1. The pizza gets bungeed on top of the rear baskets or to the front basket. The beverages (I'm more likely to go for ice cream than beer, but to each their own).
2. My wife doesn't want her flowers to be of the non-growing sort, so I would put the pots of flowering plants into my baskets. I would likely put them in a bag first if I'm going to be riding at any speed to protect them from the wind. (I'm sensing a theme in my responses.)
3. We don't do tornadoes in the west (at least not often enough to have sirens for them, but we do have tsunami sirens). However, I do live along a river that has two dams in desperate need of replacement and we are in close proximity to the Cascade fault, which is predicted to be the next one to give a "big one". (There's a bit of a race between the Cascade fault and the Hayward fault (Bay Area). I hope we lose.) When I feel the quake, I have about an hour to get to higher ground before the water from the failed dam reaches us. Lucky me, there is a large hill a mile away. (Skinner Butte, named for Eugene Skinner, city founder.) I would grab a couple of my favorite bikes and some clothing/gear/paperwork/water/food, instruct the other members of my household to do the same, and we would take a walk to the hill. The feds have already done the calculations for how high the water would get and the hill is more than three times as high as the worst-case scenario.
4. I'm a take me as I am kind of person. I would likely meet the person at our destination and go from there. Of course, I do have five pubs, a cineplex and at least a dozen restaurants within a mile of my house. That's not exactly a long walk. I'm pretty unlikely to have to deal with this since:
A. I'm happily monogamously married. Our dates are all by bike or foot.
B. I am a bit prejudiced against folks who are addicted to cars. I don't dislike them, but I don't willingly spend any more time with them than I have to.
5. Just the facts, ma'am. Just kidding. I would likely not engage in any real argument but would explore with them the infrared absorption properties of carbon dioxide (hey, that was only first found two centuries ago), the nature of light's interactions at ground level (higher frequency light gets knocked down to IR), and the fact that we are indeed increasing the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If the person is rational, then we should be able to agree that the planet will indeed get warmer over some time frame if we continue to add greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere. After that settles in, the discussion will eventually run its course with the denier having to choose to either:
A. Deny reality
B. Accept that those who will follow us have no right to a livable planet, in his/her view
C. Accept that he/she is too weak to do what is necessary to help make the necessary lifestyle changes that would buy us some time to solve this brewing crisis.
Additional question (I don't have an answer, but I am curious, especially since my son is moving to CA soon):
What do you do when you relocate to a new region. What resources do you use to help set up a car-free life that works for you?