I think that it’s quite responsible not to speculate on something they’re not an expert on.
replyIt’s exactly the sort of news bite that catastrophists glom onto.
This is responsible journalism.
> I think that it’s quite responsible not to speculate on something they’re not an expert on.
reply"Recent satellite maps show Mexico City getting closer to hell at alarming rate"
They could just call a geologist and ask, or cite some published works on the topic. It's not responsible, it's lazy.
replyThis is a phys.org "article". They're usually just rehashed press releases, and this one is particularly bad - it's literally just the NASA press release with the last 2 paragraphs chopped off. https://www.nasa.gov/missions/nisar/us-indian-space-mission-...
replyIt breaks water lines which increases the water problem even faster. On one side because its expensive to fix and on the other side because small leaks lead to massive water losses you don't find fast or easy.
replyAlso broken mains lead to sinkholes: https://www.bbc.com/news/videos/cj9zex1r3kjo
replyThere are also abandoned mines under parts of the city which also contributes to hazardous conditions.
replyNor does it say how much subsidence the satellite documented.
replyThere's this under the picture.
reply> New data from NISAR shows where Mexico City and its environs subsided by up to a few centimeters per month (shown in blue) between Oct. 25, 2025, and Jan. 17, 2026
The labels on the map were also confusing, and at first because of the relative positioning of the texts identifying the airport and the angel I thought up was East and not North, although a closer inspection made things clearer (and yes, up is North).
reply