense, fresh water tends to float on top of the salt water below. This, in turn, forces the warm ocean currents to downwell closer to the equator. Meanwhile, despite being less dense than salt water, fresh water still has a freezing point 4 °F higher (32°F) than salt water (28°F) does. The result? More sea ice. Sea ice which, in turn, increases the albedo of the oceans further north and south. Albedo increases, in turn, reflect more sunlight right back out into space, hampering the Sun's ability to warm the northern and southern regions, resulting in more ice, more snow, more albedo, and more cooling. This runaway process has in fact been responsible for several abrupt climate shifts in the past, including both the Younger Dryas ― likely the result of a meltwater pulse triggered by the late-Pleistocene thermal maximum ― and the Big Chill of 6200 BC, which may in fact have been triggered by none other than the aforementioned Pulse 1A.
So, in regards to sea level rise, therein lies the problem. Although meltwater pulses do indeed raise sea level, they also disrupt the very ocean currents that sustain them. This, in turn, leads to periods of cooling and advancing glaciers, and in some cases, even new Ice Ages. Although, I must admit, those then present a myriad of problems of their own... but that's a topic for another post.
11 January, 2015
Then, I began to research the final variable: volcanism. After all, volcanoes do a profound job of influencing meteorological patterns, yes, including ENSO ― all one needs to do is look at the devastating 1815-17 and 1883-84 El Niño events, in which volcanism has caused not just extreme El Niño, but a combination of El Niño and a big chill. In the 1815-17 case, the weather in Europe and the US East Coast got so unbelievably cold that it snowed even in May/June in cold areas, while in places like CA (then a Spanish colony), El Niño conditions caused the exact opposite ― storm after storm after storm after storm, for a full year and a half. The Los Angeles floods of 1883-84 ― also a result of a volcanism-induced ENSO shift, this time from Krakatoa ― were exceptionally devastating as well.
In modern times, there were also cases of volcanic eruptions followed very closely by ENSO shifts that we have in fact seen first-hand. In April 1982, as the poster child for volcanism-induced ENSO activity, Galunggung began erupting. When did it cease? Not until December 1983, and by that time, it had triggered an El Niño that was second only to 1997-98 in terms of its intensity. In February 1990, as another example, Kelud sent out a VEI-4 blast... and right afterward, an El Niño began to ensue, beginning as exceptionally strong, then constantly fluctuating between weak, strong (in 1991-92), and moderate. What this El Niño lacked in intensity, however, it made up for in duration. It lasted 5 years. 5 years of back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back El Niño. Fast forward, to, sure enough, February 2014, and, guess what? Kelud erupts again with the same intensity, resulting in similarly erratic ENSO activity. I began to wonder: Could a similar Indonesian volcanic event have triggered the ARkStorm?
Sure enough, there was just such an eruption at just the right time.
The culprit? Makian. On December 28, 1861 ― almost exactly when the most recent ARkStorm began deluging California ― this volcanic island, just north of the equator in the Indian Ocean, began to blow. The VEI reading was a 4 ― not particularly powerful (the 2010 eruption of Eyjafjallajökull was the same intensity), but unlike Eyjafjallajökull, this eruption kept coming. It began in December 1861 and lasted until long after the ARkStorm was over, pumping ash and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere until October of 1862. Ten months of volcanic terror. And for the first three months, California was just as devastated as eastern Indonesia was.
See, what makes Indonesian volcanoes have the impact on ENSO and PDO that they have so particularly strong is location, location, location: A, almost smackdab on the equator, and B, perfectly nestled between the Pacific and Indian oceans. See, the trade winds not only (normally) blow from east to west along the equator, but they also converge. Any volcanic material that ends up caught in them has only one way to go: toward the equator. There, it's forced to collect. It's forced to increase the albedo of the tropical atmosphere. Any sunlight that would normally warm that specific region gets reflected right back into space. Meanwhile, in the Pacific, the sun still has all the free reign in the world to shine on the equator. What does that imbalance of solar input do? Allow high pressure to build in the Indian Ocean, forcing the trade winds to reverse. Then when the trade winds do reverse, the volcanic material can also force high pressure to build in the Western Pacific and make those reversed trade winds even more powerful, which, in turn, forces the water in the Eastern Pacific to warm up even more.
When that happens to occur while an atmospheric river is already in the process of deluging California, the natural result is a recipe for disaster, to be sure. The atmospheric river becomes locked in place. It becomes stronger with each passing Kelvin wave, and Ekman transport doesn't help either, since when water curves right of an atmospheric river, it has only one way to go: toward the equator, where it is forced to downwell, adding to the already anomalous sea surface temperatures. It's a runaway feedback. If the drought is caused by a "ridiculously resilient ridge" (RRR), then there's an even more appropriate term for the ARkStorm: "ridiculously resilient atmospheric river" (RRAR). It is a monster storm that won't end for months.
