On a different subject ... but not that different from whether Westside real estate prices are sustainable ... the annual Earth Day event is on the Santa Monica Third Street Promenade from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. tomorrow. See Earth Day LA for more info.
Tracking the real estate bubble on the Westside of Los Angeles, especially in Santa Monica ... available housing inventory, highlights/lowlights, and the larger economy.
Obligatory Disclaimer: I do my best to accurately report publicly-available data, but take no responsibility for what you do with it!
Contact westsidebubble {at} gmail {dot} com .
18 comments:
What a joke. NEWS FLASH! Human beings impact the environment!
Whoop-tee-doo!
The most dangerous aspect of this new environmental activism is the insidious attack on science and objectivity. Of course "objectivity" is a concept that much of today's progressive crowd doesn't even believe exists. However, in science this concept (objectivity) is the pillar of everything.
The insidious attack on science can be seen be people say ignorant things like, "The science on global warming is settled." When Al Gore says that people who doubt the existence of "manmade global warming" are like those who believe the earth is flat, the alarming thing here is that anyone would take Gore's statement seriously.
I do cancer research for a living and I can tell you that science understand infinitely more about cancer biology than it does about the human effects on global climate change.
Americans are incredibly ignorant about all aspects of science and it is showing. Europeans are not much better off when it comes to scientific literacy.
There is no such thing as science by "consensus". In fact, on of the cornerstones of science is that a SINGLE experiment or observation can disprove the established truth. Science doesn't work like the Miss America contest where the contestant with the most votes wins.
But too many Americans are too stupid to understand this and we're being duped by the most outragious attack on science in modern times.
I'll celebrate Santa Monica Earth Day tomorrow by running all of my electric appliances and lights, and by driving my most gas guzzling vehicle 30 miles.
I'm normally not a fan of flaming people for voicing an opinion, but even if you do think the current attention given to climate change is overblown in the media, you are an idiot. The only attack on science is coming from those who would have you believe that global warming is less of an issue that it really is. Your cancer research is admirable and important, but it will be meaningless when the planet is uninhabitable. But just like the housing crash, everyone denies there's a problem until it happens.
"What a joke. NEWS FLASH!"
Idiots are still out there, still have ways to go before prices in SM hit the bottom.
'...but it will be meaningless when the planet is uninhabitable."
Who says that the planet is heading for this? What scientific evidence do you have that the planet is headed for doom or that humans are ruining the environment?
Al Gore's movie?
You illustrate my point perfectly.
BTW, even IF humans were responsible for the slight rise in global air temperatures, nothing we do in the next 10 years would alter a thing since the processes involved in determining the planet's temperature evolve over long periods of time.
So calm down you idiot.
Take a look at this
westside resident:
I am not sure why expertise in YOUR little part of that wide field that is called science gives you authority to spew forth gratuitous attacks on people who are concerned about global warming. You would have to be a Nobel prize candidate (or serious schizophrenic) to be equally an expert in oncology and climate science.
I am a scientist myself, in a field somewhat closer to climate science than cancer research, nonetheless, and still I don't find myself to be in a position to be able to judge, in any meaningful way, the evidence for or against significant human contribution to the change in the earth's climate. Which, as you say, is a very complex system indeed. Rather, I have to rely on the judgment of the experts in the field, like everybody else, and they OVERWHELMINGLY agree that humans are significantly altering the composition of the atmosphere with potentially dangerous effects.
This is not to say that this general consensus might change somewhere down the road, should more data or better model or an Einstein of climate science or whatnot come along. But GIVEN the current data and state of the art models, it seems clear that immediate action is required. And unlike what you claim, the climate scientists also agree that action in the next two decades or so will be crucial, before it is too late-- although, as you say, the actual effects of these actions will only pay off with a significant time delay.
Yes- science IS done by consensus- temporary consensus, one might say, on an imperfect approximation to the truth. I think what is particularly infuriating about your comment is that you employ your purported authority as a scientist for an apparently ideologically driven argument.
Ideology? Are you serious?
Here's a person who disagrees with everything you say:
Freeman Dyson.
Look up his name--he's more than qualified to dispute the "overwhelming" consensus that there's any hot air to manmade global warming.
In fact there are many, many PhD climate scientists that do not believe that ANYTHING needs to be done right now.
Are you stupid?
Too ironic that someone who seemingly understands the ravages of cancer upon a body can turn a blind eye to what is essentially the exact same model for polluting an ecosystem.
Without CO2 life as we know it on earth would end. CO2 is normal, natural and essential for life.
Cancer in a human body is not normal and it kills the human. It is not the sign of health or normality. Of course everyone dies sooner or later, so you can make the claim that cancer is "normal". I wouldn't try making that claim to the parents of the 4 year old patient just diagnosed with the cancer that I study.
There is no analogy between "greenhouse gases" and the existence of cancer in the human body.
In fact your comment shows just how little you understand about basic science.
another westside resident put it better than I could.
Of course the details of climate science are continuing to be researched. The point of the IPCC has been to collect and publish the general scientific consensus from many researchers, with their conclusion the situation is dire.
Of course CO2 is a normal part of life, but put too much in the atmosphere and the planet heats up.
But this is not a blog about climate change; others like Gristmill do that very well. I just posted this announcement as an event worth noting in our Westside.
I am not a scientist.
I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
However, after seeing a couple of the "Life After Humans" programs that were on recently (yes, I know, one view of science, blah, blah, blah) I couldn't help but have one thought: "That looks pretty cool".
