John, if you are laughing at sciencedaily, then I know you don't know much about science. It is one of the few news sources that links directly to the research on the topic. Instead of appealing to idiots, as you find on Fox and CNN, they clearly map out the main points in the research papers. Then, you can scroll down and read the research yourself. You may want to try it sometime. Are you afraid of what you will find?
We can't go back in time, but going forward, we want to maintain our small town atmosphere where live oaks dominate the landscape (not high rise buildings).
I can understand now why a real journalist such as Will Moredock no longer associates himself with wannabee journalist characters like Chris Haire
Oh, Mount Pleasant was named for some large sand dunes which used to exist in the area where the Old Village is now. Before construction of the jetties, the harbor, including the Old Village area, was lined by white sand and shell beaches and there were sand dunes behind them.
These dunes were leveled and hauled off to be used as fill for low and swampy areas, a process which was completed well over 100 years ago.
Steve, you trying to confuse them with reality?
We go down and buy local shrimp and seafood right off the dock at Shem creek all the time. I never have to stand in line which leads me to suspect more people are talking about saving our fishing industry than are buying fish and shrimp. I understand it's expensive now, but the cheap frozen shrimp at the store probably are grown in ponds using pig excrement, so you get what you pay for.
The Town built a dock at huge cost to be sure shrimpboats had a place to tie up.
I'm confused by all these Republicans screaming to do something for the shrimping industry. Do you want to use tax money to pay them to operate?
We could ban shrimp baiting in the fall, which would leave more shrimp in the ocean for the boats. Is that what you want? Just call your legislator!
However none of this is going to bring the Mount Pleasant of the past back. I hear a lot of complaints about the Boulevard being a home to "service workers" but no complaints about the taxes paid by the businessess they work at.
The Boulevard contributes a lot to the life and economy of it's area. You can ask the businesses around it.
It would be better if money fell out of the sky, but it doesn't. The Shrimpers know that for sure. The people who built the Boulevard complex get that. The kids living at the Boulevard and walking to jobs at the retaurants on Shem Creek know that too. People who used to sit on the veranda and watch other people sweat in the sun doing all the work pretend not to know that. There is no particular reason for people with such delisions to be qualified to make decisions about the fast, competitive future ahead of Mount Pleasant.
TROLLSLAYER writes, "No, other troll who appears from nowhere, I did not say in "Charelston".
That is a GLOBAL rate of increase."
The data for the global rate of sea level rise as kept by Colorado University's Sea Level Research Group shows the same phenomenon as Charleston's tide gauge. A link to the Raw data found here
is easily analyzed using Excel's slope function:
1992.9595 to 2003.8187 3.5 mm/yr
2003.8459 to 2014.1893 2.9 mm/yr
The rate of sea level rise over the last 21 years according to the satellite data does not show an increase.
Steve Case - Milwaukee, WI
Oh hell, let's really call Mt Plenty what it really is - one giant DUI Checkpoint! Ya'll live in Checkpoint SC 29464. With something like 475+DUI arrests last year, I don't know if I am safer on Coleman Blvd or in precarious danger every time I pass Red's
I would have no problem with this if it were true. However, the reasoning here seems highly sketchy. First off, just because this slang definition existed does not at all mean that this is what the original namer had in mind when he chose the name. He could have been thinking of another place with that name (a pattern with many place names in America; see George Stewart's book Names on the Land), or he could have named it for a hill (possible though unlikely, here in the lowcountry) he found pleasant in the area. Any number of other possibilities might have been the case. Even if the name had that meaning then, if that's not what the namer had in mind, then it's fallacious to say that this is what the name refers to.
Secondly, the sources given for this are highly suspect. One of them is an Internet forum, and I could be wrong, but I doubt most historians would consider that a citable source. The only one of these sites I consider valid is the slang dictionary. However, even though it attests to the meaning of the phrase, it does not show that this meaning is in any way related to the Charleston area town.
CIAC - I get it. Been there, done that. Bikes in The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, etc are much easier than cars and I enjoyed it a lot.