Now that it's 2015, we're in a similar drought to what we were in way back in the late 1850's, that's for sure. In 1850, 1851, 1852, 1853, of course, massive floods occurred on the Sacramento river system. Starting in 1854, however, guess what? Nothing. Nothing in northern California until 1861. Meanwhile, it was southern California, particularly in unseasonable times, that felt the first sighs of relief. Increased monsoon activity and tropical cyclone remnants, not to mention those notorious Baja lows like the one we had today, were also commonplace back then. Smackdab in the middle of that 8-year drought (just like this drought that began in 2011 ― that puts 2015 in prime position to become a possible repeat of 1858), moreover, was that Category 1 October monster that impacted a swath stretching from San Diego to Los Angeles with 85mph sustained winds (and gusts near 100mph), 15-foot storm surge, and rainfall totals in feet. It was welcome relief (if you don't count wind and storm surge damage as having spoiled it), but not until 1861 did it finally get busted across the entire state. Then again, the fact that it got busted with an exceptionally extreme precipitation event that was enough to turn the entire Central Valley into an inland sea, especially if drought-induced ground subsidence is taken into account, should be enough to send any Californian reeling.
03 January, 2015
31 December, 2014
First, for those who are wondering why films such as 10.5 are scientifically improbable: The Moment Magnitude Scale is a base-30 logarithmic one. That is, a magnitude-9 quake is 30 times more powerful than an 8, which is in turn 30 times more powerful than a 7, which is, likewise, 30 times more powerful than a 6, and so on. Based on that scale, even a fault that completely circled Earth would only produce a 10.4 quake. What's more, seismic waves are a result of friction, NOT of mere splitting. Friction does NOT create islands. Rifting, or spreading, does, and rifting, like what is seen in Africa's Great Rift Valley, the Mid-Atlantic Ridge (Iceland), the Mediterranean Ridge (Sicily), and the Red Sea, creates volcanoes, not quakes. That's because continental drift occurs on magma, not water... so, when continents spread apart, that magma becomes tempted to rise up and gush out, where it then cools and adds more rock to the tectonic plate(s) in question. Instead of water in the San Andreas Fault, there, once again, is fault gouge... and whenever it slips, more rock is ground up into that flour-like consistency to replace it, and the crack itself continues to remain a hairline while the visible scar on the surface is only visible from either A, the air, or B, space.
Also, the San Andreas is, should I say it again, a strike-slip fault. A strike-slip fault is a kind of fault that slips horizontally, one in which one plate slides one horizontal direction and the other plate slides in the exact opposite horizontal direction relative to it. In the case of the San Andreas, what that means is that the Pacific Plate is sliding northwest and the North American Plate is blindsiding it, drifting toward the southwest. So, in the event of the real "ShakeOut" scenario, Los Angeles would find itself 20 feet to the northwest of where it was prior to the quake in question. Even in the portions where it dives below the sea surface (such as north of San Francisco), it only displaces the sea floor horizontally, never vertically. Therefore, there's only one way the San Andreas can possibly displace even a small portion of the ocean column: by first inducing landslides. That has happened before, in 1906, when the quake that was most notorious for inducing firestorms that, quite literally, burned San Francisco to the ground, also sent Mussel Rock tumbling into the Pacific... but by the time the resulting wave got to San Francisco, it was so small ― I'm talking only a few inches high ― that only tide gauges could detect it. Even then, however, that's an anomaly, not the norm. Most quake-induced landslides happen inland, not on the coast.
Secondary faults, however, are a completely different story. Unlike the San Andreas, most of these auxiliary faults ― those that actually underlie heavily populated areas and are responsible for seismic events of the likes of the Chino Hills, Whittier Narrows, and Northridge quakes ― are buried fault structures with vertical, not horizontal, movement. Such faults are called blind thrust faults by seismologists, and some of them, such as the Puente Hills Fault that the Whittier Narrows quake is now seen by seismologists as having been a partial rupture of, are capable of rivaling the San Andreas in terms of magnitude (7.5 vs. 7.8), and, according to seismologists, some of them can be a whopping 15 times more dangerous than the San Andreas itself, should they rupture in their entirety. The Pico Fault, which set off the Northridge quake, as another example, also only partially ruptured back in 1994 (a full rupture would have put the Northridge quake in the range of 7.2 or higher), and it too is capable of, naturally, causing a great deal of damage. However, that's missing the bottom line: where there's thrust faulting, there's vertical movement. While vertical movement on land is, indeed, bad enough (any buildings, highways, or other structures that happen to lie directly on top of a blind thrust fault, regardless of how well they're built, will find their ground floors, and, by extension, entire structural support dangerously twisted out of proportion), it becomes even worse if that vertical movement happens to occur underwater.
