The link actually indicates that the number one threat to NYC is a
terrorist attack, not a hurricane. Two being Hurricane in NO, and
three being "The Big One in SF.
However, I did mention the threat of a hurricane in NYC in another
message. A hurricane is not New York's biggest threat, however,
It feels pretty safe now. If Gore or Kerry get elected than the masses
might move :)
On 6/6/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> Right, that's what I was talking about. Cameron posted a link a bit earlier
> in the thread. I don't know if it's accurate but according to that link NYC
> is in more danger than
There's only a 26% chance in the next 50 years of a cat3+ hurricane.
Gloria was a cat2/3 and it didn't do shit. Now those people that keep
building houses on the beach, they have a problem.
On 6/6/06, Russel Madere wrote:
> Hurricanes - Look for the hurricane that made landfall on September 21, 19
Right, that's what I was talking about. Cameron posted a link a bit earlier in
the thread. I don't know if it's accurate but according to that link NYC is in
more danger than New Orleans.
> I'm pretty sure the NYC is still high up on the terrorists target
> sites.
Hurricanes - Look for the hurricane that made landfall on September 21, 1938,
It was a Cat 3 storm and it did a number on Long Island.
> What's the danger NYC faces?
>
> On 6/5/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> > Hehe. I don't think those are comparable choices, though. See if you
> can get Mike D to
I'm pretty sure the NYC is still high up on the terrorists target sites.
On 6/6/06, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's the danger NYC faces?
>
> On 6/5/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> > Hehe. I don't think those are comparable choices, though. See if you can
> > get Mike D to move out of Brooklyn.
What's the danger NYC faces?
On 6/5/06, Dana Tierney wrote:
> Hehe. I don't think those are comparable choices, though. See if you can get
> Mike D to move out of Brooklyn. Or Sam. It's home, where they are *from.*
> That said, perhaps we can get people out of the flood plains, sure, without
>
Bush didn't provide those trailers. The plan that provides those has
been in place since Andrew hit in 1992. Tell me something Bush did
other than flyovers and photo ops.
On 6/2/06, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One federally provided trailer housing one family. That's a single thing.
>
Hehe. I don't think those are comparable choices, though. See if you can get
Mike D to move out of Brooklyn. Or Sam. It's home, where they are *from.* That
said, perhaps we can get people out of the flood plains, sure, without writing
off the Louisiana coast altogether. Few enough people have ro
People also choose to live on major fault lines. People choose to go
skydiving. People choose to audition for American Idol.
All actions have consequenses.
-Cameron
On 6/5/06, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mm so your focus in that paragraph was on the individual level? That makes
mm so your focus in that paragraph was on the individual level? That makes
sense actually, kinda. But they won't leave though, you know, not the people
who have been there for generations.
Dana
>I'm proposing how I would make a decision were I a resident of New
>Orleans. I am suggesting that
I'm proposing how I would make a decision were I a resident of New
Orleans. I am suggesting that someone STAY and get involved in
solving the problem. I am suggesting that if change is impossible,
you would be a fool to stay any longer.
Essentially, that you shouldn't comlain about the problem u
ah sorry... was confused by the following:
Given the above facts, it does make a whole lot of sense to get the
heck outta dodge. I mean I am all about getting involved in solving
the problem, but once you realise that you can't make a difference,
it's time to go.
What *are* you proposing? I am
Nope - didn't say that either. But I guess you can believe what you'd like.
On 6/2/06, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But... you think people should get out of New Orleans... and Manhattan's at
> greater risk...
>
> >convinced you of what esactly? I don't remember advocating the
> >e
But... you think people should get out of New Orleans... and Manhattan's at
greater risk...
>convinced you of what esactly? I don't remember advocating the
>evacuation of manhattan.
>
>On 6/2/06, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
convinced you of what esactly? I don't remember advocating the
evacuation of manhattan.
On 6/2/06, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, you have convinced me. So... when do we start evacuating Manhattan?
>
> >True, but we have to remember that New Orleans was originally selected
> >as a
OK, you have convinced me. So... when do we start evacuating Manhattan?
>True, but we have to remember that New Orleans was originally selected
>as a port city due to it being at the mouth of the Mississippi. It
>still is, and alot of commerce runs through it still. You can't just
>remove the ci
True, but we have to remember that New Orleans was originally selected
as a port city due to it being at the mouth of the Mississippi. It
still is, and alot of commerce runs through it still. You can't just
remove the city cause we do need the port. However, the growth of it
to what it is now wa
But again, wouldn't the BEST preparation had been to keep people out of
there in the first place? At some point, you've done all you can do within
reasonand whatever happens, happens.
