Major media outlets said they had no warning about Hurricane Michael’s intensity. While the storm’s strength was unexpected, the real culprit is the media’s disinterest in understanding and reporting on the intricacies and difficulties of weather forecasting.
The Supreme Court’s recent opinion in Florida v. Georgia shows why we shouldn’t ask the justices to create critical water policy.
“Documenting property ownership” is perhaps one of the most boring phrases one could mutter, but it’s a critical component of a free, democratic society that is lacking in developing countries – the blockchain wants to help. Plus, National Geographic is opening its archive of amazing maps, the Chesapeake Bay is ready to give you seafood again, and descendants of the famous Isaac Newton apple tree are spread across the world.
The Court rejected the special master’s recommendation that the suit be dismissed, giving Florida the opportunity to show that the Court can craft a helpful and workable decree apportioning water between Georgia and Florida.
The 2017 hurricane season was one of the most intense and unpredictable on record. The 2018 season officially begins on June 1, only a couple months after the release of a proposal to cut the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s budget by nearly 25 percent.
This week, a new Florida law prohibits local governments from passing laws designed to protect the public’s access to beaches, the line dividing the arid part of the country from the moister part is moving eastward, and metro Atlanta residents spend over $10,000 a year on driving-related expenses.
We’re still waiting on a decision in the Florida v. Georgia waters wars case and it will finally arrive on Wednesday morning after the Supreme Court added two additional days to issue opinions. Back in January when Florida and Georgia made their arguments to the Court, several justices appeared sympathetic to Florida. Meanwhile, in a brief on the matter, Atlanta asserted that the Supreme Court shouldn’t even attempt to help Florida because the benefits of the environment are often too vague to be valued.
“Finally, please settle this blasted thing. I can guarantee at least one of you will be unhappy with my recommendation and, perhaps, both of you. You can’t both be winners. But you […]