That's because vertical ocean floor displacement happens to result in vertical ocean column displacement, and, ultimately, vertical sea surface displacement. Initially, in the deep ocean, this displacement is far more pronounced on the ocean floor than at the surface. While surface displacement may only initially be a few feet, it spreads out over hundreds of miles in length, because it actually has room to spread out. Because of its length, it can travel at, quite literally, jet speeds: between 400 and 600 miles per hour, capable of traversing the entire Pacific in less than a day. As this hundred-plus-mile-long wave approaches enters shallow water, however, it no longer has the room to spread out that it once had. Consequently, the landmass forces this once fast-moving wave to slow down and grow taller. Ultimately, it ends up manifesting itself as a 100-foot bore wave with a 50-mile-long, seemingly permanent plateau of water on its tail, capable of knocking over every structure in its path and, perhaps most significantly, inundating even 10-mile-inland structures with seawater. Or, to put it in layman terms, the exact same phenomenon that ravaged Indonesia in 2004 and Japan's Sanriku Coast in 2011: a tsunami.
Japanese for "harbor wave", this term was, to be fair, one that, with the exception of some sporadic communities that have used it to describe this wall of water having hit them before, pretty much unused outside of the scientific community, to say the least, for the longest time. That is, until 2004. When people learned that it was the tsunami, not the Indonesian quake itself, that was responsible for the majority of those 220,000 deaths, suddenly more and more of the public began to take notice, and suddenly "tsunami" became a far more popular buzzword than it was before. That public lexicon was repeated in 2011, when Japan's Sanriku coast, including the Tohoku province that includes the major port cities of Sendai and Kessennuma, was also rattled by a 9.0 quake and, only 20 minutes later, bashed by a 130-foot tsunami. What's more, it also has become a point of discussion among Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, and Pacific Northwest coast residents after American geologist Brian Atwater, Japanese geologist and historian Kenji Satake, and dendrochronologist David Yamaguchi all worked together to uncover evidence that a massive quake and tsunami (possibly one that ruptured the entire Cascadia megathrust from one end to the other) had struck the region at 9PM Japanese time (4AM Pacific time) on January 26, 1700. The fact that there are blind thrust faults right here in California, however, pose an even more ominous question: Could an offshore blind thrust fault displace the ocean floor enough off SoCal enough to unleash a killer tsunami within minutes of home?
In fact, that very offshore blind thrust scenario has happened before. The date was the winter solstice, December 21, 1812. At the time, Spanish missionaries were busy building a colony in California, while on the east coast, conflict between the US, Britain, and France was, merely 40 years after the American Revolution, brewing once again. It was business as usual for those Franciscan friars working in La Misión de la Señora Barbara, Virgen y Martír, better known as the twin-steepled Mission Santa Barbara, when, suddenly, the ground began to rumble. The source of the shaking was the Santa Monica Mountains-Santa Cruz Island segment of the Channel Islands blind thrust system, which, until fairly recently, was mostly unknown to seismologists. After the quake, which in itself did a lot of damage to several Spanish missions and presidios, the Native Americans that were being "missioned" out to ― the Chumash ― knew better than to stay put. They gave the Spaniards word that they would drown if they remained in low-lying land, and since the Chumash were there for hundreds, if not thousands, of years longer than the Spaniards, the Spanish missionaries agreed to climb uphill with them to get out of the way.
Then, according to military general and Franciscan friar Luis Gil Taboada, who was commander of the Santa Barbara Presidio at the time, "the sea receded and rose like a high mountain," and then remained that way for several minutes before receding again. Hundreds of miles to the west, boats floated a mile and a half up Gaviota Canyon (that's almost exactly how far inland the No. 18 Kyotoku Maru tuna fishing vessel floated in 2011 ― go figure). Even as far north as San Francisco, Spanish accounts of this killer wave were ominous, where according to presidio commanders up there, several galleons capsized and sank in a harbor where they were supposed to be protected. To the south, in San Diego, damage to galleons and other ships was, likewise, just as severe, and according to reports, ships down there also found themselves beached.
That isn't the only segment of the Channel Islands thrust system either. The Santa Rosa segment hasn't ruptured in almost 250 years, if carbon dating is any guide, and the San Miguel segment, according to seismologists, has gone almost 300 years without a rupture. This, of course, makes those segments, thanks to stress build-up, even more overdue than the Santa Cruz segment. Then, as if that's not enough, there's also the Palos Verdes-Catalina segment of the Compton blind thrust system, which also has gone hundreds of years without a rupture, and perhaps most alarming, the Thirtymile Bank blind thrust fault, which is capable of causing a magnitude-7.6 quake offshore and setting off a tsunami that could threaten downtown San Diego. All of those are easily capable of causing a repeat of the 1812 disaster, at the very least.
So, now we have done an almost complete 180 from Hollywood's depiction. Although the notion of California falling into the ocean is definitely the work of fiction, to the utmost degree, this new evidence builds the case for these auxilary faults being capable of causing the exact opposite problem: the Pacific invading California in the form of a tsunami. In modern times, especially in California, however, "tsunami hazard zone" signs are indeed posted all over the beaches, unlike in 1812, complete with the caption "In case of earthquake, go to high ground or inland," as a stern warning to those who may be tempted to get back in the water after they feel the ground shake. What's more, there are also lifeguards and harbor police that will actually escort people out of harm's way and barricade off the hazard zone until "all clear" is given. Combine that with California's rugged coastline, unlike the coastlines in Japan, Indonesia, and Thailand, where there are a boatload of hills right up next to the coastline that people can easily run to, and loss of life should be minimal.
