Glad I Got There Before It Blew Up

Yellowstone Park is set to explode. From the Daily Mail:

[The Yellowstone volcano] would explode with a force a thousand times more powerful than the Mount St Helens eruption in 1980.

Spewing lava far into the sky, a cloud of plant-killing ash would fan out and dump a layer 10ft deep up to 1,000 miles away.

Two-thirds of the U.S. could become uninhabitable as toxic air sweeps through it, grounding thousands of flights and forcing millions to leave their homes. [emphasis added -ed.]

Geez. I’m not sure where I would go. Next door doesn’t seem reasonable, and Mexico has such strict immigration laws…

They [viz., "researchers"] said that the super-volcano underneath the Wyoming park has been rising at a record rate since 2004 – its floor has gone up three inches per year for the last three years alone, the fastest rate since records began in 1923.

But hampered by a lack of data they have stopped short of an all-out warning and they are unable to put a date on when the next disaster might take place.

A lack of data doesn’t seem to “hamper” climate scientists. Geophysicists just need on board with the video game industry and build some volcano models with a whole bunch of free parameters. Then they can make the Yellowstone caldera erupt anytime they want. Of course, it would be wise to put the date of the catastrophe a half-century in the future to avoid the embarrassing fates of Paul Ehrlich and the President’s Science Soothsayer, John Holdren. Not that being serially and ridiculously wrong time and time again is a career-killer in the apocalypse biz, but it does make for some uncomfortable moments when the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy starts slandering you with quotations from your own books.

I can’t offer you any advice, Mr/s Fellow American, but I’m headed to Home Depot for some fresh duct tape.

One thought on “Glad I Got There Before It Blew Up

  1. Career-killer?

    A favorite joke amongst us deniers: Paul Ehrlich is wrong (on about everything).

    Well, how wrong is he?

    Paul Ehrlich is so wrong, he’s tenured at Stanford teaching courses in biology and, of course, population studies. That’s how wrong he is.

    They quietly scrubbed “futurist” from any of his bios about 10 years ago, I noticed. Hilarious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven + = 15

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>