On 6/2/06, Cameron Childress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Fema says the most likely/devestating are
>
> (htt
If not, it should be. After all, wouldn't insurance rates be determined at
least in part based upon these studies? And as such, wouldn't we be entitled
to see why we have to pay XXX dollars for a policy?
On 6/2/06, Cameron Childress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yeah, I'd love to see an index per
Fema says the most likely/devestating are
(http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=2727)
1) Terrorist attack on NYC
2) Hurricane hitting New ORleans
3) The Big One.
Guess it's San Fran's turn.
Inexcusable that FEMA itself names that as a top "most likely" and
then claimed that they could not have fathome
> insurance companies. I wonder if any of that is published?
What? And give access to the most preciously guarded secrets? Why,
we'd sooner give up the eleven herbs and spices!
Nay nay, sir! I say you nay!
--
will
"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacce
Yeah, I'd love to see an index per state/county/zip of the likelyhood
of a natural disaster occuring to an individual home in any given
year. This is essentially what actuaries do all day long for
insurance companies. I wonder if any of that is published?
-Cameron
> On 6/2/06, G Money <[EMAIL P
On 6/2/06, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't...you haven't.lots of other people on this list haven't. There
> has to be thousands, maybe millions, of other Americans just like us who
> haven't fallen for it..
Actually, as I was writing that email, I was thinking that alot of
p
Yer absolutely right, and that's why I asked it as a question, and not a
statement.
I think there is a difference though, and it has to do with likelihood and
extent. How reasonably likely is the event to occurr, and how catastrophic
would it be if it did?
When I looked at New Orleans, long befor
But it's so nice and sunny here!
-Cameron
On 6/2/06, John Galt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would say they should bare ALL of the responsibility, same with southern
> California.
~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.
Not according to studies the US Gov has done. For 30 years, New
Orleans getting hit by a hurricane was the most likely and most
devistating natural disaster on their list.
A tsumani and a hurricane are not even orders of magnitude similar in
likelyhood. Nor is a volcanic eruption in the continenta
Do the residents of Seattle share culpability Mount Rainier inevitably
erupts and destroys the city? Residents of California when "the big
one" hits? New York when a hurricane finally makes a direct landing?
Any coastal area during a tsunami?
Yes, I have been watching Discovery channel.
It woul
I would agree EXCEPT where direct actions by the government (local,
state, federal) made the situation worse.
If I built a house below a dam, and it gave, it would be mostly my
fault (but if the dam was defective, then blame would be shared).
If I built a house on a river, and then they built a d
I would say they should bare ALL of the responsibility, same with southern
California.
> -Original Message-
> From: G Money [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 1:16 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: Louisiana Wetlands
>
> lemme ask a question t
lemme ask a question that may get me yelled at..
Do the residents who chose New orleans as their home, knowing full well the
inevitability of this disaster scenario, share any culpability for their
situation?
On 6/2/06, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> All I know is Mayor Ray Nagin
All I know is Mayor Ray Nagin praised President Bush in his swearing-in
speech the other day. Nagin said that the President had followed through on
his promise of help for the city.
What bugs me is that everyone knew the freaking city was going to flood and
be destroyed, it was only a matter of ti
I haven't...you haven't.lots of other people on this list haven't. There
has to be thousands, maybe millions, of other Americans just like us who
haven't fallen for it..
That offers at least a glimmer of hope.doesn't it?
On 6/2/06, Cameron Childress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
I think he was kidding, Maureen ;)
>This president has nothing to do with anything that is going good in
>New Orleans. He hasn't kept a single promise.
>
>On 6/1/06, Zaphod Beeblebrox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> that damn liberal media! Always wants to show whats going good with
>> this presid
I think they are trying for door #1. What I find interesting is that the people
who are fighting that are often the same people who wanted to rebuild the World
Trade Center.
>I agree with this in that Mother Nature Always Wins. Screw up the
>wetlands and you're gonna get pounded worse by hurric
On 6/2/06, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah yeah...she says it's the republicans fault, you say it's the democrat's
> fault.yada yada, blah blah.
and that's the strategy of both parties. So long as the nation is
kept squabbling about which is the lesser of two evils...