However, while loss of life shouldn't be too big of a problem, the same cannot be said when it comes to loss of property. The real estate along the coast of California, in places like Newport Beach, Dana Point, Laguna Beach, Ventura, and, yes, Santa Barbara is certainly some of the most expensive real estate in the entire country. Santa Barbara County is the #1 most expensive county ― that's in nationwide terms ― to live in, and Orange County comes in a close second place, with, again, the bulk of the wealth concentrated right on the coast and in the tsunami hazard zone. Add up all those pieces of expensive real estate and send a tsunami into them to wipe that real estate out, and you're looking at, easily, damages in the tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars ― in fact, I wouldn't be too surprised if the damage caused by an event like this ends up totalling higher than the damages caused by Hurricane Katrina, which has since eclipsed the Northridge quake as the costliest natural disaster in US history. Here's hoping people actually heed the warnings so that, at the very least, loss of life can be prevented in an event like this...
30 December, 2014
The word "contemporary" taken to a perfectionist extreme
Little more can be said about this form of denialism. Those people who use it have an extremely narrow, almost robotic definition of "contemporary" based on the notion that members of some ancient civilizations, such as Egypt, Greece, and Rome, had very short average lifespans due to rampant disease, unhealthy eating practices, and poor sanitation. Those traits however, couldn't be more inaccurate when talking about ancient Israel. Unlike the former societies, Israel actually had a very strict sanitation code, one that is even reflected in the Old Testament. They wouldn't do a thing without first washing their hands, then proceeding to wash them again after accomplishing such tasks. They disposed of sewage in the utmost faraway of places, either outside Israel's borders, in the Mediterranean (during the sporadic times that they had access to it), or buried in the Negev Desert (a hostile environment for pathogens, to say the least, and one that few, if any, bacteria or viruses can survive in), just to make sure disease did not have even the slightest opportunity to spread. Members of neighboring empires, I'm sure, probably would have the nerve to call the Israelites mysophobes!
As a result of this militant emphasis on sanitation and cleanliness that was unmatched by any other major civilization of the ancient world, it's conceivable that lifespans in Israel, as, once again, reflected in the Old Testament (with people living, according to the Bible's claims, 130 years on average), were far longer than they were in any other ancient civilization. The reason? Many of those other, shorter average lifespans were primarily due to either A, disease, or B, war, with disease, by far, coming out on top. Plagues ravaged many parts of the ancient world, and in places that had loose family morals (unlike Israel, the island of monogamy in a sea of polygamous empires that believed sex was a religion), it's likely STDs such as syphilis, hepatitis B/C, meningococcal disease, gonorrhea, and chlamydia also spread much more rampantly. What's more, there's the poor eating habits of Israel's neighbors, who often lived sedentary lifestyles while eating large, fat-rich meals (I'm looking at you, Rome); thus, while it wasn't widespread in Israel, it's likely that obesity was far more widespread in Israel's neighboring civilizations. If you've ever seen how a Jewish chef cooks his meat, he first drains all the blood possible out of the meat in question. With good reason, of course: blood spreads bloodborne pathogens. Then, as if that's not enough, he also washes any remaining blood out. Then, when it comes time to cook, he cooks it thoroughly for hours while draining all the fat out as it cooks. What's more, they ate small, modest portions, unlike the Romans who threw large, lavish, all-you-can-eat buffets, and their bread, unlike that of their neighboring civilizations, was (and still is) unleavened and made with whole grains. As we all know, if bread is flat, it's not going to fill someone up to the extreme that a leavened piece of bread will; thus, those who eat unleavened bread don't take in as much carbs.
These dietary factors that contributed to the Israelites' long lifespans compared to their surroundings bring us straight to the point: Because Israelites lived longer due to their eating and sanitation habits, the probability of at least some of them having lived long enough to still write about Jesus 30 or 40 years after seeing Him is much greater. Thus, this variable ― lifespan ― is a variable that builds the case for these demands for "contemporary" evidence being extremely outlandish ones. Alright, moving on...
Using uneducated language in what is supposed to be educated discussion
I have written a long critique of this practice before, but they still don't get it. It's the old adage: actions speak louder than words. Or, in this case, it's the adage of "language speaks louder than claims of intelligence": If you claim to be an intelligent person, act like it! I've seen several examples of atheist mythicists ― at least 5 of them, and counting ― claiming to be intelligent skeptics while at the same time throwing S- and F-bombs at Christians every chance they get, as if they're just trying to make themselves look uneducated. Instead of responding to our intelligent arguments with equally intelligent counter-arguments (as a scientist would do), they respond with a simple "F*** you" or "That's B******t" in a blatant attempt at (or demonstration of) street-grade immaturity that is much more typical of uneducated thugs who spend their lives looking for rival gangster blood than of scientists or professors. It certainly is enough to make anyone who sees that behavior want to question its users' acclaimed intelligence, to say the least.