But when much of the USA's entire residential living arrangements (not just Mt P!) is the aforementioned quarter, third and half-acre lots...what ya gonna do? Europeans and Asian live in and raise families in flats/apartments/townhouses/etc - all dense and more easily served by public transport and concentrated services (with little or no parking). Americans want back and front yards, mostly (outside of a few urban areas).
Changing the way Americans live seems unlikely. Adding in bike infrastructure (specific lanes, traffic lights, etc) is more likely. When riding a bike is safer and more convenient, more people will start to do it.
The other big difference is that in a bunch of major cities where it is convenient to ride a bike around it is not heat stroke hot for half the year.
Exactly why I live in Mt. Pleasant, a coastal town.
Cid95, I ride a bike for transportation in NYC when I am up there. It is actually much faster than any public transport to get to midtown from my place on Mercer. In Toronto - no car needed ever! Most European cities and towns - the same. Mt. P however, has been too poorly planned out and is too sprawling to ride a bike from home to work or vice versa. Public transport? Huh? That Boulevard is a gleaming example of major political dumbassery. "They will ride bikes" they said. To where? Work and back? Downtown? In the summer heat and rain? Not those hipsters, no way, not ever, not gonna happen. They are weekend riders, if at all. They best have a high paying job to afford the rents on those tiny closets. Does high density housing work - absolutely. Just not here in sprawl suburbia. All I see when I look at the Boulevard is the 66.5 million that Beach walked away with - sort of like Homer with the doughnuts except I see dollar signs. Mad props to Beach for a bidnezz bamboozle of major proportion and a large DOH to the politicians of Mt. P. who allowed it to happen.
Amen.... Los Super Saturn. Mat C. hahahah, ya think? One can never have enough restaurants, bars, high density apartment complexes and office space. Mt. P did diddly for the Shrimp/Fish fleet. A small stipend each year for showing up at the blessing of the fleet. The blessing should now take under 3 minutes for the few remaining boats or they can just skip it all together.
Yep, I agree CIAC. Mayor Quimby got suckered.
I would love it if Mt P were less car-oriented. I lived in a big city outside the US for several years and didn't own a car. Trains, buses, taxis could easily get me where I wanted to go and I also had groceries, restaurants, bars and services within a 15 minute walk from my apartment.
The root cause in much of America is that our residential situation is low-density. Without density (vertical living), you can't get critical mass for efficient transport or concentration of services WITHOUT accompanying big parking lots.
So, even a couple thousand people living right on Coleman and 58,000 people living on 1/4, 1/3 and 1/2 acre lots elsewhere in the town still equals big parking lots and lots of cars.
I'm honored that people somehow expect Mt Pleasant to be all things to all men. It's not, and it never has been (though it's obviously a coastal town). Don't expect too much and you won't be disappointed.
Sea Grant - the name itself is telling. No sea-level rise no grant. No climate change no grant. You really think they're unbiased. At least they admit there's sinking land, I will give them credit for that.
Any discussion of climate change immediately gets hijacked and turned into a boring debate over whether it's real or not. What's sad about this is that people never get around to talking about the practical effects of climate change. When the effects really start to hit us, people will panic. They'll go bat**** crazy, even or perhaps especially the deniers, because they never planned ahead or even envisioned the future. The panic will be far worse than the actual changes (even though the changes will be drastic and disruptive). I imagine collapsed economies, massive migrations, etc. Basically the Dust Bowl/Great Depression on a bigger scale.
What's really sad is that the reality of climate change is terrible, but not the end of the world for Charleston. The location for Charleston was chosen for its high ground, meant to repel invaders and Mother Nature. Even with a 6-foot rise in sea level, most of downtown Charleston will be above water. Storm surges will be awful, but presumably Charleston will have a dike system by then. Obviously those mansions on Kiawah won't be doing so well, but part of Kiawah will still above water, enough for boaters to go out and look at the ruins of the houses at low tide.
It's important to find realistic, practical information about sea level rise, like this map provides. Another good, very non-hysterical article was put out by the S.C. Sea Grant Consortium:
"Unfortunately, that rate [in Charelston] itself is increasing."
No, other troll who appears from nowhere, I did not say in "Charelston".
That is a GLOBAL rate of increase.
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2014,
Charleston City Paper