1) The po
> Well, God says it is the gays fault, which means Russel is right.
Wait, I thought that it was sinful gambling and general debauchery
that was at fault in NO and the Gulf Coast?
Not the Gays...not this time.
The Gays, as Robertson has so endearingly pointed out, were
responsible (at least in pa
Well, God says it is the gays fault, which means Russel is right.
(I don't know that the Log Cabin Republicans have a branch in NO)
Source: Pat Robertson
On 6/2/06, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah yeah...she says it's the republicans fault, you say it's the democrat's
> fault.yada
Yeah yeah...she says it's the republicans fault, you say it's the democrat's
fault.yada yada, blah blah. Yer both right, yer both wrong.
New Orleans is a swimming pool because it never should have been built there
in the first place and the inevitable finally happened.
On 6/2/06, Russel Mader
The democrat mayor and his democrat heavy city council were fighting over the
location of trailer parks in New Orleans. It took nearly 5 months to open the
first.
Most of the post Katrina problems in New Orleans was caused by the "business as
usual" attitude of the democratic politicians. T
One federally provided trailer housing one family. That's a single thing.
Multiply it by thousands, you get an idea.
I thought the gov. response to the disaster sucked ballsbut your "not
one single thing" mantra is ridiculous.
On 6/1/06, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Gotta love the
Gotta love the way people ignore facts and pigeonhole the messenger.
Show me evidence of one single thing that Bush has done that helped
any of the Katrina victims.
On 6/1/06, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gotta love the Left's view of the world
>
> On 6/1/06, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, that is the opinion of EVERYONE I met in New Orleans,
without exception. Diehard republicans are not happy with his
response, or the promises he made.
On 6/1/06, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> gotta love the Left's view of the world
>
> On 6/1/06, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
gotta love the Left's view of the world
On 6/1/06, Maureen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This president has nothing to do with anything that is going good in
> New Orleans. He hasn't kept a single promise.
>
>
--
---
Robert Munn
www.funkymojo.com
~~
I agree with this in that Mother Nature Always Wins. Screw up the
wetlands and you're gonna get pounded worse by hurricanes. Build all
the levies you want, you're still screwed till:
1) Someone somehow restores the wetlands.
2) New Orleans is underwater and there is eventually a new coastline
no
This president has nothing to do with anything that is going good in
New Orleans. He hasn't kept a single promise.
On 6/1/06, Zaphod Beeblebrox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> that damn liberal media! Always wants to show whats going good with
> this president :)
~~
that damn liberal media! Always wants to show whats going good with
this president :)
On 6/1/06, Raymond Camden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Russel, I'm sure you will agree that most folks (outside of LA) have
> no idea how bad it truly was here. I think since CNN showed folks
> having fun at Ma
True. I think everyone who can needs to come to New Orleans and see what is
going on here. We needed to pull off Mardi Gras to prove to the convention
people that we could host events. If Mardi Gras did not take place, New
Orleans would have died.
It is a one industry town, tourism. The oil
Louisiana. Unless we throw the
ENTIRE North Slope of Alaska and the offshore of Florida and Alabama open to
production immediately, we will never make up for the oil and gas production
the could be lost in the Louisiana wetlands. Nearly 20% of the domesticly used
oil comes out of the ground
Russel, I'm sure you will agree that most folks (outside of LA) have
no idea how bad it truly was here. I think since CNN showed folks
having fun at Mardi Gras they assume all is well now.
On 6/1/06, Russel Madere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yesterday afternoon I took a long boat ride and a hop i
t isn't in
the path of destruction? Why haven't we learned a lesson from this?
- Matt
- Original Message -
From: "Russel Madere" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "CF-Community"
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 8:35 AM
Subject: Louisiana Wetlands
> Yest
Yesterday afternoon I took a long boat ride and a hop in a helicopter on a
wetlands tour. I was blown away by the severe damage the wetlands took from
Katrina and Rita.
There were places south of New Orleans where there was no more swamp, just
lakes and bays. One point that was being made was
Yesterday afternoon I took a long boat ride and a hop in a helicopter on a
wetlands tour. I was blown away by the severe damage the wetlands took from
Katrina and Rita.
There were places south of New Orleans where there was no more swamp, just
lakes and bays. One point that was being made was
53 matches
Mail list logo