Not only is this behavior uneducated-looking, but it's also immature-looking. It's the language that middle-schoolers use. It's something that people use just to bully people, to make themselves look macho instead of making themselves look intelligent. Yet their claims are the exact opposite: "F*** you, you fool!" "B******t! I'm far more intelligent than you!" and on and on they go, with those same immature attitudes that they have in common with fighting teenagers. Just like a bully, an atheist like this is just trying to get a reaction out of us, in the most immature of fashions. What atheists like these don't realize is that we Christians, by judging their actions, certainly know who the real fool is. The real fool is the one who acts in a manner inconsistent with his claims about himself. What part of "Hypocrite!" do these atheists not understand? Yeah, exactly.
Bottom line, this atheist tirade against Christianity has gone from civil discussion to an immature man's punchline. They won't quit. No, as if atheism is itself a religion, they take this discussion to new lows, deliberately trying to make themselves look like fools. Until they can learn to act civil, well, blog posts like this one that point out their hypocrisy must continue to get posted...
06 December, 2014
Fast-forward to 2014, and the patterns are looking eerily similar. Back in August, of course, the monstrosity that was Hurricane Marie managed to, even from thousands of miles away, pound SoCal with waves between 15 and 25 feet tall, coinciding with astronomical high tide. The resulting coastal flood event was our worst in years, and damages reached into the tens of millions of dollars. One month later, Hurricane Odile managed to regenerate as a strong tropical storm over the Gulf of California and sling moisture around its circulation at us. Thunderstorms embedded in those rainbands created damaging winds in excess of 60 to as much as 70mph in some areas, pounding them with torrential rains and even (in some cases) dime- and nickel-sized hail. 6000 San Diegans were left without power, and damages also reached as high as $50 million. Around that time, sea surface temperatures, even from what is supposed to be a weak to moderate El Niño, managed to break that 1997 record, reaching the upper-70's (as high as 77°F-78°F in some areas) and, perhaps most alarmingly, resulting in tropical fish such as yellowfin tuna and (gasp!) wahoos swimming up the coast. And finally, just a couple of days ago, the first Pineapple Express storm of what could very well be another entire season of nothing but Pineapple Express events managed to dump more rain on California than the entire 2013 season. Rainfall totals from just that one storm alone managed to reach as much as a foot of rain in some areas to the north. Mudslides in places such as Camarillo, Glendora, and Silverado Canyon resulted in mandatory evacuations of people's homes. Flood waters washing down the Los Angeles and Santa Ana Rivers resulted in countless swift water rescues. Even now, in December 2014, however, it's only the beginning.
If this El Niño persists into the 2015 and even 2016 hurricane seasons ― which some similar El Niños that coincided with PDO shifts, like the 1992-95 El Niño and the 1939-42 El Niño, managed to do in similar cases ― then there's a chief worry in place here. Because not only El Niño but also anthropogenic climate change is at work here, the combination of those two phenomena could, if the El Niño gets strong enough two or three years down the road, push the sea surface temperatures past the tropical convective threshold of 80°F. That's good because you can more easily swim in it, you say? Not so fast: Where there's tropical convection, there's also tropical cyclogenesis. Tropical cyclogenesis off SoCal, of course, wouldn't be a good thing at all... and according to my research of the current system off SoCal, once it gets to that point, a positive feedback loop ensues, making it a point of no return.
It starts with a lesser-known countercurrent to the California Current. Called the Davidson Current, it's normally buried beneath the cold California waters during the summer months, when prevailing northwesterly winds push water from Alaska toward California, where the Ekman Effect makes it want to curve to the right and flow down the coast. Once the patterns shift in the winter, however, and the winds start blowing out of the southeast, the warm Davidson Current surfaces. That's because the Ekman Effect acts on those southeasterlies to actually pull water up the coast. Because the Ekman Effect also constricts the current by forcing it to hug the coast, it also creates a funnel effect that makes the Davidson Current more powerful than the relatively weak CC. Should 80-degree waters infiltrate this pattern, the results could be disastrous.
Why, you say? Because air needs to flow in to replace that convection. On the western side is a vast expanse of ocean, so the winds on that side are relatively light. On the eastern side of this hypothetical convective band, however, are mountains and hills, dotted with passes and canyons. Those act like inflow funnels, forcing the wind that rushes in to replace that convection to accelerate. As a result of the Ekman Effect's atmospheric counterpart ― the Coriolis Effect ― that mountain-gap inflow wants to curve, where? To the right, which means, from what direction? Out of the southeast! The result is that the inflow only pushes more warm water into California. Hello, feedback!
Talk about a recipe for disaster. Should the Davidson Current enter this runaway state, there would be no more California Current, that's for sure. Say goodbye to salmon and steelhead and hello to yellowfins, wahoos, and tilapia. And, yes, say hello to a West Coast hurricane threat, from the same general region that brought us Guillermo, Linda, Rick, Nora, Marie, and Odile. If you think this mountain gap inflow would keep hurricanes away, think again: The trade winds blow in that same general relative direction, that is, northeast to southwest, but guess what? Hurricanes seem to have enough power to almost cross them, like an X, and track from southeast to northwest. In this case, that would mean hooking directly toward SoCal, with devastating results.