Even my non-scientific mind would suggest that the Earth will be here long after we destroy ourselves, and will do just fine, thanks.
THAT'S what I'll be celebrating on Earth Day - cheering on the Earth, not the spoiled, $500 bag-clutching, PinkBerry eating, $80,000 SUV-driving dolts that will be at the Promenade "cuz Earth Day's cool - yay!"
[/rant]
I'll stick with an oncologist for cancer and an environmental scientist for global warming, but thanks anyway.
---THAT'S what I'll be celebrating on Earth Day - cheering on the Earth, not the spoiled, $500 bag-clutching, PinkBerry eating, $80,000 SUV-driving dolts that will be at the Promenade "cuz Earth Day's cool - yay!"---
But of course you are different--you look down on the spoiled people of our consumer society who spend $80,000 on their SUVs.
Then you go home to your modest $750,000 to $3,500,000 home. Even after the crash you'll be living in a home that 95% of Americans cannot afford and 99.99999999% of people living in third world nations cannot afford.
Your values are so noble.
We'll spend millions or even billions of dollars in this country to save an endangered species such as a moth or tortoise. However, we'll let a person die on the street of exposure.
The Los Angeles County Health Services Dept. just closed MLK Hospital which served one of the most underserved areas of our state. The County is going to close most of their clinics which is the lifeline to the uninsured and poor of our county. These closures are affecting real people's lives now but you don't hear a peep from communities like Santa Monica or the Westside.
All of the people there are too busy going to earthday celebrations and worrying about their own interests.
That is the great thing about Westside property and Westside residents--they aren't affected by mundane and boring problems like access to healthcare and poverty.
If people don't have access to good public transportation, their answer is, "Why don't they buy a Prius and save the earth!"
Or, if people don't have a primary care physician and they have out of control diabetes Santa Monica residents say, "Why don't they drive their Prius to UCLA Medical Center where their can see an internist!"
These are the perks of living on the Westside and especially in Santa Monica! The high property values guarantee that you'll be surrounded with people with real answers to today's REAL problems. And even when the RE Crash comes and goes, these people will still be there!
Happy Earth Day! I'm going to buy a fluorescent bulb and I'm doing my part to save our mother Earth!
westside resident:
I have, of course, better things to to than to argue on message boards with people who obviously lack basic social skills. But since you brought up Freeman Dyson- most likely in contrast to you, I have actually read some of Mr. Dyson's scientific publications (in mathematics). And while I admire him for his past achievements, I don't think that the he, as a scientist whose work was in a rather unrelated field (quantum physics), at the end of his career, is more of an authority on this subject than the vast majority of people who devote their life to its study.
And I have also read his article in Edge from last year. Obviously, he as a far more nuanced position than you. He doesn't call people concerned about climate change "stupid", for one thing. What's more, he does acknowledge the human contribution to global warming without reservation: "One of the main causes of warming is the increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere resulting from our burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal and natural gas." The point that's up for discussion is whether and how we should go about doing something against it. Well, ok, that's something we can debate rationally. I agree that the current climate models are afflicted by uncertainties. But given some of the possible dire consequences of global warming, shouldn't we err on the side of caution, before it is too late?
Curiously enough, I basically agree with the sentiment of westside resident's last post. Driving a Prius won't solve global warming, a concentrated GLOBAL effort might. And yes, we should have a reasonable debate about what should take priority (poverty, illnesses, environmental protection, whatnot) for us as a country, and as the community of nations in general.
Anyway, that's all I have to say on this topic. Back to the RE chatter.
But of course you are different--you look down on the spoiled people of our consumer society who spend $80,000 on their SUVs.
Then you go home to your modest $750,000 to $3,500,000 home. Even after the crash you'll be living in a home that 95% of Americans cannot afford and 99.99999999% of people living in third world nations cannot afford.
Thanks for so accurately identifying me, when I was merely commenting generically on the topic. In addition to your knowledge of science, you must also have an uncanny ability to predict the lives of others except, oops, I'm a *gasp* renter in a very, yes, modest apartment.
I don't necessarily take issue with people being relatively rampant consumers, except that the majority of them are [WARNING: unscientific analysis ahead!] ignorant, blissfully or otherwise.
[/troll-feeding]
Hey,
Let's fight over who's more qualified to claim or disclaim global warming and who's more qualified to call each other idiots.. that's just what we need.. more war.
Instead. I suggest we all talk about the bitterness of those on here who were priced out of the housing markets and have nothing better to do that write blogs complaining about not being able to afford a house.
Did I say "Bitter"... go Hillary!
My problem with the this westside resident character is the fundamental weakness in his arguments. It's not wrong for someone to live in an expensive home and try to start doing their part to slow the growth of pollution. Maybe that starts with a bit of recycling, maybe a lower emissions/consumption vehicle. Sure their house was made of cut trees and products derived from processes driven by burning fossil fuels, but you have to start somewhere. In no way is it hypocritical to take that first step and be a leader.
Also, it's not wrong for a large consensus of respected scientists to nudge our policies towards developing cleaner technologies to counter what may end up being the myth formerly known as global warming. The end result or our effort to counter a potentially nonexistent threat: the air is generally cleaner, technology is advanced, and people united to make some change.
Westside Resident: I owe you a slap across the face.
Back to housing: timmmmmberrrrrr!!!
Post a Comment