At the rate we're burning fossil fuels and inducing Arctic methane leaks, it's not a question of if this happens. It's a question of when. All I can say is, when it does happen, I hope we're prepared... because if not, and those Category 5 monsters start getting that Davidson Current induced free reign to blast their way up the coast, the results wouldn't just be disastrous. They would be catastrophic.
25 November, 2014
The first clue that I managed to dig up suggesting that the Gulf could pose a hurricane threat, at least to the Inland Empire, came from looking up the elevation of the surface of the Salton Sea. The reading? 237 feet below sea level. That alone raises a bright red flag: Even New Orleans was only about 10 feet below sea level when Katrina hit. What's more, the entire Coachella Valley, more or less, is a bowl, and it's the site of an ancient lake bed that once filled the entire region... the ancient lake, if I'm not mistaken, stretched from what is now Mexicali all the way to what is now Palm Springs. That's one massive lake... and the fact that its floor is now the site of a major population center should be enough to freak out anyone.
Then, I managed to Google " 'sea level rise' 'Coachella Valley' " (inside quotes included, as double quotes). I noticed a KCET article that was rather disturbing, depicting what would happen if climate change raised the level of the Gulf by only a few feet. Then, I switched over to the images tab. That's when I noticed something very disturbing, in regards to the Coachella Valley's only lifeline:
Ironically enough, a repeat of the 1858 San Diego hurricane isn't the worst case California hurricane scenario. That title belongs to this recipe for disaster... which, given that the Salton Sea is 237 feet *below sea level*, would be like Katrina times 10...A photo posted by Kenny Strawn (@strawn_04) on
As you can see, the only high ground between the Salton Sea and the Gulf of California is, at most, only about 7 or 8 feet above sea level. What's more, the 20-foot line ― the height of a typical major hurricane storm surge, especially in a warm, shallow environment like the Gulf of California ― is almost the entire width of the Gulf itself. A storm surge of that size eroding a path into a depression like the Salton Sink? Yeah, it's almost impossible to fathom such a catastrophe. You're looking at a region from Mexicali all the way to Palm Springs being completely submerged.
What's more, as previously mentioned, SSTs in the upper-80's to near 90 degrees are well within rapid deepening territory. When Odile managed to traverse the northern Gulf as a tropical storm back in September 2014, guess what happened? The storm grew from a weak to a strong one, with, at their peak, about 60mph winds, before making a second landfall on the northeastern shore of the Gulf. Thankfully, however, Odile had weakened to a tropical storm from, at the first landfall, a Category 4 hurricane, prior to even entering the Gulf... and what's more, this storm could have been much worse.
Remember, what was steering Odile away was an area of high pressure, whose western edge (and clockwise rotation) was already at its easternmost point and began to move westward, keeping Odile over Baja. Had Odile gotten sucked into that high only a day... or two... or three earlier, so that Odile made its first clipper landfall in Puerto Vallarta before moving up the Gulf, I guarantee you Hurricane Odile would have been a 5 by the time it reached the northern Gulf... and then, as the high began to build again, it would have pushed Odile northwestward, resulting in Odile hooking to the west instead of the east. That makes Odile our closest call so far to this.
In fact, those warm Gulf of Mexico waters in the notorious Loop Current that intensified Katrina were also around the same temperature: near 90°F. The difference, however, is that those extreme SSTs, while incredibly anomalous in the Gulf of Mexico, are commonplace in the Gulf of California. So then why haven't there been rapidly intensifying hurricanes in the Gulf of California before? There's a simple explanation for that: it's got a lot more land in the way. Most of the storms that have managed to go up the Gulf have first run into either the Baja Peninsula (mountainous terrain) or mainland Mexico (more mountainous terrain). You need the steering patterns to be near-perfect for this to happen: a strong, blocking high over the western Gulf of Mexico to the east, and, most importantly, a clockwise flow around the high that pushes moisture directly over the Mojave Desert, where the thermal low then grabs it, intensifies due to convection, and rotates, locking that blocking high in place. Then, you need a hurricane that takes a near-perfect path, so that it could get caught up in that, clipping the headland near Puerto Vallarta, entering the Gulf of California, rapidly intensifying, and making its second landfall just to the west of the Colorado River Delta. Yeah, it's not a question of if, it's a question of when... and when it does happen, the results would be disastrous indeed.
Not only would such a storm be disastrous for the Coachella Valley, but, if it is caught by that thermal low and takes that left turn as an intense hurricane, it could also remain a category 3 or higher monster even as it exits the region, provided it misses the San Jacinto and/or San Bernardino mountains, and enters the Los Angeles Basin. The resulting wind (and even tornado) damage, not to mention torrential rainfall, could pose even more problems. Remember, if that basin fills, that water is going to come in contact with not only the hot Salton Sea but also the hot ground. That will in turn add more heat to the incoming storm surge water, moving over a region that is, mind you, 237 feet below sea level, and that heat could then continue to sustain the hurricane as it passes through that inland sea that it creates. So, it would end up continuing to rapidly intensify as it makes that westward hook. Yeah, you can see where this is going: a recipe for disaster indeed.
29 October, 2014
19 October, 2014
October 19, 2014. I must admit, this post is a few days late... but this past Wednesday, Google unveiled not just the two rumored Nexus devices (the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9), but three — if you count the Nexus Player, that is. Since I've got a Chromecast and a cable box, along with only two HDMI ports, well, they're all in use... but the fact that the Nexus Player is Google Cast Ready AND supports Android TV apps as well should be a good selling point. Anyhow, in 2012, we had the Nexus 4, Nexus 7, and Nexus 10. In 2013, the Nexus 5 replaced the Nexus 4... ah, but the Nexus 7 was simply replaced with another Nexus 7, and the Nexus 5 came on board, replacing the Nexus 4. Now, in 2014, the Nexus line-up got a total makeover, with the Nexus 6 replacing the Nexus 5 and the Nexus 9 replacing both the Nexus 7 and the Nexus 10, respectively.
For 2015, however, this poses a bit of a dilemma. If Google decides to simply replace the Nexus 6 with another Nexus 6 the way they did with the Nexus 7, then there won't be any problems... but if they decide to actually increment the number once again, they would end up reusing the Nexus 7 name... for a phone!
This presents a myriad of problems. For starters, just like the title states, it would confuse customers a whole lot... and confused customers hurt business. Beyond that, however, there's also the size factor: sure, a tablet with a 7-inch screen is fine, but a phone with a 7-inch screen?!?! Talk about something that just can't be handled. You couldn't put a phone that big in your front pockets at all (only your back ones), and what's more, you can't pick up a phone that big to make phone calls without using two hands either, which means, nope, if you're in a dire emergency and need to make a phone call quickly with one hand, good luck.
Even something like a Nexus 6.5 would be problematic. Why? Because the names in the line are often rounded down or up to the nearest whole number... which in that case is also 7. That leaves Google with only two options: Either go Apple-style and treat the generations of Nexus 6 like the generations of iPod Touch, releasing three, four, even 5 generations of phones with the same name (which is a good one IMHO) or simply replace the Nexus line altogether with a turnkey solution for OEMs and carriers in the US the way they already did with Android One in India — or, in other words, Project Silver redux, which would seriously increase the adoption rates of new Android releases on a prompt basis, which is the holy grail of fragmentation reduction.
Let's hope this worst case scenario doesn't happen, shall we? Of the two above options, however, I personally would love to see Project Silver manifest itself much more so than I would multiple generations of Nexus 6. Why? Because of the crushing impact it would have on Android fragmentation: by forcing all the phones on the market to stay on the latest version of Android and get updated on a prompt basis, version fragmentation would be, for the most part, a thing of the past. Then again, I need more opinions here. Would you rather want multiple versions of Nexus 6, or would you be fine with every Android phone on the market being updated on a prompt Nexus-like basis?
17 October, 2014
It's definitely human nature for some Christians to bring climate change down to the level of evolution or claim that they're studying it because they don't have anything else to study in an attempt to demonize the atheistic science community... but in all actuality, the amount of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere has increased to a 20-million-year high as a result of human activity. Which, of course, begs the question: What human activity? The fossil fuel industry is definitely one where greed is rampant and widespread, to say the least. By collaborating with the auto and power-generation industries to create dependence on itself, the oil industry is easily one of the wealthiest ― and greediest ― industries in the world, and up until very recently Exxon was #1 in the world in terms of market cap. Until, of course, Apple and Google managed to reach the top... but still, oil greed ― and oil dependence ― continues to persist. What do those oil companies use that vaguely robber-baron-like fortune to do? More often than not, it's to pay politicians to deny climate change, which is to say "I'm going to bribe someone in science/academia to deny the consequences of my sin so I can keep on sinning," and also to send politicians into office that give them tax breaks while going to great lengths to squash competition. Thanks to the fact that CO2 emissions have also gone on to trigger methane release, well, it may already be too late to avoid this particular consequence of greed, but if not, then it's time to let the world know that it's our own sin that's responsible. As for competition-squashing, well, that brings us to our next point.
The "least of these" wanting to rebel
While, I admit, envy is just as much of a sin as greed (will definitely be going over it at a later time), greed in one group of people often triggers envy in another. Remember what the initial cause of the American Revolution was? "Taxation without representation?" Yup, it's the British king's own greed that pissed us off. Think that's always good? Not so fast: The same thing happened in Russia. Tsar Nicholas was notorious for his endless pursuit of material possessions. So too were nearly all the tsars prior to him. The US and Russia were the last two countries in the world to end slavery. In the case of the US, it was the African-Americans who were the slaves. In the case of Russia, it was the common Russians who were the serfs — or, in other words, slaves ― for nearly three centuries. The common people suffered, while the tsars lived in outright luxury... until, of course, the Bolsheviks came along. Little did they realize, communism would be just as bad as tsardom/serfdom... and thanks to the rise of dictator after dictator after dictator that came with the communist regime, it wasn't until the 1990's that Russians began to enjoy the freedoms that us Americans have been enjoying since the 1700's. Think that can't happen in a democracy? Think again. When China's Qing emperors were ousted around the turn of the 20th century, a 50-year democracy ensued. At that time, those who ran for office began to, during the Roaring 20's and what not, amass huge amounts of wealth. The result was something not too dissimilar to the situation we Americans had during the 19th century: a situation where a select few held a large swath of China's wealth. People like Mao Zedong and the gang were obviously fed up with this, and revolted. The democracy was then banished to Taiwan, and now Taiwan is democratic while mainland China is just as communist and freedom-lacking as ever. Speaking of the massive economic inequality gap, that brings us to our third and last point.
Let's be honest: Would you rather hang out with only 1% of the population or with 99% of it? Hmmm? I don't know about you, but I'd definitely choose my time with other people ― and with fellow Christians ― over my time with material possessions hands-down. Unfortunately, greed is a sin that tends to cut off its victims from the rest of the world. Unless the greedy start using some of that money to help their friends and family out, they're going to find themselves in a pickle. That is, a pickle where everyone they used to love suddenly hates them for enjoying all the wealth in the world while letting their own friends and family suffer. Thankfully, most of us who aren't compulsive hoarders (or disposophobes) aren't that dumb... but for those who are, this consequence is clearly one that's bound to affect them.
Then again, as early Christian monk Evagrius Ponticus has clearly stated, it's disposophobia that often results in greed. Greed is a sin of fear. It's a sin that's born out of uncertainty, of not knowing what the future holds. Because the greedy are often disposophobic (or, technically, phtocheiophobic ― irrationally fearful of poverty) when it comes to the future, their response is to want all the money and possessions in the world. Little do they realize, when it comes to only wanting more and more, the risks clearly outweigh the benefits.
16 October, 2014
It's no debate. It's a scientific fact: Sex spreads disease. It spreads chlamydia. It spreads Hep-C. It spreads HIV/AIDS. This is especially true if it goes unchecked. When people have sex, they exchange bodily fluids like saliva, breast milk, semen, feces (!), uterine fluid, and what not... and of course, those fluids all contain bacteria, viruses, parasites, fungi, yes, and toxins to top it all off. Of those bodily fluids, the one that contains the most pathogens, by far, is obviously feces (which have something like 50 times the concentration and diversity of pathogens compared to that found in urine, semen, and vaginal discharge combined) ― that's why homosexual males tend to be 20 times more likely to contract, not to mention fall to, STDs than anyone else ― but that's another topic for another post. Anyhow, when you have sex out of wedlock, you're going to get sick, and, if that sickness is left untreated, you're likely to die. Then, of course, any offspring you may have may also get that disease... and if the disease you give them is something other than AIDS (which they build up natural immunity to in the womb), they're lucky if they live to be 5. Speaking of offspring, that brings us to our next section.
There are indeed plenty of birth control products out there. Everything from birth control pills to condoms to surgically implanted birth control devices have been put out there as means of keeping the possibility of having an illegitimate child to a minimum. However, there's a clear issue here: None of those methods are ever 100% accurate at preventing illegitimate pregnancies. The only way to be 100% sure you're never going to have a child out of wedlock is to not have sex until wedlock. Condoms can tear, and when they tear, yup, you've just given semen free reign to leak into the vaginal cavity and merge with an egg to form a child. Likewise, birth control pills can wear off... and they only really stop about 50% of the hormones responsible for ovulation anyway. Surgically implanted devices, although they are 99% accurate, are still costly and there's still a chance they can come loose, causing extreme pain, yes, and pregnancy. When that does happen, there's a financial burden: how is that child going to be fed? How many diapers are you going to need to buy? A whole lot... which can total thousands of dollars per child. You say you have a choice to abort that child? That's tantamount to saying that you have a choice to commit genocide: it's not a democratic choice, it's a totalitarian one, committed out of, yes, terminological hypocrisy all around. Don't have sex in the first place, and you won't feel a need to make that choice.
Ever wonder what makes stimulant drugs like cocaine and methamphetamine so addictive? They inhibit the enzymes that break dopamine down, resulting in excess dopamine being released throughout the nervous system. Well, guess what? Excess dopamine is also released during sexual arousal, according to a scientific study. Excess dopamine overwhelms ― and decreases the number of ― dopamine receptors. Regardless of what the source of that excess dopamine is, there's still excess dopamine. The result? You create a scenario that makes sex just as addictive as cocaine. Once you start, you can't stop. It becomes a habit... a habit that spreads STDs, gets people illegitimately pregnant, and, yes, kills.
So, that's it for the consequences of lust ― which is clearly the sin behind abortion/gay activism all around. The driving force is clearly the sin of lust, just lurking, waiting to corrupt the world and bring it to its doom. Treating it with activist mentality is treating it with the absolute wrong light, besides: instead of getting rid of the problem, they go and make the problem worse. Little do they realize, lust has a way of striking back, like a mousetrap with bait on it, just waiting to spring on them.